A Message and Refutation for Diddo97
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
26-09-2014, 11:12 AM
RE: A Message and Refutation for Diddo97
(26-09-2014 10:54 AM)Dark Phoenix Wrote:  
(26-09-2014 08:59 AM)Revenant77x Wrote:  I doubt he is actually trans, he said that during his fishing stage where every time he showed up he was pushing a different problem to attract attention. Ever since he found something that works he does not mention the trans stuff or respond if anyone else does.

I have similar doubts, but I am not comfortable with the consequences of that assumption if I turn out to be wrong. How insensitive would it make me if it turned out to be true?

Notice I never say anything negative about the trans stuff, mainly because it is not a negative. There are people here who have reached out and would have been taken up by anyone going through that. We have several trans members and 1 who has a trans daughter who have bent over backwards to help him with anything he would need. Instead of taking them up he dropped it because it did not get the reaction he was looking for and has not been mentioned except in passing once or twice since.

That's my take on it anyway, I could be wrong (I'm nearly never wrong about this kind of thing) Diddo comes across as a baby troll learning to troll for the first time. He had no idea how to read a community to see what would set them off so he tried stuff that would bother him and to a straight teen male nothing is more of a trigger than the gay/trans thing it always gets a reaction. So when the reaction to that here was just "Oh okay here are some people who can help you" he dropped it and moved on.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Revenant77x's post
26-09-2014, 01:14 PM
RE: A Message and Refutation for Diddo97
I tend to agree with Rev - baby troll in training


Attention seeking behavior is such a pain in the ass. His suicidal threat sounded disingenuous, however that's a threat that has serious implications if it is indeed legitimate and is instead disregarded. It's very frustrating. That being said, I'd rather a troll think he's bested me than hurting someone who is reaching out for help. He knows this and is taking full advantage of it. There's another troll on this site that does something similar but is even less sophisticated than Diddo, but calling him out in the personal issues section would violate rules as well as have serious consequences if I'm wrong. Not being able to read body language and listen to the tone of voice certainly makes issues like this more difficult. I can usually call bullshit from a mile away.

As far as Diddo is concerned, if he's a troll, we are feeding the behavior by talking shit to him and engaging. It'd be better to ignore the behavior. If he is a delusional, transgender teen trying to figure out who he is and make sense of things, we certainly don't need to be mean. He utilizes enough self-deprecation for all of us. I had no idea that he had professed transgender issues until someone mentioned it in his suicide thread. If he's not completely full of shit trying to take us for a ride, he needs help working through it. He doesn't strike me as particularly malicious.

I'm not saying I'm a perfect beacon of kindness and therapeutic communication, I occasionally enjoy pushing buttons, too. I've said some harsh things to the deranged troll that keeps shitting in the shout box, as well as to the Buddhist freak (see what I did there...mean). Maybe it's because I'm newer here and have had far fewer interactions with Diddo that I think he requires a little patience, as well as a healthy dose of IGNORE. When he says something inflammatory or stupid, just roll your eyes and move on, don't engage. Kind of like a child throwing a tantrum - the tantrum usually stops when you walk away.


Just my two cent ramble. Carry on.

"If there's a single thing that life teaches us, it's that wishing doesn't make it so." - Lev Grossman
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Nurse's post
26-09-2014, 01:36 PM
RE: A Message and Refutation for Diddo97
Suicide threats can be genuine cries for help, or they can be manipulative, or they can just be "Hey look at me!" attention-getters.

I smelled troll right away on Diddo's "threat", because (a) he didn't ask for help or support; (b) he said he would kill himself unless someone could refute Sye Ten Bruggencate, but: (b1) that "argument" had already been thoroughly refuted several times on this forum, and (b2) he posted this in a subforum where refutation (and debate in general) isn't allowed. That subforum is only for help and support, and he wasn't seeking either of those.

I can't take him seriously. He isn't interested in any serious debate, and he isn't looking for help. He's just being annoying -- i.e., trolling.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Grasshopper's post
26-09-2014, 02:06 PM
RE: A Message and Refutation for Diddo97
(26-09-2014 11:12 AM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(26-09-2014 10:54 AM)Dark Phoenix Wrote:  I have similar doubts, but I am not comfortable with the consequences of that assumption if I turn out to be wrong. How insensitive would it make me if it turned out to be true?

