RE: Evidence for god? Convince me! [CHALLENGE]
March 17, 2014 at 11:30 am
(This post was last modified: March 17, 2014 at 11:32 am by MindForgedManacle.)
(March 17, 2014 at 2:54 am)fr0d0 Wrote: [quote='MindForgedManacle' pid='625434' dateline='1395017668']
The "meta" in "metaphysical" is not about being non-physical, but about being ABOUT the physical, or rather, about existing things.
Quote:Meta (from the Greek preposition and prefix meta- (μετά-) meaning "after" or "beyond") is a prefix used in English (and other Greek-owing languages) to indicate a concept which is an abstraction from another concept, used to complete or add to the latter.
...And? That's exactly what I said, indicated by the underlined bits. Metaphysics is not about the "non-physical", which is what you said. It's about things that exist, which obviously includes physical things. You are either being very dishonest or you really don't understand what you're talking about.
Quote:I think you've failed to understand the quote. It already deals with dissenters. Ryft is/was a hugely respected member here. I've linked the original discussion.
1) I did understand it and it completely fails to deal with "dissenters", the term which itself is question-begging the way you're using it here. It ignores 4 of the biggest heavy hitters in Christian philosophy and theology, so calling them dissenters is a bit like calling Galileo a poor scientist.
2) I could care less if it was made by a respected member here. Claims stand and fall on their own merit.
