(July 1, 2014 at 12:33 am)Rhythm Wrote:(June 30, 2014 at 11:39 pm)Lek Wrote: I didn't say I think you possess the "truth".Yes, you did, those are the full implications of your statement about the evidence of a persons life and it's relationship to truth. This is precisely what I'm attempting to explain to you.
Quote: I was referring to a hypothetical situation. I don't know enough about you to know if you would fit the situation or not.You don't have to know anything about me, that's the beauty of a hypothetical situation (but it's telling that the only way for you to square the circle, mentally, is to think that maybe my life isn't so good, that it doesn't fit the pattern you would accept. It does, I assure you). Let me try and make this as simple as possible. Your line of reasoning would allow -if there were an atheist and a theist who both had equally "good" lives- for two mutually exclusive propositions to be true simultaneously. That is what makes this sort of reasoning useless, irrational. Even if you plugged in "true data" you could not be sure that you would get a "true" conclusion.
Quote: You did explain why you thought I was irrational, but I didn't think your reasons were well-supported and I said why. I guess the readers can decide for themselves.Or I can explain it again, and ask you what you think. As above.
If I believe I have the truth and then I discover someone else has the truth, then I would realize that I was wrong in believing what I did. So I'm not saying an atheist and a theist both hold the truth. Living a good life doesn't prove you have the truth, but it is an indicator that might get my attention and cause me to investigate what you believe. If I found that you are right and I accepted that, then I would abandon my present belief.