Notice I never say anything negative about the trans stuff, mainly because it is not a negative. There are people here who have reached out and would have been taken up by anyone going through that. We have several trans members and 1 who has a trans daughter who have bent over backwards to help him with anything he would need. Instead of taking them up he dropped it because it did not get the reaction he was looking for and has not been mentioned except in passing once or twice since.

That's my take on it anyway, I could be wrong (I'm nearly never wrong about this kind of thing) Diddo comes across as a baby troll learning to troll for the first time. He had no idea how to read a community to see what would set them off so he tried stuff that would bother him and to a straight teen male nothing is more of a trigger than the gay/trans thing it always gets a reaction. So when the reaction to that here was just "Oh okay here are some people who can help you" he dropped it and moved on.

I'd hesitate even to call it trolling. I get far more of a factitious disorder vibe than a for the lulz vibe off the person in question.

Explaining disruptive behaviour is not excusing disruptive behaviour... but where exactly does that leave us?

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-09-2014, 02:19 PM
RE: A Message and Refutation for Diddo97
(26-09-2014 11:12 AM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(26-09-2014 10:54 AM)Dark Phoenix Wrote:  I have similar doubts, but I am not comfortable with the consequences of that assumption if I turn out to be wrong. How insensitive would it make me if it turned out to be true?

Notice I never say anything negative about the trans stuff, mainly because it is not a negative. There are people here who have reached out and would have been taken up by anyone going through that. We have several trans members and 1 who has a trans daughter who have bent over backwards to help him with anything he would need. Instead of taking them up he dropped it because it did not get the reaction he was looking for and has not been mentioned except in passing once or twice since.

That's my take on it anyway, I could be wrong (I'm nearly never wrong about this kind of thing) Diddo comes across as a baby troll learning to troll for the first time. He had no idea how to read a community to see what would set them off so he tried stuff that would bother him and to a straight teen male nothing is more of a trigger than the gay/trans thing it always gets a reaction. So when the reaction to that here was just "Oh okay here are some people who can help you" he dropped it and moved on.

He also had the sye ten suicide thread, that was a major shout for attention.

[Image: Guilmon-41189.gif] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOW_Ioi2wtuPa88FvBmnBgQ my youtube
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-09-2014, 03:13 PM
RE: A Message and Refutation for Diddo97
Excellent post... A plus 1 for you Mr Phoenix Sir!

[Image: guard-saluting.jpg]

[img]

via GIPHY

[/img]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Sam's post
26-09-2014, 03:54 PM
RE: A Message and Refutation for Diddo97
(26-09-2014 01:14 PM)Nurse Wrote:  I tend to agree with Rev - baby troll in training


Attention seeking behavior is such a pain in the ass. His suicidal threat sounded disingenuous, however that's a threat that has serious implications if it is indeed legitimate and is instead disregarded. It's very frustrating. That being said, I'd rather a troll think he's bested me than hurting someone who is reaching out for help. He knows this and is taking full advantage of it. There's another troll on this site that does something similar but is even less sophisticated than Diddo, but calling him out in the personal issues section would violate rules as well as have serious consequences if I'm wrong. Not being able to read body language and listen to the tone of voice certainly makes issues like this more difficult. I can usually call bullshit from a mile away.

As far as Diddo is concerned, if he's a troll, we are feeding the behavior by talking shit to him and engaging. It'd be better to ignore the behavior. If he is a delusional, transgender teen trying to figure out who he is and make sense of things, we certainly don't need to be mean. He utilizes enough self-deprecation for all of us. I had no idea that he had professed transgender issues until someone mentioned it in his suicide thread. If he's not completely full of shit trying to take us for a ride, he needs help working through it. He doesn't strike me as particularly malicious.

I'm not saying I'm a perfect beacon of kindness and therapeutic communication, I occasionally enjoy pushing buttons, too. I've said some harsh things to the deranged troll that keeps shitting in the shout box, as well as to the Buddhist freak (see what I did there...mean). Maybe it's because I'm newer here and have had far fewer interactions with Diddo that I think he requires a little patience, as well as a healthy dose of IGNORE. When he says something inflammatory or stupid, just roll your eyes and move on, don't engage. Kind of like a child throwing a tantrum - the tantrum usually stops when you walk away.


Just my two cent ramble. Carry on.

I see Diddo's posts as collateral transgender thinking. I think the nature of her (his) replies point to depression and confusion over her situation particularly within her own family. I saw some oddly pressurized thinking going on with my daughter before she came out to me, it just wasn't about god, it was other subjects.

Chill out, take it with a grain of salt.

Shakespeare's Comedy of Errors.... on Donald J. Trump:

He is deformed, crooked, old, and sere,
Ill-fac’d, worse bodied, shapeless every where;
Vicious, ungentle, foolish, blunt, unkind,
Stigmatical in making, worse in mind.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-09-2014, 06:16 PM
RE: A Message and Refutation for Diddo97
(26-09-2014 12:11 AM)Dark Phoenix Wrote:  Consider the following as a message to the community as much as a message directly for Diddo97. I would like to invite comments from everybody, but especially Diddo97.

In the short time that Diddo97 has been with us here on TTA I have been frustrated with his poor forum behavior, concerned with his mental state, and annoyed with his incessantly repeated weak argument. Ever since the Refining Reason Debate between Matt Dillahunty and Sye Ted Bruggencate, he has been spamming the forum, parroting Sye's presuppositionalist apologetics. I am not impressed with the argument or Diddo97's poor deployment of it. In the interest of dispelling this nonsense I have included a summary of the argument as well as my own refutation below.

The Presuppositional Argument for God

The argument is presented as a challenge. The unbeliever is told to provide a justification for what are known as "properly basic beliefs" or "foundational beliefs". These include believing in our own existence, that of others, the reliability of our senses and cognitive functions, and the reliability of reason and logic. If the unbeliever attempts the challenge, yet fails to provide a justification free of circular reasoning, the presuppositionalist points out that the best justification is the belief that god exists and is the foundation and justification for the foundational beliefs. If the unbeliever is unable to point out any flaws in this, he is now trapped, since to argue against the proposition with logic or reasoning will be considered circular by the presuppositionalist.

The next portion of the argument is presented on the shoulders of the challenge. The believer feels that they have adequately made unbelief impossible to defend, but they are left with an obscure god who's existence is only necessary to provide justification for foundational beliefs. They resolve this by claiming revelation from god, directly to them, which includes an identification as a specific god and the revelation that all other humans have received this message as well. If an unbeliever claims not to know if a god exists, the believer will simply say "You are a liar. You know god exists".

A common form of the argument begins by asking whether or not the unbeliever believes that there is such a thing as "absolute truth" or not. It doesn't matter if they answer yes or no, since the next question will ask them whether their answer is "absolutely true" or not. This word game will continue until either the unbeliever affirms a series of statements or exits the discussion. If you submit to being led by the tongue in this manner you will soon have agreed that "absolute truth" exists, that you know some things to be true, that logic exists, and that it is unchanging, not made of matter, and universal. At the point you are presented with something along the lines of:

"Truth, knowledge, and logic are necessary to prove ANYTHING and cannot be made sense of apart from God. Therefore... The Proof that God exists is that without Him you couldn't prove anything."

This argument can sometimes seem very compelling, especially as it is often presented with such aggressiveness or extreme confidence that to argue against it is to become vulnerable to insults and verbal bullying. Its proponents are often brutal and offensive in their dealings with unbelievers. Sye Ted Bruggencate is an excellent example.

Many people have commented that the argument isn't obviously flawed at first glance, but most people feel distinctly uncomfortable with it, as though they knew something wasn't quite right. The way the argument is used to force you into scripted question and answer periods, and its unclear and confusing nature are both red flags for a lot of people.

My Refutation

The argument is very flawed, even fatally so. It is beyond resuscitation.

The most efficient way of refuting the argument is to not be deceived by the initial challenge. The task of providing a justification for foundational beliefs is impossible without reasoning in a circle, or at all for that matter. The presuppositionalist cannot justify them either, and has already committed to them without asserting god at all. He has been dishonest by claiming god as the justification for reason, when the opposite is true. He is and always was forced to engage in reason, logic, to trust his own cognitive processes, etc... in order to reach the god hypothesis.

This is so easy to prove, it is laughable that it ever constituted an argument at all. Perform an experiment in your mind, if you doubt it. Strip away your foundational beliefs. Stop feeling, experiencing, and thinking. No one, including you, exists. There is no logic, no reason, and no universe.

Now what are you going to do?

You can't even think a thought, let alone reason out why god is "necessary". If you wanted to do that, you would have to assume the foundational beliefs again before you could even begin.

