RE: Creationism
August 13, 2020 at 7:53 pm
(This post was last modified: August 13, 2020 at 8:20 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
.............? A non sequitur is when none of the premises speaks to the conclusion. Show me which of the premises of the argument I was asked to consider speak to a god, any god, of any kind.
This should be a trivial exercise. Not " can't see how it aint valid" - fuck man, that's not even a valid argument - just show me a single premise of the argument that I was asked to consider says one solitary thing about a god.
By my definition, which is the standard definition of a successful logical argument, plantingas argument is successful. I don't find it compelling, and he concedes that it isn't compelling, but he at least cared enough to make sure his form was valid. I really don't understand, nothing about my assessment of the argument presented or cosmological arguments in general is even remotely controversial. These are known knowns. My participation in this regard is as a parrot, not a discoverer or demolisher of arguments. All of this work has already been done.
The argument I offered above as a superior form of the argument from contingency contains actual beings and everything, you don't see me commenting on the invalidity of concluding god in that one, because it actually makes the effort. The concern there is composition.
If your concern is my wild rhetoric and clever attacks..then thank you, but I can't claim them as my own - at least you threw me a "clever" peanut. I like being clever. Regular modern day sophist on the farm.
I think I like it more than being intelligent - which I also am. Huge, huge fucking...intellect...and part of that is knowing alot about cosmological arguments. They're my favorite, because i completely understand why people have found them so compelling and how they're instrumental to every single god story we've ever come up with, and also why they're wrong. Wrong as-in, couldn't possibly be right.
This should be a trivial exercise. Not " can't see how it aint valid" - fuck man, that's not even a valid argument - just show me a single premise of the argument that I was asked to consider says one solitary thing about a god.
By my definition, which is the standard definition of a successful logical argument, plantingas argument is successful. I don't find it compelling, and he concedes that it isn't compelling, but he at least cared enough to make sure his form was valid. I really don't understand, nothing about my assessment of the argument presented or cosmological arguments in general is even remotely controversial. These are known knowns. My participation in this regard is as a parrot, not a discoverer or demolisher of arguments. All of this work has already been done.
The argument I offered above as a superior form of the argument from contingency contains actual beings and everything, you don't see me commenting on the invalidity of concluding god in that one, because it actually makes the effort. The concern there is composition.
If your concern is my wild rhetoric and clever attacks..then thank you, but I can't claim them as my own - at least you threw me a "clever" peanut. I like being clever. Regular modern day sophist on the farm.
I think I like it more than being intelligent - which I also am. Huge, huge fucking...intellect...and part of that is knowing alot about cosmological arguments. They're my favorite, because i completely understand why people have found them so compelling and how they're instrumental to every single god story we've ever come up with, and also why they're wrong. Wrong as-in, couldn't possibly be right.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
