Perhaps I realized the futlilty of trying to debate with a person whose inclination to reasoning is barely above primary school level. I mean this seriously Perry.
hillary,
I also have talked with many atheists over the years and know when they are posturing and gasping for air, like you are now doing.
You may view this as a 'cop out' on my part, that is your perogative, but if you have any sense at all, you will understand what I am saying to you and learn from it.
That's just it. You keep claiming that you are saying something.... but say nothing. How can we learn from nothing?
For instance, if "social conditioning" as you have maintained in the past is the source to determine good and bad, right from wrong then:
1. Who determines what standards the social conditioners use to set social policy?
2. What reasons for confidence should I have as a member of the social group that my policy makers will make decisions that are in my best interests?
3. Are there any historical, examples of groups of people who have turned their notions of right and wrong over to a prevailing human authority outside of themselves?
4. How did those groups fare?
5. Are commercial social conditioners creating "conditions" favorable to them or to me?
6. Who are the people who choose the social conditioners?
7. How much influence do they have over the social policy makers?
8. Where do these folks go to get their notions of right and wrong?
9. When I check in with my social condition(ers) to tell me what to think, what do I do when my social conditions conflict with someone else's social conditions and its policy makers?
10. What criteria do you personally use to determine when it is appropriate for you to seek the guidance of your social conditioners rather than doing what you personally perceive to be right and wrong?
Try hard to imagine a person debating quantum physics with a nine year old child and you will understand why it is neccessary for both yourself and Vinny to grasp even a primitive understanding of your subject before you can stop embarrassing yourself in debate.
Atheists are sad figures because in any discussion, this is what it always gets down to isn't it? Hollow appeals to authority, that isn't even there? Frankly, I find the attitude old and worn out, and I have better things to do with my time.
Next stop? Outrageous and vulgar language for shock value? It's the same old playbook .
That is why I am suggesting that before wasting my time, you do your research. There is plenty of information out there
You are my research. Please answer the 10 questions that I posted above so that I can determine if your source of the knowledge of good and bad is better than my Source. I mean, this is what you are claiming isn't it? Perhaps you have never really sat down and considered the overwhelmingly ridiculous implications of what you "posit".
You see, in order to be able to effectively debate this issue, you must have an understanding of both sides of the argument, and at present you are unable to grasp anything beyond the usual fundamentalist nonesense.
Just bloviation and condesension. Please "demonstrate" something, or at least personally testify to something that can be examined. I have no problem with personal testimony.... but you can't seem to provide even that. Everything from you seems to be conceptual rather than practical.