Argument against atheism

[amkerman]

Darwinning:
logical argument:

all men are mortal
socrates is a man

therefore
socrates is mortal

or
If it is a bird
Then it has wings
It is a bird

Therefor it has wings

My argument is based on premises and conclusions, like all arguments. those premises you can accept or reject, but whether or not you accept or reject my premises has no bearing on the logical validity of the argument.

You are being intellectually dishonest saying that I have not made an argument...

---

rhythm I misspoke when I said that richness couldn't exist without a belief in consciousness... i meant to omit the word belief from that sentence.

your analogous argument shows the lack of understanding you have of your own condition, it's trolling.

Wool socks are not something that occur naturally in the universe so there is no reason to believe that they are a primary function of the universe.

Even if wool socks were a naturally occurrence in the universe, and even if they were a primary property of the universe, they exist independent of Jelly Bellies.

I can go to the store, or different stores to get wool socks, or jelly bellies. When I get one I do not necessarily get the other. Therefore, the existence of jelly bellies does not necessitate wool socks as a primary property of the universe.

---

again aleialora I fear once anyone calls something God, you automatically get defensive. If I called it, "however you logically justify a believe that things can be objectively true or real without any empirical evidence to support such a notion" would that make the argument easier to accept? I mean I'm already long-winded as it is...