My refutation of Sye Ten's presuppositional apologetics
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
13-02-2016, 07:55 AM
RE: My refutation of Sye Ten's presuppositional apologetics
(13-02-2016 06:14 AM)diddo97 Wrote:  
(13-02-2016 06:09 AM)Banjo Wrote:  You've seen Sye, right?

Not quite sure what you mean here. Are you under the impression that I'm doing an elaborate act of wordplay? Or are you telling me that Sye is absurd?

Sye Ten is dangerous. It is important to be able to refute his arguments.

Sye Ten is a fool, ... to be dismissed as one.
You obsession with him continues .... unabated, .... as before.
No. One. Here. Gives. A. Shit. About. The. Idiot.
Only. You. Do.

Now go out and play.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
13-02-2016, 08:00 AM
RE: My refutation of Sye Ten's presuppositional apologetics
(13-02-2016 06:34 AM)Banjo Wrote:  I'l leave for a few days. Sorry everyone.

Just eat a Snickers™. Smile




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
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
13-02-2016, 08:13 AM
RE: My refutation of Sye Ten's presuppositional apologetics
(13-02-2016 07:55 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(13-02-2016 06:14 AM)diddo97 Wrote:  Not quite sure what you mean here. Are you under the impression that I'm doing an elaborate act of wordplay? Or are you telling me that Sye is absurd?

Sye Ten is dangerous. It is important to be able to refute his arguments.

Sye Ten is a fool, ... to be dismissed as one.
You obsession with him continues .... unabated, .... as before.
No. One. Here. Gives. A. Shit. About. The. Idiot.
Only. You. Do.

Now go out and play.

Hey, I'm just trying to explain how I got out of my insanity. I'm not going to talk about him elsewhere. Heart

Truth seeker.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-02-2016, 08:58 AM
RE: My refutation of Sye Ten's presuppositional apologetics
(13-02-2016 06:16 AM)Banjo Wrote:  
(13-02-2016 06:14 AM)diddo97 Wrote:  Not quite sure what you mean here. Are you under the impression that I'm doing an elaborate act of wordplay? Or are you telling me that Sye is absurd?

Sye Ten is dangerous. It is important to be able to refute his arguments.

Sye is absurd. Der!

Yes he is absurd but there is a point to refuting him. Bad ideas grow like weeds, to use a gardening analogy. When they are young and tender, they are easy to remove. Let them grow and strengthen and put down deep roots and build up a tough stem and they are extremely hard to get rid of. The russian thistle here on my property is like that. If I get busy and don't attend to it early I have to wait until the fall when it dries out and take a flame thrower to it. Weeds also make a lot of seeds that get spread around, to extend the analogy.

“The uncontested absurdities of today are the accepted slogans of tomorrow. They come to be accepted by degrees, by dint of constant pressure on one side and constant retreat on the other - until one day when they are suddenly declared to be the country's official ideology.” - Ayn Rand.

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
[+] 2 users Like true scotsman's post
13-02-2016, 09:00 AM
RE: My refutation of Sye Ten's presuppositional apologetics
(13-02-2016 08:13 AM)diddo97 Wrote:  
(13-02-2016 07:55 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Sye Ten is a fool, ... to be dismissed as one.
You obsession with him continues .... unabated, .... as before.
No. One. Here. Gives. A. Shit. About. The. Idiot.
Only. You. Do.

Now go out and play.

Hey, I'm just trying to explain how I got out of my insanity. I'm not going to talk about him elsewhere. Heart

You're probably better served in the Personal Issues section, you won't take flak; but no one here - no one anywhere AFAIK - gives Sye Ten a drop of credibility.

[Image: ZF1ZJ4M.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes houseofcantor's post
13-02-2016, 12:34 PM
RE: My refutation of Sye Ten's presuppositional apologetics
Wait, there's something there to refute? I thought he didn't have anything more than empty assertions.

