(November 29, 2015 at 12:21 am)orangebox21 Wrote:
Quote:A semantic dispute is a disagreement that arises if the parties involved disagree about the definition of a word, not because they disagree on material facts, but rather because they disagree on the definitions of a word (or several words) essential to formulating the claim at issue.I asked that the term be defined. I did not assert that the term was wrongly defined.
Quote:It is sometimes held that semantic disputes are not genuine disputes at all. But very often they are regarded as perfectly genuine, e.g., in philosophy. It is also sometimes held that when a semantic dispute arises, the focus of the debate should switch from the original thesis to the meaning of the terms of which there are different definitions (understandings, concepts, etc.).Which could become the course of discussion here. Given that the same word can be used to prove God is unfair (definitions 1,3) and that He is fair (definition 2), shouldn't we switch our focus from the thesis to examining the meaning of the term?
Quote:Semantic disputes can result in the logical fallacy of equivocation.Which was why I asked for a term to be defined. My initial intention is to avoid equivocation due to a misunderstanding or misrepresentation of the original statement.
(Quotes reference)
(November 28, 2015 at 2:46 pm)Pandæmonium Wrote: Orangebox I think most people would see it unfair if an all powerful being decided to give people given disabilities for...some reason.I'm sure you recognize that appealing to 'most people' to validate a truth claim isn't a good reason.
(November 28, 2015 at 12:31 pm)drfuzzy Wrote: You quoted me, and didn't read my response? "I didn't write this in this atheist forum to have a debate with a g...... preacher."How about with a philosopher? If yes, then.....
Relative to definition #1: How are the principles of equality and justice determined?
Relative to definition #2: Why do you reject this definition but accept the others?
Relative to definition #3: Do you think that it is reasonable [having the faculty of reason] to submit the concept of fairness to a single person's 'personal expectations?' If you read a book and it fails to live up to your expectations would that book be 'unfair'?
And still you dodge the actual point.
Thief and assassin for hire. Member in good standing of the Rogues Guild.