On Moral Authorities

[FallentoReason]

You wouldn't get taken seriously in an academic environment. This sort of response doesn't engage with the dilemma in any meaningful way, just like 'squirrel' won't either. You see, philosophy isn't about seeing the world through *your* eyes. Understand that this argument isn't meant for *you*. What it's asking of you is to get in the theist's shoes and think through the horns. If you actually stopped being stubborn for once you'd realise we would have something to agree about, only IF you actually bothered to philosophise and reach a conclusion.

Before I engage in the dilemma I have just been trying to get a consistent answer from you regarding true and false dichotomies. Your inconsistent answers and self-contradiction and unwillingness to admit you're wrong is embarrassing. Why not just say "Oh you're right, it is a false dichotomy, because the answer "neither" had been given, I'd never thought of that."? You've already said that you know what a false dichotomy is and that the answer "neither" can be given, so then why do you keep insisting its not a false dichotomy? You're contradicting yourself. Either you know what a false dichotomy is or you don't. In order to debate you have to admit when you're wrong about something. You're more interested in your pride than in debate. I'll address the dilemma when I've discovered that the person I've addressing is capable of admitting to their own self-contradiction rather than burying their head in the sand and doubling down on their falsity.

The issue you're having is that for some unknown reason you believe that producing *an* answer, any answer at all, will miraculously make the dilemma false. I've asked for you to justify how it can be neither, and to be fair, you actually did give a response. You keep saying it's because 'gods don't exist'. But see, that assertion is up for debate. The whole reason why there's volumes and volumes of literature on gods/no gods etc. is because we're all trying to find sound reasoning, either for or against the existence of god(s). And simply denying the dilemma 'because gods don't exist' is rather narrow-minded, uninteresting, biased. My equally boring reply to that would be, 'they exist, so you're refutation is wrong'. Now what?