Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

The Argument From Reason...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Stoic
    replied
    Originally posted by seer View Post

    Well no, that is the whole point. You would have to show how it is possible for chemicals, biology functions and the laws of nature to know of propositions. These functions are self-evidently not truth aiming or aware of propositional ideals - nor of rational inference. So my first premise stands until you can offer a genuine defeater.
    Sorry, I don't share your incredulity.

    Leave a comment:


  • seer
    replied
    Originally posted by Stoic View Post

    I think it's your burden to show the first premise of your argument is true.
    Well no, that is the whole point. You would have to show how it is possible for chemicals, biology functions and the laws of nature to know of propositions. These functions are self-evidently not truth aiming or aware of propositional ideals - nor of rational inference. So my first premise stands until you can offer a genuine defeater.

    Leave a comment:


  • Stoic
    replied
    Originally posted by seer View Post

    Of course, if naturalism is true - no one could read a map. What do chemicals, biology and the laws of nature know of propositions? That is your burden...
    I think it's your burden to show the first premise of your argument is true.

    Leave a comment:


  • seer
    replied
    Originally posted by Roy View Post
    Like, for example, by reading a map?

    That would produce, from your first premise:

    "1. If Naturalism is true, then no event can cause another event due to its propositional content."
    2. Reading a map is an event that can cause another event due to its propositional content.
    3. Therefore if naturalism is true, no-one can read maps.

    If #3 is false - and it certainly appears to be false - then your first premise is also false.

    (At this point I expect you to try to shift the burden of proof).
    Of course, if naturalism is true - no one could read a map. What do chemicals, biology and the laws of nature know of propositions? That is your burden...

    Leave a comment:


  • Roy
    replied
    Originally posted by seer View Post
    A simple example would be reasoning to take a certain course of action, then acting on it - like the figuring out (propositional content) the best route to travel to a specific destination.
    Like, for example, by reading a map?

    That would produce, from your first premise:

    "1. If Naturalism is true, then no event can cause another event due to its propositional content."
    2. Reading a map is an event that can cause another event due to its propositional content.
    3. Therefore if naturalism is true, no-one can read maps.

    If #3 is false - and it certainly appears to be false - then your first premise is also false.

    (At this point I expect you to try to shift the burden of proof).

    Leave a comment:


  • seer
    replied
    Originally posted by Stoic View Post

    What does it mean for an event to cause another event due to its propositional content?
    A simple example would be reasoning to take a certain course of action, then acting on it - like the figuring out (propositional content) the best route to travel to a specific destination.

    Or propositional content leading to true conclusions (rational inference).

    1. All dogs are mortal.
    2. Spot is a dog.
    3.Therefore spot is mortal.

    Leave a comment:


  • Stoic
    replied
    Originally posted by seer View Post
    no takers?
    What does it mean for an event to cause another event due to its propositional content?

    Leave a comment:


  • seer
    replied
    no takers?

    Leave a comment:


  • seer
    started a topic The Argument From Reason...

    The Argument From Reason...

    And I quote:

    1. If Naturalism is true, then no event can cause another event due to its propositional content.

    2. But some events do cause other events due to propositional content (i,e.logical inference).

    3. Therefore naturalism is false.

Related Threads

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by whag, Yesterday, 03:01 PM
14 responses
60 views
0 likes
Last Post rogue06
by rogue06
 
Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
21 responses
129 views
0 likes
Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
78 responses
414 views
0 likes
Last Post tabibito  
Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
45 responses
303 views
1 like
Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
Working...
X