if we have enough monkeys tapping typewriter keys they will eventually tyoe out the Bible
What's with the eventually? They did, and before they even got round to inventing typewriters.
Shining One's Link To A Dishonest ICR Article
by AlanF 37 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
Abaddon
-
AlanF
ellderwho wrote something that just about outdoes Rex in terms of showing shining reasoning ability:
Rex had written:
:: Where does logic come from, eh Alan? Where does your reasoning come from in the first place?
:: How can you, with a naturalistic presupposition, account for the existence of logical absolutes when logical absolutes are concepts of the mind and not physical, energy, or motion?"
To which I replied (note ellderwho's highlighting in red):
: AL: You're getting into questions that no one can answer at present in a completely satisfactory way. I hope you understand that such "laws", being constructs of the mind, are like the "laws" and axioms of mathematics, and in fact are a subset of them.
: But you did answer. Remember?
Look again, genius, at the sentence:
:: You're getting into questions that no one can answer at present in a completely satisfactory way. I hope you understand that such "laws", being constructs of the mind, are like the "laws" and axioms of mathematics, and in fact are a subset of them.
I did not say that no one can answer Rex's question. I said that no one can answer in a completely satisfactory way. I then proceeded to give my attempt at a partial answer.
Then, of course, we find good old Rex jumping in and cheering on ellderwho's sparkling display of reasoning ability. No surprises from this pair.
AlanF
-
Shining One
Hi Alan,
Do you remember this cop-out answer to Elderwho when he pressed you about the basis for logic? You said something like, "it comes from our brains"!!!!
Due to the human brain being subjective in nature, so how could this be? If you keep telling yourself something long enough you are going to believe it, because all of the evidence at hand fits your presuppositions! That's why all of your argumentation about the 'evidence' is not at all relevant. EVERY human being filters information taken in. The evidence has holes in it either way. We can and do find out things by experimentation but all things are not subject to measurable experimentation. You discount what your see and hear every day: the design inherent in the world and the obvious fact that it had an intelligence behind it. You are adrift with an anchor that doesn't reach the bottom!
Rex -
Shining One
Hey Pist,
You aren't even in the ballpark. You need to replace the picture of 'Blondie' (Eastwood) with one of 'Tico' .....LOL.
Rex -
AlanF
Rex, there's a great deal of evidence that can be interpreted in one and only one way. For example, if I write, "Rex is white" and ellderwho then writes, "AlanF said that Rex is black", then to say that ellderwho is wrong is not a matter for argument.
The same thing goes for the examples I gave about Morris' quotations that misrepresent his sources. The sources don't say what he claims, in the instances I pointed out. That's not a matter for argument, because his misrepresentation is objectively true.
Now, whether Morris' misrepresentations are due to dishonesty or lousy scholarship may well be a matter for argument. I think the man is deliberately dishonest, because I've seen far too many examples of his misrepresentations.
Remember that this is no different from people pointing out the dishonesty of Watchtower writers when they consistently misrepresent sources in the areas of science, the trinity, blood and a host of others.
Your double standards are clearly evident, because you refuse to look at the evidence when it's thrown in your face. You remind me of my former wife, who refused to look at a JW book she had once studied in Bookstudy, when she knew that what I wanted her to see would have proved something she didn't want to admit.
As for my once saying that logic comes from our brains, that comes under the category of what I mentioned in this thread: "questions that no one can answer at present in a completely satisfactory way." Why do you have to be led by the hand through such simple logic? Didn't your God give you what he gave most people?
AlanF
-
Abaddon
Oh god, this is the point where the presuppositionalistic theist tries to show that nothing is determinable as they (obviously) cannot prove most of the premises required for their faith system.
What astounding faith; "I can't prove a thing but neither can you!" Mmmm, makes god proud I am sure... LOL...
Sad fact of it is is that, despite their airs, graces and their condescending and unwarranted attitude of superiority, Presuppositionalists such as Shining One can not actually provide any objective difference between the validity of their claims and beliefs than those of your average anamistic shaman with a bone through their nose.
So they try to make out everyone is as clueless as them, and that every 'fact' is equally subjective.
Of course, this level of intellectual dishonesty is not surprising. Although one CAN argue this way, it's neither big, clever or particulary interesting.
It is also guaranteed that, no matter how enthusiasitically they might argue this way, they're being hypocritical. They will accept the comforts and benefits of the modern world, yet the minute it comes to areas of science concerning origins (for example) they stop accepting the paradigms and experimental methodology and rules of evidence that have allowed all the comfoprts and benefits of the modern world to be developed.
Of course, arguing with someone who has already decided
a/ They are right, and
b/ the evidence doesn't matter (see a/ above)
... is not going to change their opinion; there will be no 'Road to Damascus' moment where Shining One admits to be in error, and to having utilised the wrong orifice for communication. However, as the utter vacuosity of their arguments are nicely displayed in such threads, one can see a benefit for those who might be tempted by such empty and futile philosophies.
-
ellderwho
As for my once saying that logic comes from our brains, that comes under the category of what I mentioned in this thread: "questions that no one can answer at present in a completely satisfactory way."
Sounded pretty satisfactory to me. Its okay Al.
-
Shining One
Of course, arguing with someone who has already decided
a/ They are right, and
b/ the evidence doesn't matter (see a/ above)
See about a dozen people on here who follow me around and try to silence others with derision and sarcastic comments.......of course, people who have their comfortable world-view challenged often react in that manner.
R.