This is a DEATHBLOW to the argument. If those who deploy this argument were honest, and understood how hypocritical and uninspired their argument is, we wouldn't have any more presuppositionalists. That being the case, there are still other weaknesses to the latter parts of the argument which deserve at least an dishonorable mention.

1. The claim of personal divine revelation is flawed because of its ability to "prove" conflicting concepts. Take for example Islam and Christianity. They are not only opposed in their doctrines, but mutually exclusive in the very existence of their deities. Islam claims that Allah is the ONLY god. Christianity doesn't recognize the existence of Allah. Islam claims that Mohammad is Allah's prophet. Christianity doesn't consider Mohammad a prophet, but asserts that the son of god, Jesus Christ, died for all our sins. Islam considers Jesus to be merely a man and a teacher. If all of these propositions can be asserted as fact via divine revelation, then divine revelation cannot be reliable. To claim otherwise is to accept contradiction into one's world view.

2. The claim that all people "know" that god exists, and those who deny it are liars, is both flawed and deeply offensive. Having already demonstrated that divine revelation can be claimed to "prove" anything, even contradictory things, there is no justification for such a specific knowledge of the private thoughts and beliefs of others. It is an example of one of the most common dishonest argument methods, assertions repeated incessantly and with confidence, yet without evidence or logical justification. The presuppositionalist is most likely dishonest in this, knowing full well that claiming something often enough and loud enough can sometimes wear people down into thinking it might be true. Nothing could be further from truth.

This is an offensive and arrogant statement as well, since one lowly human being is claiming to possess the knowledge of his fellow's thoughts, even when they "lie". Such hubris deserves humiliation and ridicule. Even more so when the same lowly human being claims a direct line to the supernatural as well. Our toleration of such a person, especially in this community, should be zero.

3. "absolute truth" is a poorly fabricated misnomer. "Truth" as typically defined, is more than enough to convey what is meant by "absolute truth". True already denotes a finality, or what actually is, without reference to a subjective mind. If something is true, it doesn't matter if I agree with it or not. It doesn't require my agreement in order to be true. Most presuppositionalists won't define "absolute truth", and the few who do merely present the definition of "truth".

4. The argument is attempting to use universal facts about human nature against the unbeliever. A study of Epistemology will yield an understanding of our human limitations. The things we "know" are actually theories which fit the known facts, not true knowledge in the sense that the conclusions will never be overturned or refined. We don't "know" anything in a perfect sense, which seems to be something believers take issue with. The presuppositionalist may be right when he or she says that a perfect knowledge is impossible without a revelation from a supreme being. However, we are all in the same Epistemological boat, and that theory doesn't fit the known facts. It must therefore be dismissed.

If anyone feels that I have misrepresented these arguments, or refuted a straw man, feel free to present me with what you feel to be the actual argument. I will refute that as well, if I can.

Now that I have refuted these arguments in full, I am not interested in hearing Diddo97 assert anything without first accounting for the flaws I listed here. I ask the community to join me in insisting that he give an accounting of these flaws. If you read one of his spammed empty assertions, please send him the link for this post. Spam the link below every one of his posts if you have to, until he honestly provides an explanation for his arguments. I don't want him to feel welcome in spamming presupposition anywhere, because every time he tries someone will say "Dark Phoenix already refuted your bullshit. Here. (Insert link)"

Objections to Diddo97's Poor Behavior

That brings me to your behavior, Diddo97. You evade or ignore questions about your arguments and posts regularly. When you do give answers, they are never sincere, but are usually repetitions of what you have already said or asserted. There has been no such thing as a conversation or dialogue with you, since you are not respectful enough to engage and be sincere.

Does this look familiar?

[Image: 8Nx9Qco.png]

I know it does. This is your "go-to" response whenever you don't have an answer for someone. You just put this up and ignore whatever the question or statement was.

In case you decide to deny it, here are two threads where you did exactly that.

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...th-Diddo97
http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...ist?page=2

When you are not evading or ignoring what others post, you are making the same statements over and over again, without evidence or logical justification. You often post the exact same words over and over, sometimes in many different threads.

In case you try to deny this as well, here is one excellent example.

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...hool-essay

Claiming or saying "God is not for us to understand" and then merely repeating it when questioned about it, is a perfect example of how you are not engaged in open discussion, but are contributing a great deal of repetitive garbage to the forum.

