RE: Evidence for atheism
September 25, 2014 at 7:05 pm
(This post was last modified: September 25, 2014 at 7:18 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
LOL, I like that, Imma pass it along to the teachers in my family.
In the same way, I fail the folks who come along with "arguments" that they claim makes their faith "reasonable". They must satisfy the requirements for such a designation. When they do not, their claims are, to me, false - as in..not true - there is no middle ground in my conception between those two concepts. If they refer to those requirements, they cannot then backpedal - stating that that their claim is not false - even if it is not "necessarily true". It is false, they chose the metrics, they failed to meet the requirements - and those requirements define what we mean when we give something the designation. Again, logic is not just a conclusion, it is the process that led to that conclusion - the two cannot be separated from that end. Showing that a conclusion can be derived from some other line of thought, or cannot be derived from the line of thought invoked, is to show that their claim is false. A does not lead to b. If b is true, it is not true for the reasons they have offered. Give me some other argument.
In the same way, I fail the folks who come along with "arguments" that they claim makes their faith "reasonable". They must satisfy the requirements for such a designation. When they do not, their claims are, to me, false - as in..not true - there is no middle ground in my conception between those two concepts. If they refer to those requirements, they cannot then backpedal - stating that that their claim is not false - even if it is not "necessarily true". It is false, they chose the metrics, they failed to meet the requirements - and those requirements define what we mean when we give something the designation. Again, logic is not just a conclusion, it is the process that led to that conclusion - the two cannot be separated from that end. Showing that a conclusion can be derived from some other line of thought, or cannot be derived from the line of thought invoked, is to show that their claim is false. A does not lead to b. If b is true, it is not true for the reasons they have offered. Give me some other argument.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
