(March 21, 2019 at 6:17 pm)Belaqua Wrote:(March 21, 2019 at 6:07 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: Even if I give you that argument, right down to the contingency of the universe on the prime mover, that still would only be an argument for a prime mover, do you understand?
That's right. I just said that. I understand it.
A Prime Mover is a Prime Mover, and if a Christian wants to argue for more attributes, he needs to make separate arguments.
Why do I have to say things twice?
Quote:What is your definition of god, Belaqua?
I don't have one, particularly. I am working on several different ones.
Then there is the apophatic idea of God, which makes the lack of our ability to define God something important in our understanding. That's an interesting train of thought.
I'm not avoiding anything, and I'm not lying. And it's not fair of you to accuse me.
You don't like my answers, that's all.
You said very clearly that only science-type evidence is evidence. If that's what you think, that's your metaphysical commitment.
I'm perfectly happy to say "I don't know" about a lot of these questions. Unlike you, I haven't yet mastered each and every argument and shown where it is unsound.
Also please note that you have left two of my questions unanswered. If you're going to accuse me of avoiding things, you shouldn't also do the same.
"It may also be that there is no internal unity to metaphysics. More strongly, perhaps there is no such thing as metaphysics—or at least nothing that deserves to be called a science or a study or a discipline. Perhaps, as some philosophers have proposed, no metaphysical statement or theory is either true or false. Or perhaps, as others have proposed, metaphysical theories have truth-values, but it is impossible to find out what they are."
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/metaphysics/#MetPos
Sounds like it all might just be mental masturbation and in the end amount to nothing.
I don't have an anger problem, I have an idiot problem.