It takes more than high-school education to understand the validity of these methods.
Of stampcollectors and atheists
- Thread starter Syzygys
- Start date
It takes more than high-school education to understand the validity of these methods.
I'd say it takes less than a high-school education. otherwise one would look elsewhere. HOw do ypou claim one can test the validity of these methods ?
And you don't have an argument, only statements which you would have us accept on your say-so.
Your speciality seems to be trapping yourself in a metaphysical web of your own devising. Earlier you suggested that an invisible stamp exists because you expected it to bolster your argument in some way. I have already addressed this point without your having given any account at all that would support what you wanted to convey ; you were merely evasive and suggested that I wished to talk about stamps. This wooliness is your standard defence when you have nothing to offer.
To stick with your invisible stamp ( pun intended ), you claimed that it could exist. Well, the bad news is that it cannot do so. We can define a stamp by its properties such as size, colour, weight and so on. One of its properties is visibiloity which means that, by definition, an invisible stamp cannot exist. Yet you would have us believe otherwise. Before talking about methods and all the rest, can you address this simple point. You brought it up, so I expect you to explain it in plain English.
The application of what ?
You have an interesting way of looking at things. I am not lazy, nor am I a victim in any sense that I can think of. You seem to be pojecting your own problem onto me. I am not indecisive because I have left all the religious hocus-pocus behind me , I have a positive outlook and get on with life, Reading some of your posts leads me to believe that you are a master of indecision. You want the truth, you want it now, so you are stuck between a rock and a hard place because you cannot have what you want.
Ha!
Ha! You can make such an exclamation because the Buddha and other Eastern "savants" have explained everything to your satisfaction. Or have they ?
at applying normative descriptions
what else?
(the same holds true in the science classroom too)
given that the existence of any said thing is usually attained by applying normative measures ..... and the non-existence of normative measures in regards to wood pixies......
as mentioned earlier, seems you are more into discussing non-existent stamps as opposed to invisible ones
:shrug:
In a pig's ear.
Do you ever think before you type ? An invisible stamp and a non-existent one share the property of non-existence. You want to distinguish between them when no distinction is possible.
so when people manning a radar base hear that the enemy have missiles that are invisible to their radar, they all breath a sigh of relief?
:bugeye:
The What you don't know can and will hurt you definitely has some power, raises a sense of urgency. But it is also quite frustrating to try to prepare when one doesn't know what to prepare for.
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
given that the existence of any said thing is usually attained by applying normative measures ..... and the non-existence of normative measures in regards to wood pixies......
Again, a non-answer.
if you don't have any normative descriptions for persons claiming the existence of pixies, you have a non-question ....
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
if you don't have any normative descriptions for persons claiming the existence of pixies, you have a non-question ....
1. what are normative descriptions of God ?
2. how do they prove Gods existence ?
I thought we were talking about normative descriptions of persons making claims - whether they be about god, science or pixies
(ie how you have to be or act in order to know something)
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
No, we were talking about how there is as much evidence for Gods existence as there is for woodpixies.
so if you want to discuss issues of evidence, why do you hesitate in examining the persons making the claims?