the case against the case against god

[Simon Moon]

But seriously,
@MysticKnight, all you do is label the ways the brain experiences its own activities as "supernatural". You have provided no reason to think that anything fishy is going on, and hence he name is very misleading and only serves to obfuscate.

And the only justification for doing so is a fallacious argument.

MysticKnight's original claim in this thread:

Seeing a connection to God and knowing the connection is real should be enough proof. I think goodness, love, greatness, praise, value, are signs of this connection, and with reflection people can see we are connected to the Divine

It can be rewritten something like this:


Premise1 - We are connected to God
Premise2 - Goodness, love, praise, value are signs of this connection
Conclusion - therefore God exists

It is obvious that he is guilty of the fallacy affirming the consequent. His first premise contains his conclusion.

Then he goes on to claim that we are the ones being disingenuous by being skeptical of his 'evidence' for the existence of God when we state that there are natural explanations for all of it.