RE: Argument from perpetual identity against naturalism.
March 20, 2013 at 1:12 pm
(This post was last modified: March 20, 2013 at 1:14 pm by Mystic.)
The first encompasses both of them. So it can be properly basic or not.
The 2nd is not properly basic.
The 3rd is properly basic.
I can see how this is complicated.
You need to believe in an identity to believe in a perpetual identity, so it seems you cannot justify belief in the latter without the former.
But what they really mean, is that, when a belief is based on argument deduced from other beliefs. From inference.
The 2nd is not properly basic.
The 3rd is properly basic.
I can see how this is complicated.
You need to believe in an identity to believe in a perpetual identity, so it seems you cannot justify belief in the latter without the former.
But what they really mean, is that, when a belief is based on argument deduced from other beliefs. From inference.
