There seems to be almost universal agreement among theists and atheists that a God either exists, or not, one or the other. We might be suspicious of the fact that this widely shared assumption appears to be taken as an obvious given which requires no examination. — Jake
If we were to examine reality without the burden of this blind assumption, we might see that the vast majority of reality from the smallest to largest scales, space, does not fit neatly in to a tidy simplistic dualistic "exists or not" paradigm.
Thus, it's at least possible that the simplistic "exists or not" paradigm the God debate is built upon may not accurately represent reality, which if true, tends to turn the entire God debate in to a big pile of pointless rubbish. — Jake
Upon seeing this, some people may wash their hands of the God debate and turn their attention to other matters. This seems a reasonable choice. Other people may choose to dump the questionable "exists or not" assumption and then continue a God investigation on that basis. This seems a reasonable choice too. — Jake
Most people will ignore all of the above because they've memorized a collection of beliefs and arguments which they use to publicly inflate their ego, and they don't want this fun game spoiled by some party pooper. Ok, I suppose this is reasonable too, but perhaps not all that interesting. — Jake
I would settle for just an end of arrogance of ones position, an end to sarcasm as tactic, and a significant increase in respect for each other's reasonable beliefs. — Rank Amateur
Given that God's [non-]existence cannot be proven, it seems unlikely. — Pattern-chaser
But the children's merry-go-round to nowhere nature of the debate can be proven, yes? — Jake
It's so nice to meet an incurable optimist. — Pattern-chaser
What if God both exists and does not exist? — eodnhoj7
What if God both exists and does not exist? — eodnhoj7
sounds more like the start of the God debate than the end of the God debate. — Rank Amateur
If God is both being and none being, with God being the equivocation of being and non being, the by default God is defined as equivocation. — eodnhoj7
Equivocation is not an issue of language, but measurement and definition — eodnhoj7
Equivocation is using a word in two different senses as if you're NOT changing senses, and it's particularly a problem when you're presenting an argument as if a sense of a term is consistent rather than referring to two different things. — Terrapin Station
Definition occurs through the separation and connection of phenomena, — eodnhoj7
Relations exist but don't necessarily weigh anything. — Terrapin Station
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.