RE: The absurd need for logical proofs for God
December 12, 2020 at 7:08 am
(This post was last modified: December 12, 2020 at 7:21 am by The Grand Nudger.)
It would be evidence enough, if they could establish any relationship between it and the character stuck in their magic books. The problem isn't that they can't point to things which would be or could be evidence, and we don't actually require evidence in any other context to preclude all other potential explanations...it's that those things turn out not to be.
Not that it's difficult or that the bar is high, or that the subject is unknown, but that they have been plain and simply wrong. Take Kloros assertion that only a conscious agent can produce conscious agents. That would be, if it were true, evidence of a conscious agent. The trouble is that it isn't true.
Additionally, the simple act of point to lifes grand design, our specific argument, is a textbook example of a stolen concept. Of asserting and thus requiring the truth of that which demonstrates the inadequacy or falsehood of one's own premises.
So..when an argument fails on logical and evidentiary grounds, we generally don't say that it failed..in some sense, because it's not possible to prove it, or to provide evidence of it - but because the idea was just wrong from the floor to the ceiling. Conceivably, if true, some other argument or some other set of evidence could or would demonstrate as much - just not this one, because it's DOA.
Not that it's difficult or that the bar is high, or that the subject is unknown, but that they have been plain and simply wrong. Take Kloros assertion that only a conscious agent can produce conscious agents. That would be, if it were true, evidence of a conscious agent. The trouble is that it isn't true.
Additionally, the simple act of point to lifes grand design, our specific argument, is a textbook example of a stolen concept. Of asserting and thus requiring the truth of that which demonstrates the inadequacy or falsehood of one's own premises.
So..when an argument fails on logical and evidentiary grounds, we generally don't say that it failed..in some sense, because it's not possible to prove it, or to provide evidence of it - but because the idea was just wrong from the floor to the ceiling. Conceivably, if true, some other argument or some other set of evidence could or would demonstrate as much - just not this one, because it's DOA.
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!
