RE: A "meta-argument" against all future arguments for God's existence ?
February 26, 2022 at 6:32 pm
(February 26, 2022 at 6:26 pm)Angrboda Wrote:(February 26, 2022 at 6:23 pm)Klorophyll Wrote: Neither Kant nor Hume agree with you. I guess I should be proud of how stupid I am.
You're full of shit. I can quote you where Hume shits all over the teleological argument. Show us where Kant or Hume say the teleological argument isn't crap.
(And Kant is a moot point, as he was a theist bound determined to bend himself into a pretzel to prove God, so he's hardly a worthwhile defeated.)
^This is why I suspect Kloro hasn’t read Hume’s ‘Dialogues’. Cleanthes’ assertion quoted above is pretty handily demolished. The ‘Dialogues’ were written as a framework of fictional debates to reject arguments for God.
Hume had his weaknesses, but supporting teleology wasn’t one of them.
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