(August 10, 2009 at 11:23 am)Jon Paul Wrote: Again, read through the read. What of, my arguments HAS been refuted? I have seen no refutation of A) the a posteriori argument from potentiality/contingency........
The Cosmological Argument. Correct? Or are you speaking of something else entirely?
Please reply without the word-salads. For example instead of something like "causes are ontically prior to their effects" Just say "causes bring about their effects". Really, no one is impressed with your impressive use of a thesaurus and a latin phrase book.
![[Image: yeltongue.gif]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=smilies.vidahost.com%2Fcontrib%2Flynx%2Fyeltongue.gif)
If I propound an argument a contrario a posteriori, please don't repudiate a priori.
It's ab absurdo from ab irato.
Well, ok, not as an impressive use as yours, but you get the picture. It doesn't help the communication of your thoughts. And I want to know your thoughts on this cosmological argument. Not the thoughts of some long dead catholic dudes. 'k?
I used to tell a lot of religious jokes. Not any more, I'm a registered sects offender.
---------------
...the least christian thing a person can do is to become a christian. ~Chuck
---------------
NO MA'AM
---------------
...the least christian thing a person can do is to become a christian. ~Chuck
---------------
NO MA'AM
![[Image: attemptingtogiveadamnc.gif]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=img824.imageshack.us%2Fimg824%2F7042%2Fattemptingtogiveadamnc.gif)