(September 28, 2012 at 7:02 am)Napoléon Wrote:(September 26, 2012 at 9:07 pm)whateverist Wrote: My objection is to something else I see him doing (which I've already identified), which I see as motivated and dishonest.
And as I've already pointed out, numerous times now, it doesn't make a blind bit of difference to the point which I and apparently you now agree is his main one.
And as I've now conceded that it makes no difference to his main point I have to wonder why you say it again. Do you think if one agrees with someone's main point they should never take exception to anything else they say? If that is your main point, I don't agree.
(September 28, 2012 at 7:02 am)Napoléon Wrote: You really do have it in for this man don't you?
What I don't like about him is that he speaks with the absolute conviction of a fundamentalist. He has a stunted conception of what a human being is and how we do or should reason. His stance toward agnosticism is telling.
