RE: Van Tillian/Clarkian Presuppositional Apologetics.
August 27, 2011 at 8:09 am
(This post was last modified: August 27, 2011 at 9:03 am by The Grand Nudger.)
Ryft, do you feel that you have a refined version of TAG that avoids the fallacies of equivocation, division, false dichotomy, and special pleading? If so, drop it in the forums here, and we'll have some fun with it. Speaking more specifically to presuppositionalism, do you feel that there can be any grounds for debate when the demand is made at the outset that one assume that your position is completely correct before debate can begin? Does accepting a false presupposition invalidate logic entirely? Couldn't I leverage presuppositionalism to successfully prove any false statement true? Wouldn't any presupposition that makes the fewest assumptions have a broader application to the pursuit of knowledge in general? If we were to compare presuppositions, and the conclusions that follow, would it be unreasonable to then ask ourselves which of these conclusions seems to match observed reality to a more accurate degree?
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
