A Message and Refutation for Diddo97
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
08-10-2014, 09:27 AM
RE: A Message and Refutation for Diddo97
(08-10-2014 09:19 AM)diddo97 Wrote:  You want a refutation of this? Ok.
<snip>A picture of a brain in a vat<snip>
Unless you have an absolute source for your knowledge, you can't know anything absolutely.

Fixed for you.

Now for some obligatory smilies that diddo loves to over-use.

Gasp
Facepalm

As mentioned before, this is a result of your mental deficiency which means that you can only think in terms of absolutes. Thinking in terms of a brain in a vat gets you nowhere. You don't even ever explain why it is relevant to the conversation (do you actually even know?)

But assuming that you are saying that you can't know anything absolutely, the same can be said about the existence of your imaginary god friend.


(... and Drinking Beverage )
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Mathilda's post
08-10-2014, 09:30 AM
RE: A Message and Refutation for Diddo97
(08-10-2014 09:27 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  
(08-10-2014 09:19 AM)diddo97 Wrote:  You want a refutation of this? Ok.
<snip>A picture of a brain in a vat<snip>
Unless you have an absolute source for your knowledge, you can't know anything absolutely.

Fixed for you.

Now for some obligatory smilies that diddo loves to over-use.

Gasp
Facepalm

As mentioned before, this is a result of your mental deficiency which means that you can only think in terms of absolutes. Thinking in terms of a brain in a vat gets you nowhere. You don't even ever explain why it is relevant to the conversation (do you actually even know?)

But assuming that you are saying that you can't know anything absolutely, the same can be said about the existence of your imaginary god friend.


(... and Drinking Beverage )

Friend? What friend?

Truth seeker.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-10-2014, 09:31 AM
RE: A Message and Refutation for Diddo97
(08-10-2014 09:30 AM)diddo97 Wrote:  Friend? What friend?

Meaningless response.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-10-2014, 09:33 AM
RE: A Message and Refutation for Diddo97
(08-10-2014 09:19 AM)diddo97 Wrote:  Unless you have an absolute source for your knowledge, you can't know anything.

I know that it is time for you to fuck off, troll. Yes

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-10-2014, 06:58 AM (This post was last modified: 10-10-2014 09:08 AM by CONVERSIONTUBE.)
RE: A Message and Refutation for Diddo97
On this presup shit, I have a couple questions.

This stuff goes deep and some of it kind of goes over my head I have to admit.

It seems such a silly argument shouldn't require a detailed 2000 word explanation why TAG or similar Presups are easily refuted and wrong.

Can you please read my 2 arguments for why TAG is wrong and see where I have failed.

#1

They ask you could you be wrong about anything, is there anything you know for sure.

Yes,
1. I know A= A
2. I know A does not equal not A
3. I know these can never not be true

I also know that these concepts exist whether or not I ever exist or whether a world or the universe ever exists.

They ask can you be sure?

Yes 100 %

So isn't their argument over at this point?

They might say how can you be sure,

I am sure, prove me wrong.

By doing this you are forcing them with the burden of trying to find examples where those 3 things aren't possible but of course they cannot.

For fun you could explain that if God was required to make these laws it means there was a time before these laws existed. Without these laws it means

God was but he wasn't,
He was in and out.
He was square and he was circle.

Explain all these concepts are ridiculous and then bid a due.

#2

Let them do their whole speal and then say,

You Know What You are Completely Right, You have Converted Me.

I AM NOW A Muslim.

Then Walk Away.


Where does this argument fail because I cannot see it?

I thought this site was good and really detailed.

http://www.oocities.org/athens/sparta/10...oncept.htm

There was a lot of detail, here are the conclusions.

1. "It is undeniable that TAG is an attempt to defend a view whose chief idea (the notion of a god) commits the very error which it charges against contrary views. It essentially claims that non-Christians commit the fallacy of the stolen concept while supposedly serving as a defense for a view which cannot escape this same error. It is bad enough to defend a view which is built on stolen concepts. However, it is even worse to accuse others of committing that very fallacy in the attempt to defend that view. This is intellectual hypocrisy. Thus, TAG should be abandoned by those who are interested in achieving rationality in their views."

2. "That the tenets of the Christian worldview have no necessary logical consequence amongst themselves has grave implications for TAG as a defensive argument and for Christianity as a whole. Essentially it tells us that the various positions of Christianity must be accepted without reason, for not only do the ideas of Christianity bear no self-evident or logically demonstrable relationship to reality, they have no internal logical consequence connecting them together into a whole, and, frankly, they are flatly incredible. TAG then expects one to swallow all of Christianity's claims in one lump sum for essentially no reason whatsoever, save perhaps that its believers claim that it is all true. That the various tenets of the Christian worldview must be accepted as a package-deal is confirmed by those instances in which believers claim that the whole Bible is true when in fact they have investigated none or very few of its claims. In many cases, believers claim to know that the entire Bible is true when they've not even read it all. Consequently, they do not know what it is that they are saying is true. This can hardly be considered intellectually honest. Knowledge for Christian theism, then, is not a hierarchically ordered, integrated sum, but a "village of squat bungalows" in some imaginary landscape. Sadly, TAG ignores the disintegrated nature of Christian theism when it argues that knowledge logically presupposes the truth of its various, unconnected doctrines."
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-10-2014, 09:33 AM
RE: A Message and Refutation for Diddo97
Dildo still dodging Dark Phoenix's challenge.

Anybody surprised? Didn't think so.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Fodder_From_The_Truth's post
10-10-2014, 10:38 AM
RE: A Message and Refutation for Diddo97
(10-10-2014 09:33 AM)Fodder_From_The_Truth Wrote:  Dildo still dodging Dark Phoenix's challenge.

Anybody surprised? Didn't think so.

I think it's unfair of you to not only bump this thread but also point out at the same time that diddo is dodging Dark Phoenix's challenge when he would most likely prefer for this thread to just slip away and get back to trolling asking mind numblingly stupid challenging questions.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Mathilda's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: