RE: Very short version of the long argument.
September 11, 2017 at 8:47 am
(This post was last modified: September 11, 2017 at 8:49 am by Mystic.)
Guys, if you want details, look at the long argument in the other thread. It's all there in a narrative, that explains each premise (not in order), but it's there.
This is the short argument, doesn't mean that each premise cannot be elaborated on (I did that in the other thread).
You can't deny conclusion in an argument. You have to deal with the premises. So are you saying we can know something about ultimate highest goodness possible without a connection to it?
This is the short argument, doesn't mean that each premise cannot be elaborated on (I did that in the other thread).
(September 11, 2017 at 8:47 am)mh.brewer Wrote:(September 11, 2017 at 8:39 am)MysticKnight Wrote: So we can know something about ultimate goodness (whatever it is) without a connection to it?
There is no ultimate goodness, it does not exist. That's why the initial premise is faulty. It is fantasy delusion. All you have is a make believe connection.
You'd be better off making a connection with Superman.
You can't deny conclusion in an argument. You have to deal with the premises. So are you saying we can know something about ultimate highest goodness possible without a connection to it?
