RE: The absurd need for logical proofs for God
December 4, 2020 at 10:15 am
(This post was last modified: December 4, 2020 at 10:26 am by Mister Agenda.)
(December 3, 2020 at 12:12 pm)Klorophyll Wrote:(December 3, 2020 at 11:49 am)Mister Agenda Wrote: All the minds we know with a reasonable level of certainty to exist based on observation are associated with brains. It does not necessarily follow that if embodied minds exist, disembodied ones must also exist. There's a disconnect. Literally, since you're imagining minds disconnected from bodies. It is perfectly honest and coherent to accept the existence of embodied minds without also accepting the existence of disembodied ones. It's like saying if you accept the existence of humans, you must also accept the existence of Sasquatch, else you're dishonest or incoherent.
One small reminder, I never presented the full case for why the analogy for other minds is equivalent to that for god. The part explaining that in Plantinga's work is highly technical. I am merely conveying the underlying intuitions of what I understand so far. Roughly speaking, he argues that the objections to the telological argument are exactly the same objections to analogy for other minds.
So we're dishonest and incoherent if we don't agree with an argument you didn't even make? Even if we were aware of Platinga's entire argument and it's actually correct; it's poisoning the well to snarl at us for being incoherent and dishonest if we don't fully understand an obtruse argument. If those are Platinga's words, he should know better...and if they're yours, you should know better too.
A finely tuned universe that is so because it was designed and created necessitates a finely-tuned Creator. An omnipotent universe Creator could create ANY universe imaginable, the possibilities are literally infinite; the odds that we would have a Creator that made this exact universe is one in infinity.
I'm not anti-Christian. I'm anti-stupid.