Oh, okay, we're refuting the empty assertions.

The OP is a decent, rational response, and if you're looking for something to keep from falling for Sye's presup bullshit yourself or to keep a skeptical friend from falling for it, it's a solid answer.

But it's not a good reply to someone who actually buys into it, because it's a PREDICTABLE. Predictable responses don't throw opponents off their script and make them sit down and actually think. Faced with a presuppositionist, I like to employ what I call the Mystery Puppetmaster argument. It's main strength is that it isn't something they've heard before.

"Okay. Let me describe three hypothetical people -- Jenny, Kate, and Sybil. Then I will ask you two questions.

"Jenny receives a genuine revelation just as you describe from a God like the one you describe -- unquestionable, perfectly revealed knowledge. Jenny receives it with total faith. She is firmly convinced that this revelation comes from God, believes it with complete conviction and is certain that she has true knowledge. The person pulling the strings behind her firm belief is God.

"Kate has not yet received such a revelation. There is, however -- again, all this is hypothetical -- a malevolent agent such as the Devil of Christianity, who delights in tricking people, playing on their pride, and driving them away from God... and for whatever reason, God occasionally allows this to happen rather than simply rendering the Devil totally impotent or erasing him from existence. The Devil's powers are limited but they do include a talent for deception and the ability to whisper ideas into peoples' minds. Using the later ability, he communicates a revelation to Kate and pretends that it is from God. The Devil's deception is not perfect, but it is more than sufficient to trick a mere human... especially one prone to total faith, as Kate is. She is firmly convinced that this revelation comes from God, believes it with complete conviction and is certain that she has true knowledge. The person pulling the strings behind her firm belief is the Devil.

"Finally, we have Sybil. Sybil has not received a revelation from any supernatural entity. However, a lifetime of indoctrination by family and community has told her to expect such a revelation, primed her for it, and made her eager for it, and told her to accept it unquestioningly when it occurs. One day, she gets an idea that is unusual for her. Rather than thinking that she might be particularly insightful that day, she immediately ascribes this to being her long-hoped-for revelation from God. A few more incidents like this and she is convinced that God is planting truth upon her heart, when in fact it is her own subconscious speaking and nothing more. If there is a God, God has not spoken to her yet. In her internal dialogue, she begins ascribing one half of her mental debate to God giving her revelation, and her experience in the Church lets her subconsciously shape this half of the dialogue to say the sort of things that God is typically characterized as saying. It's not a perfect delusion, there are flaws in it, but it's sufficient to fool both herself and most of those she talks to, especially since she and they have been conditioned to accept these things on faith rather than be skeptical. She accepts all this with total faith, just as she was trained to. She is firmly convinced that this revelation comes from God, believes it with complete conviction and is certain that she has true knowledge. The person pulling the strings behind her firm belief is her subconscious pride, arrogance, and credulity, which were ultimately engineered by her coreligionists.

"So, we have three women, each of which is firmly convinced that her revelation comes from God, believes it with complete conviction and is certain that she has true knowledge. Two of them are in serious error on this point. Each of them believes that the puppetmaster pulling the strings of their unquestionable revelation is God, yet for one of them the puppetmaster is actually Satan, and for another the puppetmaster is nothing more than her own pride.

"The first question is this. You are presented with one of these women. You do not know which one she is. She witnesses to you about the revelation that has been placed on her heart and insists that she has a true and perfect knowledge that you should accept on her say-so. It falls to you to tell the difference between whether she is divinely inspired, diabolically tricked, or simply deluded. Remember that the devil's false revelation is crafty enough to fool most mortals, and the delusion originates in someone who was raised in the religion and so conforms very well to what believers think and the Bible says. What tests do you perform, what questions do you ask, what methods do you employ to tell the difference between someone who ACTUALLY has true, revealed knowledge, and someone who simply believes they have it but is in error?

