Agnosticism IS the most dishonest position

[Belacqua]

And what is an abstraction?  It is the result of a process of measurement omission.

I'm not seeing yet why that should be so.

Justice, for example, is an abstraction. And it certainly can't be measured as an abstraction. It may well be a concept we come up with through life experiences, namely: just and unjust acts. But these acts can't be measured either. Some things just aren't quantifiable. 

You can't infer a god's existence by looking at nature.  The concept of inference rests on the primacy of existence principle.  The notion of gods assumes the primacy of consciousness principle.  Therefore any attempt to infer gods existence is not only invalid but unsound since the claim that a god exists is self-contradictory.  Inference from nature can only get you to something that is natural.  That's my view anyway. 

Well, you understand that there are different views about this. I don't understand what you mean when you say that the "notion of gods assumes the primacy of consciousness principle." Does this just mean that we have to be conscious before we understand the notion? Because that seems true enough. 

Nor do I see why the claim that a god exists is self-contradictory. It exists or it doesn't, but claiming one way or another may be self-consistent. 

It may be that "inference from nature can only get you to something that is natural." I'd have to see the argument behind that to know if it makes sense to me. The word "supernatural" is notoriously hard to define, but in natural theology it just means something that is transcendent and necessary for the existence of the natural. 

you are using the term conceive here in a much more colloquial way than I am

I admit that I know nothing at all about Ayn Rand's philosophy of concepts. Is there a brief explainer for me, to get me up to speed? A link or a book (under 800 pages)? I think it would be unfair of me to request a remedial class from you, since I'm too stingy to send you green tickets in exchange!