would you like to accept as true the rest of the propositions and get right to the conclusion? — Rank Amateur
Conclusion:
Therefore theism as defined, is not in direct conflict with scientific fact. Theism, as defined is not in
direct conflict with reason, since by reason alone there are positions both for an against.
Accept? — Rank Amateur
Then I am missing something as well, because I don’t agree that an atheist is forced to think the Universe exists just because. Only the rationally deficient thinks a thing without a reason for it. — Mww
Do you see that upon any examination by anybody on anything whatsoever, such examination automatically and necessarily subsumes its object under the concept of time?
“...intuitions without concepts are empty; concepts without intuitions are blind...” — Mww
happy to, make an argument please that theism is unreasonable. — Rank Amateur
Now, setting facts and scientific facts aside for the time being, you can either say something about theism not being in conflict with "reason", which is trivial given your meaning of "reason" as distinguished from reasonable, and which misses the point, or you can say that it's reasonable, which doesn't follow from your argument. So it's lose-lose. — S
I am asking others to respect the belief that theism is a reasonable belief. I am not asking that they find theism reasonable. — Rank Amateur
I have no problem, you have agreed with all the premises and the conclusion. — Rank Amateur
If you have an issue with the difference between a position based on reason, and reasonable. Do some work, state your position clearly and make an argument. — Rank Amateur
It’s only a contradiction in terms if you’re using your question-begging definition of the universe. — AJJ
Obviously you never saw “Rick and Morty”. Rick created a mini-universe to power his space car. — Noah Te Stroete
You're suggesting that we should make a special exception so that a word means something completely different just so you can avoid a contradiction in terms and make your argument which concludes that God exists. That's unreasonable and clearly driven by your motive. — S
I’m suggesting that you shouldn’t use a question-begging definition in your argument. It’s unreasonable and clearly driven by your motive. — AJJ
barrow — Rank Amateur
You're suggesting that we should make a special exception so that a word means something completely different just so you can avoid a contradiction in terms and make your argument which concludes that God exists. — S
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.