RE: Argument from Reason?
June 22, 2015 at 2:51 am
(This post was last modified: June 22, 2015 at 2:51 am by robvalue.)
Erm... looks like one of Kalam's cousins. Baseless assertions designed to make a predrawn conclusion inevitable.
Most sceptics are methodological naturalists, I would think. (I'd be interested to know if I'm wrong on that.) So they don't deny the existence of the supernatural on principle, just that if it exists, it is beyond our ability to investigate.
And something supernatural is a far fling from a god, which again isn't someone's favourite storybook character by default. So like the Kalam, it needs non sequiturs to reach the conclusion.
I didn't read it all in detail so apologies if I misinterpreted.
Most sceptics are methodological naturalists, I would think. (I'd be interested to know if I'm wrong on that.) So they don't deny the existence of the supernatural on principle, just that if it exists, it is beyond our ability to investigate.
And something supernatural is a far fling from a god, which again isn't someone's favourite storybook character by default. So like the Kalam, it needs non sequiturs to reach the conclusion.
I didn't read it all in detail so apologies if I misinterpreted.
Feel free to send me a private message.
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.
Index of useful threads and discussions
Index of my best videos
Quickstart guide to the forum
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.
Index of useful threads and discussions
Index of my best videos
Quickstart guide to the forum