"The second question is this. Let's say that YOU are one of these woman. You have what you believe to be a revelation. What means should you employ to determine whether it is divine, diabolical, or delusional in origin?"

The point of this is to establish that presuppositionalism just DOESN'T WORK to get past agnosticism. If the person just relies on faith, they're obviously producing a false positive in two of these three scenarios... and in one of them, they are rendering themselves a disciple of Satan. If they rely on some sort of comparison to the Bible, this gives the opportunity to push back a step -- how did the humans who wrote the Bible tell the difference? How about the ones who compiled it from separate texts, deciding what books to put in and what ones to leave out? How did they determine which were true revelations and which weren't? Is such a method possible? If so, what was it? Why wouldn't they employ it and not record it, if it was so important? How do we tell whether the Bible is divinely inspired, diabolically inspired, or simply the work of humans? If they say that everyone has different presuppositions, point out that Kate and Sybil also had the presupposition of a god that exists and grants true revelations, and they both turned out to be flatly wrong in their conclusions about where their particular revelations came from.

"If I ignore the alternatives, the only option is God; I ignore them; therefore God." -- The Syllogism of Fail
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like Reltzik's post
17-02-2016, 02:08 AM
RE: My refutation of Sye Ten's presuppositional apologetics
(13-02-2016 12:42 AM)diddo97 Wrote:  The entire position depends on God revealing stuff to us. I have not gotten this revelation, because if I did, I would have known. If my worldview is absurd without God, I have no way of knowing if the Bible is valid, so the verse saying that everyone knows God exists is pointless.

They say they need god to establish reliability of their senses and reasoning. Yet they need to rely upon senses and reasoning to reach that very conclusion. Has this already occurred to you? What do you think about it?

Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of a spiritless situation. The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness.

-Karl Marx
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-02-2016, 02:18 AM
RE: My refutation of Sye Ten's presuppositional apologetics
(13-02-2016 07:55 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Sye Ten is a fool, ... to be dismissed as one.
You obsession with him continues .... unabated, .... as before.
No. One. Here. Gives. A. Shit. About. The. Idiot.
Only. You. Do.

Now go out and play.

Hey, back off. Don't you remember how much Sye's arguments got Diddo in a twist? If anything, I think we should be congratulating him. What kind of community tells you to fuck off whether you agree with us or not?

Besides, since when is it better to ignore apologists by attacking their character, rather than refuting their arguments?

Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of a spiritless situation. The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness.

-Karl Marx
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Dark Phoenix's post
17-02-2016, 08:47 AM
RE: My refutation of Sye Ten's presuppositional apologetics
(13-02-2016 12:57 AM)diddo97 Wrote:  The problem with most answers I've seen to this is that they play right into the hands of presups. "How do you know that? Drinking BeverageDrinking BeverageDrinking BeverageDrinking Beverage", all the way down. However, it falls flat when you realize that it all comes down to what I said above, He has several arguments going at once that don't connect and yet rely on each other.

Sye's arguments have two problems. One, as you've noted is the presuppositional, circular nature of his claims.

The other is that they self-refuting. When he starts going down his whole "but how do you know, man?" rabbit hole, he's stetting himself up for failure. His goal is to get you to question the fundamental nature of knowledge and logic so that he can quick plug his god into the little hole he's trying to create. The problem is, once he does, you can shut him down by repeating his same quip right back at him.

"...so to have absolute knowledge, you need an absolute knower."
"Yabut how do you know, man?"
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 9 users Like RobbyPants's post
17-02-2016, 12:02 PM
RE: My refutation of Sye Ten's presuppositional apologetics
One of my favorite debates with Sye is when he's up against Alex Bolten. He makes Sye look like a complete idiot. But, there is no belittling. He's a polite Brit who let's his arguments speak for themselves.

It's long, but worth the listen if you haven't already.




"Why hast thou forsaken me, o deity whose existence I doubt..." - Dr. Sheldon Cooper
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes mgoering's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: