http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthread.php?64842-Why-I-dont-believe-...

 

Hopefully you can read that.

 

I'm not sure how to respond. If anyone can help, I'd greatly appreciate it.

 

 

 

 

Some extra info I had to post elsewhere:

 

The plain text is him. The text in the blue box is me. It's his post quoting me.

 

This link is where our particular discussion in the thread started:

http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthread.php?64842-Why-I-dont-believe-...

 

Here's my response to the above:

http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthread.php?64842-Why-I-dont-believe-...

 

Also, you'll be viewing the thread in "threaded mode". If you prefer it, that's fine. However, I find threads on such forums easier to navigate in linear mode. If that'd make it easier, just go into "Display" (on the right-hand side on the top of the thread) and select "Switch to Linear Mode"... if you want to. It shows the posts from earliest-posted to latest-posted.

 

I really need help, so please help...

Tags: CARM, God, Richard Feynman, logic, omnipotence, positivism, science, scientism

Views: 130

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

It would probably be easier if you copied and pasted the particular replies in question.

Your problem is that you let this argument become entirely to broad, when arguing with a thiest , especialy a somewhat inteligent one(they exist i promise you) you need to keep your arguments on one or two points at all times untill those points are resolved. if you dont do that the entire argument will become bogged down under its own detritus. i would start with his first point and just go from there

 

"Too bad. I was referring to Hume's problem of induction. It is a serious blemish on your side of the tracks, which few pop-atheists fail to even consider. . .let alone attempt to deal with. " this is the case of the pot calling the kettle black. please explain to me how you know god exists without using inductive reasoning. you can try deductive reasoning but it is ends up having the same problem  as you need to prove its postulates with either more deductive reasoning add infinitum or inductive reasoning. the fact is inductive reasoning is the best possible way to try and find the truth and morever it works. it was because of inductive reasoning behnd electrons, cunductivity, magnatism, tensile strenght etc that you have a computer infront of you. without inductive reasoning next time you are thirsty you might try to drink sand because all your past experience of water assauging thirst would mean nothing.

 

i guess you could try gnosis . you just  Know yahweh exists, he just Knows Krishana exists, another guy just Knows allah exists. but in the end that leaves us nowhere and is completely useless.

 

so please enlighten me just how a theist gets around this problem?

RSS

  

Events

Blog Posts

Labels

Posted by Quincy Maxwell on July 20, 2014 at 9:37pm 28 Comments

Services we love

We are in love with our Amazon

Book Store!

Gadget Nerd? Check out Giz Gad!

Advertise with ThinkAtheist.com

In need a of a professional web site? Check out the good folks at Clear Space Media

© 2014   Created by Dan.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service