RE: How to easily defeat any argument for God
August 15, 2019 at 10:35 pm
(This post was last modified: August 15, 2019 at 10:38 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
He used the term non natural to mean not empirical. Like a number, an axiom, or an idea.
The main point of the position is that “bad”, for example, isn’t harm. Harm is bad, sure. But bad Durant reduce to any natural ( or empirical ) property. Non naturalism thinks that naturalism is the wrong explanation in that respect. The supernatural explanation would just be super-wrong.
Instead, we know that things are bad because( or when) they harm because harm is bad-alike. It has a badness. Bad is a term for a concept that we directly apprehend and reason from. It’s not contained to any individual.
We all apprehend bad even if we don’t fill the set with the same contents. It’s strength is that brute force comment of human experience. It’s weakness is that, since it can’t point to the empirical as bad, only as partaking of it typifying the form bad by pure reason, it can’t demonstrate that it’s not simply referring to intersubjectivity.
That, and the loose rational mooring of anything claimed - and claimed to be - non empirical, or non natural.
The main point of the position is that “bad”, for example, isn’t harm. Harm is bad, sure. But bad Durant reduce to any natural ( or empirical ) property. Non naturalism thinks that naturalism is the wrong explanation in that respect. The supernatural explanation would just be super-wrong.
Instead, we know that things are bad because( or when) they harm because harm is bad-alike. It has a badness. Bad is a term for a concept that we directly apprehend and reason from. It’s not contained to any individual.
We all apprehend bad even if we don’t fill the set with the same contents. It’s strength is that brute force comment of human experience. It’s weakness is that, since it can’t point to the empirical as bad, only as partaking of it typifying the form bad by pure reason, it can’t demonstrate that it’s not simply referring to intersubjectivity.
That, and the loose rational mooring of anything claimed - and claimed to be - non empirical, or non natural.
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!
