RE: Atheism and the existence of peanut butter
October 4, 2021 at 7:35 pm
(This post was last modified: October 4, 2021 at 7:36 pm by BrianSoddingBoru4.)
(October 4, 2021 at 7:02 pm)Jehanne Wrote:(October 4, 2021 at 6:00 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Well, we have three surviving letters of Joan’s, so that’s a pretty convincing empirical test.
But let’s say we didn’t. Accounts of French history of that period are also empirical evidence. And there’s no reason that empirical evidence can’t be used in an inductive argument.
Boru
Scholars also have the written transcripts of her trials of Condemnation and Nullification, the latter having occurred 25 years after her immolation.
But Kloro doesn’t seem able to grasp that, just as historiography is an empirical science, he is unable to grasp that calling apparent design ‘evidence’ is an empirical argument.
So, his use of a flawed example to support his claim that empiricism can’t be part of an inductive argument kinda sorta blew up in his face.
Boru
‘But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods or no gods. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.’ - Thomas Jefferson