(August 13, 2012 at 9:19 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: Sure. That and four sixty-five will get you a venti latte at Starbucks.
Hmm. Personally, I'd be interested to know what my beliefs, if true, entail. I'd feel intellectually lazy if I just assumed that my beliefs didn't entail something, and ignored proofs to the contrary.
For instance, if someone could prove that my beliefs regarding science and mathematics, if true, imply good reasons to think that Christianity is false, would you really let me get away with saying, "Yeah, well, that and four sixty-five will get you a venti latte at Starbucks"? Wouldn't that strike you as incredibly ignorant of me?
(August 13, 2012 at 9:01 pm)CliveStaples Wrote: So by that definition, "quantum fluctuation in a singularity" qualifies as a necessary being. That I can buy.
Does it meet the criteria? If so, then it's a "Necessary Being". That's how definitions work. Welcome to logic!
“The truth of our faith becomes a matter of ridicule among the infidels if any Catholic, not gifted with the necessary scientific learning, presents as dogma what scientific scrutiny shows to be false.”
