(June 4, 2016 at 6:56 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: Only a theist could take a paradoxically absurd mystery and propose an even greater absurdity is the obvious answer....In the final analysis you have an imaginary puzzle piece that supposedly fits a poorly understood puzzle. These 'arguments' you bandy about are only convincing to the desperate and weak-minded.
Very clever rhetoric. I sure some will find it persuasive. Please remember that I have not yet presented any specific demonstration although I have, admittedly, alluded to it.
The issue at hand concerns whether a specific observation (that only actual objects can cause change) could be considered evidence for something. It is certainly evident to the senses. I’ve always thought that evidence meant just that: something, well, evident. I’ve never been bit by the dog my neighbor doesn’t have. Now maybe you have had different experiences of things that do and don’t exist. Maybe you can relate how one time you quenched your thirst with the contents of an empty cup. No?
