On faith

Yazata said:
Not typically. The vast majority of logical arguments can and do use statements about empirical observations of this-worldly states of affairs as their premises. That's what we do in everyday life and it's what science does. The exception might arguably be mathematics (that's controversial).
Click to expand...

Can you give an example of such an argument?

Yazata said:
It would seemingly be circular to use logic to provide a logical justification for logic.
Click to expand...

Do you use logic to define logic?

Yazata said:
Being 'without logic' wouldn't be a position, it would be a psychiatric illness.
Click to expand...

Do you think that being without formal logic would be a psychiatric illness?

Yazata said:
Are you trying to suggest that being "with God" is the same kind of innate thing? I don't see a whole lot of evidence that's true, there's just too much religious diversity in the world.
Click to expand...

I didn't mention anything about religion.
You need to stop paraphrasing what I say.

You say you don't see a whole lot of evidence of God being the same kind of innate thing. I would term it as the same type of relationship. But that being said, what would be regarded as evidence that God and logic are innately related to the human being, in your opinion. Remember, you are the one that claims there is currently no evidence that this is the case.

Yazata said:
So I'm inclined to think that what people might innately have is less an innate monotheism than an innate propensity towards religiosity in general. The form that religiosity takes will typically be the result of cultural influences.
Click to expand...

You seem obsessed with religion. No one is discussing religion.

Yazata said:
Except that I don't think that and have explained why in numerous threads. I think that reality probably overflows our human ability to understand it and that there will probably always be mysteries. See posts #24 and #25 here.
Click to expand...

I looked at the links, and saw no relation to the point I made.
You already displayed a type of arogance by stating that you don't see a whole lot of evidence that God and logic are in a similar category, as far as how they relate to humans. You imply that those who do, are pretending that the lack of evidence you speak of, is there. But I'm willing to bet that you have no clue as to what that evidence is.

Yazata said:
Again you are putting words in my mouth that I don't agree with. I have argued repeatedly in numerous threads that the word 'proof' is typically too strong for real life, more appropriate in mathematics. In real life, including science, what people want are plausible and convincing reasons, even if they don't rise to the level of apodeictic proof.
Click to expand...

Yes you have argued that, and repeatedly. But you keep claiming there is no evidence, yet the the theist says there is evidence, and we explain what we mean by evidence. Just google evidence for Gods existence. By now you must believe that there is no evidence for God, so the only remaining confirmation that you will undoubtedly accept, is proof.

Yazata said:
Well sure. If you want to convince me of anything, you have to convince me. I'm the judge of when I'm convinced. I'm sure the same is true for you.
Click to expand...

I'm not interesting in convincing you. I just as sooner discuss it.
Also you shouldn't want to be convinced, you should want to find for youself, but I doubt that you really do want to.

jan.
 
Jan Ardena said:
I was right. It is a joke.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, Jan, but what, do you want a prize? Of course it is. In truth, I'm just wondering: What is the threshold at which you accept that these people aren't actually here for an honest discussion?
 
Cluelusshusbund said:
Jan knows to look into her hart for truth;;; you'r incorect assertion about me coud lead lessor believers astray.!!!
Click to expand...

I don't know whether to remind that people really need to read the terms before signing, or invoke the Long Marble Thesis.
 
.
......................................................................................
Runaway.gif
 
Tiassa said:
I don't know whether to remind that people really need to read the terms before signing, or invoke the Long Marble Thesis.
Click to expand...
Huh... no decision yet.!!!

Well i suggest that you get an take the advice of a level headed mod who dont have a dog in this thred an go by what Fraggle Rocker says.!!!
 
Tiassa said:
In truth, I'm just wondering: What is the threshold at which you accept that these people aren't actually here for an honest discussion?
Click to expand...
Way to try to poison the well, Tiassa.

How about you keep your blanket suspicions of the rest of the posters' motives to yourself?
 
Tiassa said:
I'm sorry, Jan, but what, do you want a prize? Of course it is. In truth, I'm just wondering: What is the threshold at which you accept that these people aren't actually here for an honest discussion?
Click to expand...

I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt.
I know some atheists will use mockery as a way to bolster their atheism, or try to act in a way they think the theist believes.

I would like cluelesshusband to take this fabrication as far as he can. Because I will be able to gauge what he thinks belief in God is, and how and why he thinks people believe in God.

The atheists here will repeatedly assert there is no evidence of God, while not knowing what would be evidence. That to me, is the threshold at where they aren't here to have an honest discussion. If that is where they set the bar, then we have to proceed from that point if we wish to enjoy a discussion.

Jan.
 
But you've never been interested in discussion, only in preaching, circular logic, and avoiding questions.
 
Jan Ardena said:
The atheists here will repeatedly assert there is no evidence of God, while not knowing what would be evidence. That to me, is the threshold at where they aren't here to have an honest discussion. If that is where they set the bar, then we have to proceed from that point if we wish to enjoy a discussion.
Click to expand...
In the spirit of honest discussion, Jan, do you believe in God because you see evidence of God, or do you see evidence of God because you believe in God?
Please, an honest answer?
 
Jan Ardena said:
Let me guess, you don't believe in God, because you know there is no evidence for Gods existence. Right?
Click to expand...
For most it is not that they know there is no evidence, just that they don't see it (whatever the evidence may be) as evidence for God's existence.

You say that there is evidence, that one only has to Google it to find what people consider as evidence.
Care to provide just one example for us to examine, in the spirit of honest discussion?
I ask you to provide it so as to remove the possibility of us deliberately chosing one we could easily refute, i.e. to avoid risk of dishonesty on one side, and subsequent appeals to dishonesty on the other.
 
Tiassa said:
I'm sorry, Jan, but what, do you want a prize? Of course it is. In truth, I'm just wondering: What is the threshold at which you accept that these people aren't actually here for an honest discussion?
Click to expand...
Do you think Jan is here for that?
 
Baldeee said:
In the spirit of honest discussion, Jan, do you believe in God because you see evidence of God, or do you see evidence of God because you believe in God?
Please, an honest answer?
Click to expand...

"Because" is irrelevant. God is all there is.
That is without me accepting God exists or not.
I don't accept there is zero , unless it is in relation to one.

But as you ask, I believe in God, because is all there is.

Jan.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top