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
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
-
Originally posted by Machinist View PostThe theist began with human reason to even make the assumptions that form his 1st premise, therefore his argument is circular.
That does seem circular. I suspect there is a rule here that we do not know about (if you do know, please share), that states when the clock starts (so to speak). Does it really matter just how you got there? The "How you got there part" is not part of the deductive argument. Shouldn't only the contents of the deductive argument be what matters for it to be a Valid Deductive Argument?
It seems intuitive to me that there is a rule somewhere that says that only what is inside the argument matters when it's validity is being questioned.
Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
- 1 like
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Machinist View PostMy argument is not that our reasoning ability is not generally reliable, but why is it generally reliable, what makes more sense.
I'll keep that mind. It's a nuance that's easy to lose sight of.Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by Machinist View PostIt seems intuitive to me that there is a rule somewhere that says that only what is inside the argument matters when it's validity is being questioned.
- 1 like
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View Post
I said nothing about anything beyond death, the point is consciousness is not material. And you can hold to your science of the gaps view...
“He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.
- 1 like
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View Post
That again, is just stupid Tass. Historical critical thinking is not a scientific method.
And again, we had accurate history long, long before the scientific method came about.
You are just being disingenuous because you, holding to scientism, need to filter all truths and facts through science. And it can't be done.
That is false, I have known men that did not love their mothers, in essence, hated them. One was a life long friend. So prove scientifically that you actually love your mother.
By experience; drinking your cup of tea the other morning is as much of a fact as the known distance between the earth and the moon. Even is no one else witnessed your drinking it.
Last edited by Tassman; 01-20-2022, 11:48 PM.“He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.
- 1 like
Comment
-
Originally posted by Stoic View Post
You are absolutely right. Even a circular argument can be valid, as long as the conclusion must be true if the premises are true.
Oh bother. I was thinking that a valid deductive argument is the very way out of the circle.
I'm just going to use Stoic's example here:
1) Our reasoning abilities are the result of natural selection. -(IF this premise is true)
2) Reasoning abilities that are the result of natural selection are generally reliable. -(and IF this premise is true)
3) Therefore, our reasoning abilities are generally reliable. -(THEN this conclusion must necessarily be true.)
Is this not a deductive argument?
What i'm trying to do here is construct a valid deductive argument for the atheist that logically justifies the reliability of human reason.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Tassman View Post
The “point is” that there is no coherent energy medium for the functioning of consciousness beyond the material activity of the living brain.Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by Tassman View Post
“Historical critical thinking’ practices objective research and the accumulation of verifiable facts just as does scientific methodology.
Indeed, beginning with Socrates – prefiguring scientific methodology by nearly 3,000 years.
Some mothers mistreat their children and some people hate their mothers but this is not the norm. Despite the outliers Homo sapiens, as a social species, have evolved via natural selection to instinctively love and be loyal to their families and community. This is the norm as verified scientifically.
Subjective experience is not necessarily correct, it can be deceptive, e.g. I may NOT have had my usual cup of morning tea but thought I remembered having it. Or, more dramatically, I have doubts that the sun actually careened towards Earth during the 1917 “Miracle of Fatima” despite thousands of witnesses believing it did. In short, subjective experience is not always factually reliable.
Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by Stoic View Post
You are absolutely right. Even a circular argument can be valid, as long as the conclusion must be true if the premises are true.
(Begging the Question or Circular Argument)
Abstract: Petitio principii is a logical fallacy where the conclusion of an argument is claimed to be proved by an equivalent statement in the premises. Furthermore, one of the premises is logically dependent on the conclusion of the argument. Circular arguments are epistemic variations of the fallacy, whereas the begging the question fallacies are dialectical failures. The varieties of petitio principii (including begging the question and circular argument) are explained with illustrative examples and links to self-check quizzes.- Petitio Principii (begging the question or circular argument) is the fallacy of assuming in the premise(s) of an argument a statement which equivalent the conclusion of the argument. Thus, what is to be proved has already been assumed in the premises.
Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
And this shows that the theist argument is not circular. The conclusion "therefore human reasoning can be generally trusted" has no equivalent in the premises.
It does however in the atheists. "Therefore human reasoning can generally be trusted", may just as well be the first premise.
If you were to play both of these arguments, only the atheist's argument would continually loop.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Machinist View PostAnd this shows that the theist argument is not circular. The conclusion "therefore human reasoning can be generally trusted" has no equivalent in the premises.
It does however in the atheists. "Therefore human reasoning can generally be trusted", may just as well be the first premise.
If you were to play both of these arguments, only the atheist's argument would continually loop.
Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View Post
Petitio Principii
(Begging the Question or Circular Argument)
Abstract: Petitio principii is a logical fallacy where the conclusion of an argument is claimed to be proved by an equivalent statement in the premises. Furthermore, one of the premises is logically dependent on the conclusion of the argument. Circular arguments are epistemic variations of the fallacy, whereas the begging the question fallacies are dialectical failures. The varieties of petitio principii (including begging the question and circular argument) are explained with illustrative examples and links to self-check quizzes.- Petitio Principii (begging the question or circular argument) is the fallacy of assuming in the premise(s) of an argument a statement which equivalent the conclusion of the argument. Thus, what is to be proved has already been assumed in the premises.
"Strictly speaking, petitio principii or begging the question is a valid but fallacious argument."
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by whag, Yesterday, 03:01 PM
|
39 responses
155 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by whag
Today, 03:32 PM
|
||
Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
|
21 responses
129 views
0 likes
|
Last Post 03-21-2024, 12:15 PM | ||
Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
|
80 responses
426 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by tabibito
Today, 12:33 PM
|
||
Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
|
45 responses
303 views
1 like
|
Last Post 03-17-2024, 07:19 AM |
Comment