the application of my argument is rather simple, as I have tried to show by arguing that the beliefs of numerous different posters necessitated a belief in what would correctly be termed a monotheistic deity, even if that is not how one personally defined their belief.
Darwinning, take you analysis of the simple argument socrates is mortal.
The first statement: all men are mortal.
You claim that it is probably true, butt can not be proven with 100% certainty. agreed
Second statement: Socrates is a man.
you claimed that I should use the term "was". not true; you simply decided to assume a certain socrates. probably true. agreed.
Third statement: Socrates is mortal.
You claim that if the premisses are correct than this conclusion is likely correct. agreed.
My argument:
If, unlike yourself, you actually hold the beliefs that all men are mortal, that socrates is a man, or that Socrates is mortal, it necessitates a belief in something that would correctly be described as "God". While It is wholly rational not to hold any of those beliefs, to believe purely in probabilities, it is not logical. The human experience is something most would consider as true. When most people say or think something they don't properly describe that act as a "belief that I am probably saying or thinking that 'X'" they usually would assert that objectively the are actually saying or thinking it regardless of what they believe. but a belief that Anything is objectively and actually true or real necessarily stems from a belief in something for which there is absolutely no empirical evidence or data, i.e. God.
Therefor atheism, even if true, is illogical.
Darwinning, take you analysis of the simple argument socrates is mortal.
The first statement: all men are mortal.
You claim that it is probably true, butt can not be proven with 100% certainty. agreed
Second statement: Socrates is a man.
you claimed that I should use the term "was". not true; you simply decided to assume a certain socrates. probably true. agreed.
Third statement: Socrates is mortal.
You claim that if the premisses are correct than this conclusion is likely correct. agreed.
My argument:
If, unlike yourself, you actually hold the beliefs that all men are mortal, that socrates is a man, or that Socrates is mortal, it necessitates a belief in something that would correctly be described as "God". While It is wholly rational not to hold any of those beliefs, to believe purely in probabilities, it is not logical. The human experience is something most would consider as true. When most people say or think something they don't properly describe that act as a "belief that I am probably saying or thinking that 'X'" they usually would assert that objectively the are actually saying or thinking it regardless of what they believe. but a belief that Anything is objectively and actually true or real necessarily stems from a belief in something for which there is absolutely no empirical evidence or data, i.e. God.
Therefor atheism, even if true, is illogical.
