gfm7175 (02-13-2020)
"When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny."
A lie doesn't become the truth, wrong doesn't become right, and evil doesn't become good just because it is accepted by a majority.
Author: Booker T. Washington
gfm7175 (02-13-2020)
"When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny."
A lie doesn't become the truth, wrong doesn't become right, and evil doesn't become good just because it is accepted by a majority.
Author: Booker T. Washington
"When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny."
A lie doesn't become the truth, wrong doesn't become right, and evil doesn't become good just because it is accepted by a majority.
Author: Booker T. Washington
Okay. You have faith in several religions. Got it.
Define "supernatural". Define "natural".
Here, you're making up numbers.
Define "reality".
Me too.
Define "miracled".
No. Religion in and of itself is fine. In fact, we all are religious about one thing or another, as mankind is a religious animal. It is fundamentalism that is at the root of various evils. You yourself are being a fundamentalist. You are attempting to prove your religions you mentioned at the start of this post.
Redefinition Fallacy (religion <-> lies)
Circular Argument Fallacy (attempting to prove your religions)
USFREEDOM911 (02-13-2020)
He is attempting to prove his religions that he mentioned in his OP. In other words, he is being a fundamentalist.
He is just throwing around various words that he doesn't know the definitions of (or cannot consistently define) such as "religion", "supernatural", "reality", ...
Frank Apisa (02-13-2020)
He seems to have no idea what religion is, nor the logical framework behind religion. He doesn't strike me as an individual who is familiar with logic.
Therefore, he likely doesn't realize that he himself is practicing several religions, which at that point it is very easy to be a fundamentalist and "wage war upon" religions which he does not adhere to.
IF he was studied in logic (he obviously isn't), he would respond to you by calling out your post to him as an "Attempted Force of a Negative Proof Fallacy" (because you are attempting to get him to prove a negative regarding an open set, which would be an Argument of Ignorance Fallacy on his part). In other words, you are attempting to force him to commit an Argument of Ignorance Fallacy.
BUT, since he isn't studied in logic, he would likely oblige to your request and attempt to prove their non-existence (thus committing an Argument of Ignorance Fallacy).
His problem is that he has no clue what religion is, nor the logical framework that religion is built upon. He is a fundamentalist of his religions likely due to his lack of understanding about his practicing of those religions.
MAGA MAN (02-13-2020)
Man is ignorant of how to create life from none life elements because he doesn't know how to do it. Then logically it must follow that somewhere there is someone or some thing that does know how to do it or live wouldn't exist.
You can say it's an Argument of Ignorance Fallacy. But at some point you must allow simple logic to intercede.
Bookmarks