Thank you for your clarification. I was starting to think that you were being intellectually dishonest, ironically in your redefinition of the term intellectual dishonesty to justify your accusation rather than just admit you made a poor choice of words.
You've also accused me of believing something because I find comforting, which is not the case. However, if you insist it is, I don't know how to rationally discuss what I really believe with someone who claims to know me better than I know myself.
On reflection, I think this is where you're getting tripped up.
Beliefs don't need to have a rational justification. They only require rational justification if you wish to argue that someone else should believe as you do.
I hope that helps to clear things up.
That doesn't seem to apply but perhaps you can show me how it does.
You've also accused me of believing something because I find comforting, which is not the case. However, if you insist it is, I don't know how to rationally discuss what I really believe with someone who claims to know me better than I know myself.
(August 7, 2014 at 8:34 am)Napoléon Wrote: "How do you rationally justify your own belief in god"I've repeatedly answered this question. In fact, I've never stated that my belief in God is rationally justified, that it is, rather, instinctive.
On reflection, I think this is where you're getting tripped up.
Beliefs don't need to have a rational justification. They only require rational justification if you wish to argue that someone else should believe as you do.
I hope that helps to clear things up.
Quote:In fact, I stand by what I say, you are being intellectually dishonest. Period.
Quote:When one avoids an honest, deliberate and comprehensive approach to a matter because it may introduce an adverse effect on personally and professionally held views and beliefs.
Intellectual dishonesty is a failure to apply standards of rational evaluation that one is aware of, usually in a self-serving fashion. If one judges others more critically than oneself, that is intellectually dishonest. If one deflects criticism of a friend or ally simply because they are a friend or ally, that is intellectually dishonest. etc.
http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?IntellectualDishonesty
That doesn't seem to apply but perhaps you can show me how it does.
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
