(February 3, 2013 at 8:02 am)catfish Wrote: Presuposition - "you have already as the appologist, failed, before you have even finished your argument..."
LOL, awesome example man, you failed immediately after you started...
.
In what way? If the best they can do to offer "evidence" is conjecture, mental constructs, hypothetically this or that, etc. they've failed to meet the burden of proof established by the extraordinary nature of their claims. Philosophy without evidence or demonstration, even if the philosophy is sound, is insufficient to meet the proportional burden of proof for such extraordinary claims.
This is not a presupposition. This is how the burden of proof, with the burden scaling according to the extraordinary degree of the claim, works.
I'd wager it's the same critical thinking you apply to every area of your life outside of your religious beliefs (but with you maybe I shouldn't be so certain).
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
