Albert Cipriani

Dear Theo,
Tho you and I mostly share the same conclusions, I feel compelled to disown the attitudes you’ve spewed. You characterized my dialogue here as follows:
Tho some of the posts I come across here affect me like speed bumps and piss me off, these people are far and away the smartest message board group I’ve met and seem to be, by and large, sincere and genuine. I try to return the favor. So should you. – Sincerely, Albert the Traditional Catholic

Bill Snedden

A proposition is, simply, a sentence. "There are no married bachelors" is a grammatically correct English sentence. It is, therefore, a proposition. The use of "no" without constraint implies universal negation. Therefore, it is a universal negative proposition. QED.

The LoNC is certainly a factor in proving this proposition false. The conjuction of "married" with "bachelor" creates a logical contradiction and therefore cannot be true.

The point is that one can prove universal negatives false by appealing to the definitions involved and the LoNC. If the definitions conflict, creating a contradiction, then the proposition is proved false.

Whatever. I wish you every success as a marriage counselor for bachelors. Perhaps you've found a previously untapped market...

Regards,

Bill Snedden

Jamie_L

Albert,

I got distracted by Easter (oddly enough) and family illness, but I haven't forgotten about you.

Thanks for answering my question. And, I guess, I really don't have much to complain about. Although I will point out that your description for how to differentiate between true and false non-emperical claims basically boils down to a subjective, individual evaluation. While that's well and good and consistent, it leaves human beings without any way to resolve conflicts of the type "What you believe is false, and what I believe is true." Maybe that's the nature of the beast.

For the record, using your criteria is pretty much what brought me to the fold of naturalism and away from the fold of theism.

At any rate, thanks for the courtesy.

Jamie

Albert Cipriani

You’re Welcome, Jamie.
See what I mean, Theo? This is a great bunch. They are far more polite that I.

Contrary to your claim, their reactions to theistic arguments is not at all comparable to a Three Stooges movie. "Nyunck, Nyuck, Nyuck," Albert the Traditional Catholic

hinduwoman

This from a Christian who depends on ignorance --- God is mysterious, men are finite, how do you know everything there is to know.

hinduwoman

He can advise the bachelors not to marry and remain bachelors.

Jobar

Albert:
Ergo, both our sides will always be able to find chinks in each other’s armor. “Pointing out the weak points” of theistic or atheistic arguments may arouse the heartbeat of accountants, but not people who dare to think that arguments might actually lead to conclusions and the truth.

But what the hell, if all I can get are chink detector experts in these parts, like the Monty Python character, I guess I’ll just have to pony up another $5...

Oh, how apt! See, I've always pictured the theists who argue here as Monty Python characters; one in particular.
-
-
-

Albert Cipriani

Jobar,
The only way your post could be made funnier would be to have that Occam's razor animation you once posted perform the "flesh wounds."

But if I may be allowed to indulge in a some gratuitous payback here, I'd like to say that of all the Monty Python characters in the "Search for the Holy Grail," I picture you atheists as the two coconuts that were constantly being knocked together to simulate prancing horses. -- Cheers, Albert

Ernest Sparks

I would rather picture you among that file of monks with their chant books:


Pie Jesu Domine, miserere nobis. {BAM!}
Pie Jesu Domine, miserere nobis. {BAM!}
Pie Jesu Domine, miserere nobis. {BAM!}
.......................................


But we can each do our own thing:

YOU -> go back to your god, Cathol
WE -> go back to our god, Athe

Ernie

Albert Cipriani

Dear Bill,
As always, a thoughtful and thought-provoking post: You are so right. We are inextricably bound up with whatever be our notions of meaning. Meaning does not exist independent of us. It’s a potentially unholy marriage, whereby the two of us become one.

Ergo, we must espouse our meaning carefully. If wine, women, and song are all that is meaningful to us, expect to be jaded frightfully for all eternity. If love of God and neighbor is meaningful, expect your cup to eternally runneth over. – Cheers, Albert the Traditional Catholic