Ontology of God--Theological Noncognitivist View

[Edwardo Piet]

You crazy diamond Evie

Pardon?

And what's with the new "evinice" word??

Is it a new word?

Say you had a sand pit with an impression in it, and the object that made the impression was missing. In this instance, couldn't you know or have a good idea of what made the impression without it actually being there?

Of what being there? 'it'. Well there would be an indication of the shape (and perhaps things like weight, etc) of whatever 'it' is. But we still don't know what 'it' is...

We're not talking about 'evidencing' something anyway. We're talking about working out 'something' of the entity in question.

Is talking about spotting indication of something through its effects (as you are with the sandpit example) not talking about evincing?

Isn't valid indication of something, evincing (giving evidence of) it?

Now, important: It seems to me that you are not talking about finding out anything what X (God in this case) is, but rather you are talking about traces or effects.

Because as in the sandpit example, whatever 'it' is there are presumably many many things that 'it' is not - not just the sandpit that left the trace. So it is not itself the act of 'finding out what it isn't' that is helpful. I mean, finding a squashed grapefruit on a supermarket floor and seeing that that also 'is not' whatever was in the sandpit isn't exactly of any extra help at all, even if it is, indeed, part of the category of what whatever was in the sandpit 'is not'.

So, what you are talking about is traces and effects it seems to me. Whatever was in the sandpit left traces, or effects. That is the indication, that is the evidence, that evinces, that is valid. Just about anything at all that isn't what was left in the sandpit is of no help, right?

Do you think there are things we can call "not God" Evie? Do you agree this is possible?

I see this as possible. But I am yet to see you give on example of how this in itself helps lead us to 'what God is', it seems to me we have to define what God is first. And traces and effects of him being indications, evincing (giving evidence) is not the same thing as labelling anything he isn't.

EvF