Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
How do you attempt to rationalise with the completely irrational?
Collapse
X
-
Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
-
Originally posted by Chrawnus View PostThe Epicurean dilemma being valid would mean the two options it presents are the only acceptable alternatives. As has been demonstrated time and time again, that's clearly not the case.
Hence, as you remarked, alternatives have to be constructed.
As one philosopher, Kai Nielsen, observed, "God or no God, torturing the innocents is vile. More generally, even if we can make nothing of the concept of God, we can readily come to appreciate . . . that, if anything is evil, inflicting or tolerating unnecessary and pointless suffering is evil, especially when something can be done about it."
And an omniscient, morally good, and omnipotent God can do something about it.
However, as has been demonstrated by various commentators to this thread, any concept of an omnipotent deity is bound by logic.
Hence we have the inconsistency that provides an objection to this God's omnipotence. That objection runs that if this God is omnipotent then It can bring about any state of affairs. However, if this God can bring about any state of affairs, then this God can create a stone so heavy that even this God cannot lift it. However, if the stone is so heavy that even this God cannot lift it the very concept of an omnipotent being involves a logical contradiction. Namely, that this God’s omnipotence logically entails Its non-omnipotence.
Originally posted by Chrawnus View PostI think you're trying to make Epicurus' dilemma out to be something far more complex than what it really is. At the end of the day, what it really boils down to is being presented with an artificially limited set of option deliberately constructed in such a way that the theist loses no matter which option he chooses. It's a disingenious argument that is only persuasive to those who value rhetoric over reason.
Originally posted by Chrawnus View PostWhy would anyone want to address the dilemma "as it stands" when it's clearly constructed in such a way that the theist loses no matter which option he picks?
Originally posted by Chrawnus View PostThe only thing that is required for the alternatives to be "effective" is that they are even hypothetically possible.
One might ask what moral goodness is to be found in the natural evil of giving a five year old cancer? Or allowing hundreds of individuals to be buried alive in earthquakes?
Originally posted by Chrawnus View PostThere may be potentially serious arguments against a good God in world where evil and suffering exists.
It may well be a theological position but it is premised on highly dubious thinking.
For example, the Free-Will Defence maintains that it is logically possible that any world that God would create and maintain with free creatures in it is compatible with some moral evil. However, does that contention strictly hold given the sheer amount of moral evil in this world? That is a debatable point. Furthermore, the concept of significant freedoms also needs to be clearly defined.
Originally posted by Chrawnus View PostI've never seen a single good argument or reason to conclusively rule out the existence of God "God as conceived within the Judaeo-Christian, and later Muslim, theistic traditions.""It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by whag View PostI appreciate your defense of seer, since you have had combative exchanges with him in the past and he probably doubts the authenticity of your Christianity.
Meanwhile, some Christians like seer suggest it's unreasonable to ask for signs and proof rather than inner voices. Inner voices can be confused with anything ranging from regular Socratic daemon to schizophrenia. My sister currently believes her dead dog visits her from beyond the grave. It's meaningful to her and brings her comfort.My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1
If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26
This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View PostI actually thought it was a vortex but discounted that because by running may arm around the fern I would have interfered with it.
Originally posted by seer View PostAnd I'm not given hallucinations -ever.
Originally posted by seer View PostAnd I think you will find that William of Ockham believed in miracles.
If you consider your experience was some sort of theophany - it was not much of one, was it? Hardly a burning bush."It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View PostNot necessarily.
If you did have an hallucination how would you know it was an hallucination?
If you consider your experience was some sort of theophany - it was not much of one, was it? Hardly a burning bush.Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by Ronson View PostYou've never had an hallucinogenic substance?"It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by Whateverman View PostNot necessarily. Mountains don't necessarily interfere with tornadoes, for example.Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View PostOf course it would.
Originally posted by seer View PostPerhaps you are having a hallucination right now.
Originally posted by seer View PostIt was enough for me...
My thread title certainly has relevance in many areas."It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View PostYet you select the least rational conclusion as being the most likely.Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View PostWhy would that be the least rational for a Theist? And this is rich coming from one who doesn't even believe that the laws of logic are absolute. You don't have a rational leg to stand on.
I suppose you might as well believe the fairies were doing it."It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View PostWhy would that be the least rational for a Theist? And this is rich coming from one who doesn't even believe that the laws of logic are absolute. You don't have a rational leg to stand on.
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View PostWas it nature's purpose for the dinosaurs to survive? Nature does not deal in good and evil. So again yes, our survival is a good only because we say so?
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by Cow Poke, Today, 03:46 PM
|
0 responses
2 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Cow Poke
Today, 03:46 PM
|
||
Started by Ronson, Today, 01:52 PM
|
1 response
9 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seanD
Today, 03:09 PM
|
||
Started by Cow Poke, Today, 09:08 AM
|
6 responses
44 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by RumTumTugger
Today, 10:30 AM
|
||
Started by CivilDiscourse, Today, 07:44 AM
|
0 responses
17 views
0 likes
|
Last Post Today, 07:44 AM | ||
Started by seer, Today, 07:04 AM
|
29 responses
142 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by oxmixmudd
Today, 02:59 PM
|
Comment