How do you feel about atheists?

  • Thread starter Thread starter punisherthunder
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
PRmerger said:
I am enjoying this immensely, MrE.

The fact that you do this for a living is irrelevant, BTW.

So the fact of your profession notwithstanding, you still need to acknowledge that if your son says, “I believe it’s not heads!” and you don’t give him the coin when it’s…not heads (because it’s…tails)…you would be unfair and illogical.

Yes?
Click to expand...
You tangent regarding the coin is irrelevant. The crux of the matter is this, you do not accept that

A. Someone can reject one half of a dichotomy without accepting the other half.
B. Someone can reject one half of a dichotomy without asserting that half is false.

In both cases you are incorrect.
 
PRmerger said:
Yes!!

You are correct!

But when you say, “I don’t believe that it’s even” this NECESSARILY means…

“I do believe that it’s odd.”

There is agnosticism first. We agree it’s fine to say, “I don’t know if it’s even or odd…until I have more evidence.”

BUT!!!

When you say, “I don’t believe the number of gumballs is even”…

You have taken the next step. You have passed agnosticism…

And this means…

“I do believe that it’s odd.”

#necessarily
Click to expand...
Aside from the fact I have never used the words I don’t believe you are still wrong. I said I reject the claim, and rejecting a claim is NOT a positive assertion, is a position REGARDING an assertion.
 
MrEmpiricism said:
No because rejecting the claim it is even Is not the same as claiming it is not even. I can reject the claim it Is even and still be open to the possibility that it is even.
Click to expand...
#jawdropping

When you reject something it’s the same as saying “I also may not be rejecting this”?

Really?
 
PRmerger said:
#jawdropping

When you reject something it’s the same as saying “I also may not be rejecting this”?

Really?
Click to expand...
You really need to read up on this subject.

There is a CLEAR difference between…

I reject claim A as true. (THIS IS NOT A CLAIM it is a position in regard to a claim)

And

I claim A is false. (THIS IS A CLAIM in its on right)

Until you can grasp the difference we are just going to go round in circles.
 
MrEmpiricism said:
You tangent regarding the coin is irrelevant. The crux of the matter is this, you do not accept that

A. Someone can reject one half of a dichotomy without accepting the other half.
B. Someone can reject one half of a dichotomy without asserting that half is false.

In both cases you are incorrect.
Click to expand...
Unles the dichotomy is jointly exhaustive and mutually exclusive. You can only not accept ~A when you accept A unless a false dichotomy has been structured. That why false dichotomy have been defined. Have I been taught incorrectly? To be fair, I haven’t read anything on the forum that lead to this and may misunderstand what you are saying.
 
and no I can not reject something while not rejecting it, I can however reject something and be open to the possibility it may in fact be true.
 
MrEmpiricism said:
You tangent regarding the coin is irrelevant.
Click to expand...
Just indulge me, please.

If your son said, “It’s not heads”, in the scenario already provided, would you be correct in refusing to give him the coin which came up as tails?
 
JD1789 said:
Unles the dichotomy is jointly exhaustive and mutually exclusive. You can only not accept ~A when you accept A unless a false dichotomy has been structured. That why false dichotomy have been defined. Have I been taught incorrectly? To be fair, I haven’t read anything on the forum that lead to this and may misunderstand what you are saying.
Click to expand...
To be honest I should have avoided the use of dichotomy as it will only serve to complicate the subject. The bottom line is when faced with two potential options I can reject the claim A is true without asserting it is false, or asserting B is true.
 
PRmerger said:
Just indulge me, please.

If your son said, “It’s not heads”, in the scenario already provided, would you be correct in refusing to give him the coin which came up as tails?
Click to expand...
I have no wish to be side tracked into irrelevant discussion.
 
MrEmpiricism said:
I have no wish to be side tracked into irrelevant discussion.
Click to expand...
Why?

It would be a relatively short side track.

And we’ve already established that you are quite eager to engage in tributary discussions.

One has to wonder why you are unwilling to answer my very simple question.
 
MrEmpiricism said:
and no I can not reject something while not rejecting it, I can however reject something and be open to the possibility it may in fact be true.
Click to expand...
Like this?

I reject the arguments for God’s existence but I am open to the possibility that the arguments may actually be true?
 
MrEmpiricism said:
Seriously, your gifs and stories are not doing anything for you. I do this for a living, every other critical thinker on EARTH agrees with me including the Christian ones. I am trying my best to be patient with you and help you but if you are not interested you just have to say so and we can move on.
Click to expand...
“Appeal to authority” is no argument at all
 
PRmerger said:
Like this?

I reject the arguments for God’s existence but I am open to the possibility that the arguments may actually be true?
Click to expand...
No, like this. I reject the claim a god exists due to the fact that none of the arguments can with stand critical analysis. However, I am not making the positive assertion that there is NO god.
 
MrEmpiricism said:
No, like this. I reject the claim a god exists due to the fact that none of the arguments can with stand critical analysis. However, I am not making the positive assertion that there is NO god.
Click to expand...
What happened to the “but I am open to” part?

Why can’t you apply it here? :confused:
 
It’s all just sophistry and mind games, PR. However, it’s true that there is no little g god. There is only, God.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top