| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys writes:
> > > Sounds like a faith statement to me--"well, we don't know our god yet, but
> > > he's slowly revealing himself and his creation to us--we just have to work
> > > harder, and have a better understanding, and over the span of time,
> > > eventually we'll know all that there is to know for our god knows all
> > > (eventually)."
> >
> > A straw man argument erected by a man of faith -- or so I assume...
> Just because you say it's a straw man, don't make it so.
You are exactly correct. What makes it a straw argument is the fact that
you made a simplistic caricature of Richard's argument and then addressed it
as though it was an accurate summation of his position. That is the very
definition of a straw man argument.
> If it's not always, then it's finite, and stuff can exist outside.
That's a tautalogy, and even accepting your assertion, we must acknowledge
that "stuff can exist outside" the infinite, as well. There are an infinite
number of prime numbers, but 4 is not among them.
And if we instead say that God the Infinite is also God the Comprehensive,
then we have to accept that evil and cruelty are also part of Him.
> > I am sorry, but they remain
> > your unique ideas, wacko or otherwise...and the same is true even if we
> > expand those holding these unique ideas from a single individual to a whole
> > group. Even when hundreds of people think a rust stain on a wall is a sign
> > of the Black Madonna, it's still just a rust stain to science.
>
> And is still a rust stain to me. There's a straw man arguement there if you
> want to know where one is.
Richard knows what it is, but you apparently still do not. He was not
giving a summation of your argument; he was providing an example of the way
over-zealous faith can lead to reality-contradicting beliefs.
> > Please show me something in human experience that is beyond observation and
> > study. A tautology will not do, nor will statements that "beg the question."
>
> I think that if you read that sentence, you would see a logical
> contradiction--"show" me something that is "beyond observation".
Then, without evidence, you're asking Richard to assume that faith is
valid, which is hopelessly circular.
> Again, no one else has to believe what I believe. But I'm not any stupider,
> or less right for that belief than you are without that belief.
But do you accept that you might be? I mean, if hypothetically it turns
out that you have faith in something that truly doesn't exist, do you accept
that it's possible for belief to be wrong?
You are most certainly not "stupider" because of your faith, but you are
really misinformed on some key issues of this debate, as well as on
fundamental processes of debate itself. That's fine--I am sure that I'm
more poorly informed than you on any number of subjects, but the problem
occurs when someone insists that he's right by dint of perspective, when in
fact he's wrong. That type of behavior is likely to give an impression that
the person is, if not stupid, then definitely foolishly stubborn or unrealistic.
Dave!
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: slight
|
| (...) I thought it was an accurate summation of his position, and not a simplistic caricature at all, and I did not see any proof to the contrary, just the <delete> 'straw man arguement', and therefore my claim that 'calling it a straw man arguement (...) (22 years ago, 17-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: slight
|
| (...) Just because you say it's a straw man, don't make it so. Quoteth Hop-Frog (...) Further quoteth (...) Not a straw man arguement--you state in the paragraph above that there will *always* be something new to study. How can you make that (...) (22 years ago, 17-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
225 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
