Grand Canyon Arguement...

WashMDJD · Posted: Mon May 19, 2008 9:47 pm Post subject:

Everybody mark this day down on your calendars - I'm agreeing with Joesephpalazzo. Not only is it wishful thinking, it is expressly denied by the Christian scriptures in several places.

I'll reiterate my argument to you, Missionary, since you utterly failed to respond to it last time. For the record, acknowledging an argument and then ignoring it is bad discussion form. I'll even extend upon the argument for you, just to make the point a little clearer. Your argument appears to be:

P1: Man is fallible and shouldn’t be trusted.
P2: Observed knowledge comes from Man.
C1: Observed knowledge is fallible and shouldn’t be trusted.
P3: God is infallible and should be trusted.
P4: Revealed knowledge comes from God.
C2: Revealed knowledge is infallible and should be trusted.
P5: Trusted, infallible knowledge should be preferred over untrustworthy, fallible knowledge.
C4: Revealed knowledge should be preferred over observed knowledge.
P5: Revealed knowledge says that God exists.
C5: Therefore, God exists.

Now, let’s sidestep past the point where P1 is false (since fallibility doesn’t necessitate distrust), and slide right past the part where C1 fails because of P1’s falsity. Let’s ignore for now the bald assertion of P3, for which no non-circular argument can be given. Let’s also ignore the pure and bald assumption of P4, which is itself a problem since the source of revealed knowledge (if such a thing even exists) is more than tenuous (recall Descartes’ demon-illusion problem). Let’s deal with the whole part about C2 being false in light of the problems with P3 and P4, later. Let's skip past the tenuous nature of P5, since there are people who have claimed that they have revealed knowledge that God does not exist. What I want you to focus on is C5. C5 is where my objection to your argument lies.

My previous objection to you was that your argument over-proves your point. In legal terms, we'd say that the argument had an overbreadth problem. Your argument of "Revealed knowledge = Christian God," if true, proves not only the Christian God but thousands of other gods, goddesses, animisitic spirits, monsters, demons, and devils. It's a very crowded sky if your logic holds true. In other words, even if we grant the ridiculous arguments all the way up to C5 (virtually none of which I find to be true), your conclusion shouldn’t be C5: Therefore, God. Your conclusion should be C5: Therefore, gods.

You do realize, don't you, that Hindus, some Buddhists, Muslims, Jews, African Shamans, and every other religious group ever conceived have experienced their own 'revelations' and have had 'life changing personal experiences' with their gods, demons, and sacred ancestors, right? According to C2, these experiences are infallible, and should be trusted, even over mere observed knowledge. Do you yet understand why your logic, if true, commits reasonable people to the most extended pantheon ever conceived? Your argument, and therefore you (by extension) are denying the unity and oneness of the Christian God. I'm pretty sure that amounts to blasphemy, since the Biblical God makes abundantly clear that he's the only deity (even while simultaneously asserting the reality and powers of other gods, curiously enough). I'd suggest you stop typing and start praying for your forgiveness, else be damned to the lake of fire.
_________________
"Ne mea dona tibi studio disposta fideli,
Intellecta prius quam sint, contempta reliquas."
-Lucretius, De rerum natura

("...that my gifts here set forth for you with faithful solicitude, may not by you be contempuously discarded before they have been understood.")

"Mes amis, si j'avance, suivez-moi! Si je recule, tuez-moi! Si je meurs, vengez-moi!" --Henri de la Rochejaquelein

Bardolph86 · Posted: Mon May 19, 2008 9:58 pm Post subject:

We are not 100% certain that there isn't an undiscovered planet with Kenny G's face perfectly displayed on its surface. Unless we can know all of the universe, we can't say that we 100% know that there is no such planet.

But,

there's no reason to doubt that that isn't the case. Although we can't technically be 100% certain, we would still for practical purposes say that we are certain no such planet exists.

Now if we accept that the supernatural is real and can entirely design and create the world, then it is a possibility that every piece of evidence for evolution observed is wrong and the world was created in a short time and has been around only for thousands of years.

But just because it's a possibility doesn't say anything about how likely it is to be true. Keep in mind the Kenny G planet is a possibility, just very unlikely.

The theory of evolution isn't 100% certain... aaand?

Instead of stopping there and saying "see, you're not 100% certain", stop and remember that not being 100% certain about something doesn't mean you by default shouldn't accept it. You would probably agree with a denial that there is a planet with Kenny G's face perfectly displayed on it, although it's not 100% certain.

When you accuse science of uncertainty, it's pretty meaningless since that argument also applies to disbelief in the Kenny G planet, which you probably find to be a pretty reasonable disbelief.

Missionary · Guest Local time: 1:04 PM

Missionary · Guest Local time: 1:04 PM

GodWarrior98 · Posted: Mon May 19, 2008 10:14 pm Post subject:

Bardolph86 · Posted: Mon May 19, 2008 10:15 pm Post subject:

Who said it's not?

Bardolph86 · Posted: Mon May 19, 2008 10:18 pm Post subject:

And missionary, I was talking about evolution vs creationism, not about whether there's a god or not.

lumpymunk · Posted: Mon May 19, 2008 10:22 pm Post subject:

You still can't get out of the habit of using omniscience as your standard for valid knowledge.

It's NOT an all or nothing deal.
_________________
“Here, here's American Gladiators. Watch this, shut up, go back to bed America, here is American Gladiators, here is 56 channels of it! Watch these pituitary retards bang their fucking skulls together and congratulate you on the living in the land of freedom. Here you go America - you are free to do what well tell you! You are free to do what we tell you!” ~ B.Hicks
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNOPu_wU6hs

WashMDJD · Posted: Mon May 19, 2008 10:29 pm Post subject:

Missionary · Guest Local time: 1:04 PM

Missionary · Guest Local time: 1:04 PM

	AtheistForums.com Forum Index -> Religion General Discussion	All times are GMT - 5 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 ... 8, 9, 10, 11 Next
Page 9 of 11