To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 27735
27734  |  27736
Subject: 
Re: The God Game!
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Tue, 25 Apr 2006 13:50:25 GMT
Viewed: 
1580 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Timothy Gould wrote:
   In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Eaton wrote:
   This one’s for you, Dave! http://www.philosophyquotes.net/cgi-bin/godgame1.cgi

‘Course, it counted me as being contradictory several times, though I’ll maintain that either I wasn’t contradictory or (in at least one case) the questions are rather flawed. But cute, nonetheless.

DaveE

Hmmm. Their is one notable flaws of logic in this test. They compare the burden of proof for the Loch Ness monster with that for the existence of God which, given that the LNM exists or does not within our sphere of discovery and God may not is quite patently absurd. It’s like arguing that the existence or non-existence of fairies in my garden is comparable to that of supermassive black holes. I’m a devout atheist but this sort of thing peeves me. If you wish to ‘prove’ consistencies or inconsistencies in an argument at least compare chalk and ink not chalk and cheese.

I agree-- I had the same thoughts when I took the Loch Ness “hit”.

BTW, when you say you are a “devout atheist”, what exactly does that mean? Are you asserting that there definitely ISN’T a God somehow?

Just wondering,

JOHN



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: The God Game!
 
(...) Yeah. It's a massively flawed argument IMO. (...) I'm making the point that atheism is as much of a leap of (not)faith as religion is a leap of faith. Thus although I know that agnosticism is logical (as there is nor proof for or against) I (...) (19 years ago, 25-Apr-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: The God Game!
 
(...) Hmmm. Their is one notable flaws of logic in this test. They compare the burden of proof for the Loch Ness monster with that for the existence of God which, given that the LNM exists or does not within our sphere of discovery and God may not (...) (19 years ago, 25-Apr-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

17 Messages in This Thread:









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
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR