Jobar

Albert, I think you have a lot of gall to accuse anyone else of being testy. The snappish and irritable tone of this thread is mainly attributable to your own poor manners, and willingness to berate and demean the intentions and intellectual qualities of your opponents. Remember what I told you about your tactics being counterproductive?

I am tempted to lock this thread down, but I will refrain in hopes that you will cease your baiting of those who disagree with you, and dispute in a reasonable and polite manner. I know you are capable of it.

Albert Cipriani

Sorry Jobar,
I keep on not measuring up to the polite standards of this board. It is the politest and best run board I’ve ever been on. Maybe that explains why I keep on failing to measure up in that category.

However, I do think I’m doing better than before. You haven’t had to warn me in over a month by my count. Just the same, sorry. Apologetically Yours, Albert

Albert Cipriani

Dear Alix,
I’d said: You said: My equivocation between faith in God’s existence and faith in the existence of other people is no proof of either. It’s a correlation, or as you put it, “a correspondence.” The existence of both brands of faith is axiomatic.

You said: No, my equivocal correspondence between belief in improvable gods and belief in improvable people is just that, an equivocal correspondence. Both beliefs are synonymous as a matter of fact, not by definition.

There is simply no escape from the solipsism that this may all be a dream (except for me, which must be for you more like a nightmare). Likewise, there is no escape from the fact that there is no empirical proof of God’s existence. – Sincerely, Albert the Traditional Catholic