When you are not making empty repeated assertions, you are openly contradicting yourself. In your thread "Matt Dillahunty vs Sye Ten Bruggencate" you openly contradict yourself several times. Your first few comments were in criticism of Sye, and revealed some of his argument's weaknesses.

"I don't see how Sye's appeal to solipsism implies God. Why does God solve this problem? If we can't know anything, we couldn't possible know if God is real or honest. Sye is hiding his naked assertions behind philosophical problems."

" 'truth is what corresponds with reality as percieved by God' He has yet to demonstrate that this has anything to do with his holy book..."

"Essentially, Sye's arguments are good untill he brings his religion into it. He still needs to demonstrate that the Bible is valid, even if his philosophical arguments have some merit. He also seems to be under the delusion that he is immune to his own arguments."

Suddenly, you start contradicting your own assessment. None of your previous objections have been explained by Sye in the debate, or anyone else for that matter, yet you still said:

"Ugh. Sye is completely pwning. His position is incredibly depressing, and he has just proven it. If a torturous, deceitful, obnoxious being existed, Sye fits the bill perfectly."

Of course your statement that "he has just proven it" didn't seem to matter when you went on to say:

"Matt: "Why did God leave the most important thing, the instructions for salvation, prone to error?"
Sye: "For reasons that are perfectly suitable for God"

Ugh. How are you not horribly depressed by this? Knowing that you're just a puppet of an omnipotent being who would happily torture you for all eternity? Nothing about this guy makes ANY sense to me."

"His argument is almost indistiguishable from pure brainwashing. He relies on not letting you think or ask any questions. Even in this debate, his entire argument was pretty much directed at the audience. He is a complete monster."


None of that sound familiar? Here's the proof.

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...ruggencate

These are only a few examples, but anyone taking a look through your post and thread history can vouch that these examples are representative of your behavior and attitude as a whole. Although I can understand that your positions may be dynamic, it has not been possible to identify exactly what in presuppositionalism appeals to you and convinces you. You have not allowed for discussion of that kind to take place.

I do my best to follow some simple guidelines that help me promote discussion and an exchange of ideas. I have made simple significant changes to the ways in which I debate or discuss controversial topics, that I think helps to facilitate honest discussion and a better understanding for everyone. I invite you to consider ways in which you might evolve such systems of your own. Here are a few examples.

1. I try to answer questions, even if I just say "I don't know". I try to respond to each poster, if possible, to acknowledge them and engage in discussion.

2. When I answer questions, I do so honestly. I try not to evade a subject or line of discussion simply because it makes me uncomfortable.

3. When someone posts a criticism or objection to something I say or assert, I try to read and understand it. If I struggle with it, I ask questions to gain understanding.

4. When someone is arguing a point, especially in response to one of mine, I consider whether or not the refutation is successful and why I might think that. I ask them what convinces them, specifically, and they explain in detail. If I do not agree with them, I try to make it clear why that is by giving them detailed individual points to consider. In this way, we achieve an exchange of ideas, as opposed to merely preaching to each other.

5. Perhaps most importantly, I am open to the idea that I might change my position. I may even do so on a scale so large as to include my whole world view. I am skeptical, but can be convinced with good logical justification or good evidence.

Although these are probably not even close to a perfect system, they work well enough for me. I would really appreciate it if you would consider ways in which you can open up, be more sincere, and talk about the issues in a respectful and intellectually honest manner.

Concerns with Diddo97's Mental Health

I think that I speak for many of the posters here when I say that, based on many of your posts, I am genuinely concerned about your mental and physical well being. You have posted with such utter self loathing and hatred that I am have been shocked by it more than once. You treat yourself so poorly on this forum, that I am deeply concerned that you may be in need of legitimate psychiatric help.

I will just use some of the worst as examples. There are a lot of posts like this, but these really stood out to me.

"I am a dirty, arrogant, violent, mentally retarded monkey."

"I believe that I'm fat, lazy, unintelligent, and dirty."

"You don't want to be friends with me."

"I'm a fallible monkey."

"I have no friends. My intelligence is fading. My body is becoming huge, ugly, and hairy, preventing me from being around people. I'm am incapable of learning anything. I feel really old. I have not experienced peace since 2012. I am completely incompetent at anything.

