Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Pulp · 08-18-2002, 02:36 AM

I'd like to take this opportunity to say hooray for Jesus.

How can good argument be bad?

RogerLeeCooke · 08-18-2002, 10:04 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by SUTG:
Do you have evidence for everything you believe in?

Yes. (What a silly question!)

HRG · 08-18-2002, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Intensity:
Imanuel Kant asked:
What does this mean to you?

It means IF (and oh what a big IF), we are to think of the Trojan War, which is a myth, as historical, then Troy VII will be a good candidate for consideration as the the fortress/city of King Priam.

[ August 16, 2002: Message edited by: Intensity ]

AFAIK, most scholars accept the Trojan war as historical. For instance, names like (W)Ilios - the "W" disappeared later in Greek -, Alexander (Paris' second name), Acheans = Ahhijawa etc. appear in Hittite archives of diplomatic correspondence.

Regards,
HRG.

SUTG · 08-19-2002, 12:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Darwin's Finch:
Utter lack of evidence.

So you think that you should not believe in things for which you don't have evidence? How do you justify this assumption?

Devilnaut · 08-19-2002, 12:18 PM

SUTG:

Quote:

So you think that you should not believe in things for which you don't have evidence? How do you justify this assumption?

It's not an assumption, it's how belief works. Before you can believe something, you need a reason.

[ August 19, 2002: Message edited by: Devilnaut ]

SUTG · 08-19-2002, 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Heathen Dawn:
More belief than that is too great a strain. I prefer not to believe, but to revel in what the senses can perceive.

Do you believe that the senses can never be fooled? Why do you assume that it is correct to believe in what the senses can percieve? How did you evaluate this assumption?

Darwin's Finch · 08-19-2002, 12:25 PM

indeed. SUTG is just trying to get me to admit that I hold all sorts of trivial beliefs based on less than rock-solid evidence (my mechanic stubbed his toe the other day, my cat is outside but hasn't run away yet, etc.) and then will try to say that I am inconsistent in applying my demand for evidence. <yawn>

Devilnaut · 08-19-2002, 12:26 PM

SUTG:

Quote:

Do you believe that the senses can never be fooled? Why do you assume that it is correct to believe in what the senses can percieve? How did you evaluate this assumption?

What's your point?

MadMordigan · 08-19-2002, 12:32 PM

So you think that you should not believe in things for which you don't have evidence?

You win the cupie doll!

How do you justify this assumption?

Because the opposite hurts too much.

SUTG · 08-19-2002, 12:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Devilnaut:
SUTG:
Before you can believe something, you need a reason.

What is your reason for believeing that statement?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-18-2002, 02:36 AM	#91
Pulp Junior Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: wellington, New Zealand Posts: 6	I'd like to take this opportunity to say hooray for Jesus. How can good argument be bad?

08-19-2002, 12:25 PM	#97
Darwin's Finch Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Gardnerville, NV Posts: 666	indeed. SUTG is just trying to get me to admit that I hold all sorts of trivial beliefs based on less than rock-solid evidence (my mechanic stubbed his toe the other day, my cat is outside but hasn't run away yet, etc.) and then will try to say that I am inconsistent in applying my demand for evidence. <yawn>

08-19-2002, 12:32 PM	#99
MadMordigan Beloved Deceased Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Vancouver BC Canada Posts: 2,704	So you think that you should not believe in things for which you don't have evidence? You win the cupie doll! How do you justify this assumption? Because the opposite hurts too much.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.