(August 7, 2014 at 12:03 pm)Napoléon Wrote: I fully explained why I thought you were being intellectually dishonest and I think I did a bloody good job. If you still insist you're not being so, then, well, you just have an entirely different understanding of the term to me.I've provided my understanding based on the definition provided earlier in this exchange. As for the spirit of that law, I don't see any dishonesty on my part there either. If you can't elaborate any specifics on where I was being dishonest, either with myself or with you, we may be at the agree-to-disagree point.
Quote:You tell me, you're the deist.You're ascribing motives to me that I haven't claimed and, in fact, have denied. The ball is in your court.
Quote:Totally not the point I was making. Taking my words out of context and construing them to fit your own purposes, hmm, sounds like something that has a term...My apologies if I have misunderstood you. That does seem to me to be where you're tripping up. Do tell if and where I'm wrong. Being overly quick to shout "liar" is manufacturing drama.
Quote:Why? Because what does it even mean? That's why.
I believe in a flying unicorn that orbits the sun. I believe it because instinct tells me so.
Would you not think I was being stupid for thinking that? Would you not think my reasoning is faulty?
You constantly saying "instinct" is like a blanket term for "I can't be arsed to explain my reasoning".
When I see the universe, I see a machine. When I behold our progress toward higher reason and civilization, I see intent. How is this remotely comparable to unicorns that fly around the sun?
This entire retort sounds like an appeal to ridicule.
Quote:Right, best bit of information I've got here.I don't. This may be anther point of misunderstanding. When faced with a mystery, our intuitions may lead us in one direction or another based on our interpretations of the limited information we have. We remain open minded and test our hypothesis against the information that continues to come in. In the case of deism vs. the cosmic lottery, there isn't enough information to go on as of yet. When more comes in, I'll evaluate it.
But I still don't understand why you think it's necessary to have a belief, in spite of one or the other.
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