And to top it off, I feel like it would be arrogant to not be this way. I know that's irrational, but I can't get rid of that feeling, because I feel like THAT would be arrogant. I'm trapped."

"I'm transgender. Yup, every single person on this forum hates me now. Why? Because they know that it means I'm mentally retarded. I don't know why everyone finds that funny, but they do. There is no cure for me. My life is over."

"Clearly someone has problems if they think that they need to mutilate their genitals to be happy. I don't see how it's any different from thinking I should really be a box, or thinking that I shouldn't have any arms. Mental retardation, by definition. It's arrogant to think that I could be a woman."


I have no ill will against you for being transgender. As far as I understand it, you are a victim of that condition, and are in no way guilty of anything negative. There is no decent person who would claim that you are.

I find your statements deeply disturbing. They convince me that you are in dire need of spending time with a mental health professional who can council and encourage you through your struggles, especially that of being transgender.

Your thread "The Last Straw" was the last straw for me. I am utterly convinced that you NEED help. I don't take threats of suicide lightly, and neither should you. The fact that you didn't post again for some time after this post had some of us convinced you had gone through with your threats.

"If you cannot refute Sye Ten Bruggencate, I will kill myself. There is no point in living if I know with 100% certainty that all humans are evil, filthy, disgusting animals."

I resent being put in the position of delivering a refutation, if only so that you won't end your own life, or otherwise harm yourself. I can hardly think of anything quite so selfish as that. I hit the pillow that night wondering if somewhere far away, you were lying with wrists slit open or hung from the rafters like a rag doll. I felt resentful in being used in such a way, yet compassionate, since I experienced similar suicidal impulses in combination with thoughts of self loathing as a teenager. I feel that I understand, if only in a small way, what you are going through.

You are manipulating me, and many of the people on this forum for any kind of attention you can get, and I don't appreciate it. I am willing to take the risk of playing into your sick games by posting this thread, if only to make you aware of how important it is for someone suffering from depression and suicidal thoughts to seek treatment.

I urge you to seek help. Tell your parents. Talk to someone who is family that you trust. Let them know that you are thinking these thoughts about suicide and saying these awful things about yourself. Let them help you. I urge you to do something about this in the real world. YOU NEED IT.

If nothing else, at least stay on the forum and try to learn about how you can be accepted and fulfilled by yourself and others without religion. At least here you can be free of condemnations of your nature, especially in sexual matters. I invite you to challenge your beliefs about yourself, your worth, and your nature. God isn't the only subject worth re-evaluating. You might find some serious relief if you adjust your decorum and engage with sincerity on the issues that matter to you.

Very well stated. Yes I have also pointed this out to many presuppers, that the axioms of philosophy are outside of the realm of proof because they are implicit in the concept of proof. The "properly basic beliefs" as they say are axiomatic and as such they don't need to be accounted for or proved since they are perceptually self evident and without them there is no such thing as proof or argument.

Their charge of circularity does apply to their own argument though since there premises assume the very thing that is in question. How hilarious.

There is another fatal flaw besides the ones you have pointed out. The TAG argument, and every other argument for the existence of God, commits the fallacy of the stolen concept. That is the fallacy of using a higher level concept such as
"argument" or "justification" while denying the validity of a lower level concept which the higher one logically rests on. Since the God claim contradicts the axioms on which logic rests, any argument for it commits this fallacy.

And so, there is nothing left of TAG.

Do not lose your knowledge that man's proper estate is an upright posture, an intransigent mind and a step that travels unlimited roads. - Ayn Rand.

Don't sacrifice for me, live for yourself! - Me

The only alternative to Objectivism is some form of Subjectivism. - Dawson Bethrick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-10-2014, 05:39 PM
RE: A Message and Refutation for Diddo97
Finally, something that doesn't reek of stupidity...

Truth seeker.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-10-2014, 06:07 PM
RE: A Message and Refutation for Diddo97
(02-10-2014 05:39 PM)diddo97 Wrote:  Finally, something that doesn't reek of stupidity...

Or "Finally, my brain allows me to see the flaws in everything I done on this site"

“You see… sometimes life gives you lemons. And when that happens… you need to find some spell that makes lemons explode, because lemons are terrible. I only ate them once and I can say with certainty they are the worst fruit. If life gave me lemons, I would view it as nothing short of a declaration of war."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like DemonicLemon's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: