An account of debating a creationist

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
hardly, in fact some philosophers would hold that without the inclusion of the supernatural a unified view of the universe is not possible.

Zen master

Ooh goodie!

Can you point me to some of those philosophers?

Originally posted by Great King Rat
Ooh goodie!

Can you point me to some of those philosophers?

yes me

The Zen master

Originally posted by twhitehead
'The supernatural' is nothing more than a claim that there are no universal rules. Hence, it is not necessary for anything to 'make sense' as in 'follow certain rules'.
Of course most people who invoke the supernatural do so in order to claim that they know the rules and everyone else doesn't - or rather they make up the rules then invoke the supernatural as a socially acceptable way of saying 'I make up the rules and nobody can tell me different'.

no its not

Originally posted by Great King Rat
Hitler knew very well how to eradicate jews.

Was that therefore wisdom?

was it virtuous?

The Zen master

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
yes me

The Zen master

some philosophers... plurar.

Come on, bobby, try a bit harder.

Originally posted by Great King Rat
[b]some philosophers... plurar.

Come on, bobby, try a bit harder.[/b]

There's me and lets see, R J Hinds, there's two right off, there may be other, lesser luminaries, who can say
The Zen master

LOL, your brain is pretty fvcked up from all those years of religious indoctrination, but I can't deny you have retained a decent sense of humour.

Originally posted by Great King Rat
LOL, your brain is pretty fvcked up from all those years of religious indoctrination, but I can't deny you have retained a decent sense of humour.

When one goes from house to house with a Bible in ones hand, it helps, it helps a great deal 😀

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
When one goes from house to house with a Bible in ones hand, it helps, it helps a great deal 😀

Yes, I assume it holds back the tears of constant failure, doesn't it?

What percentage of people that you bothe...... I mean talk to on your door-to-door trips is actually interested in what you're telling them?

Originally posted by Great King Rat
I'm not asking if it's your problem and I'm not asking if it bothers you.

I'm asking if you must consider yourself agnostic about the situation I just described. It was really a very simple question.


I agree with your definition about atheism. I merely pointed out that Sonhouse doesn't consider himself an atheist (thus is not sure god doesn't exist). But he should comment on that himself if he wants to.

you are asking where do you draw the line. where do you state "this is bullsht, i am certain it isn't possible". it is hard to describe the exact place when certainty of the impossiblity of something becomes "i don't know and cannot know for sure".


a simple answer would be yes, i should be agnostic about that. "i do not know" doesn't close any doors, it doesn't limit you in any way. you reserve judgement and put it aside.


Sonhouse doesn't consider himself an atheist
from what he has been posting, he is clearly an atheist. hence me saying it doesn't matter what he calls himself.

Originally posted by Great King Rat
But certainly with god's help such a boat would be possible?

no.

god made the world obey the laws of physics. we observe them now, we strive to understand them. the fact that they don't bend and twist is what makes that boat impossible.


god didn't actually hammer a nail in that boat. he made noah, a human, use non-magical wood, non-magical nails. he described in detail how to build that boat. by those details, we know that boat is impossible. the fact that it isn't written in the bible "after noah completed that piece of crp construction, god saw it would crumble to pieces first time someone sneezed in its direction, so he covered it in magical god spit and made it an awesome boat". and that is only dealing with the seaworthiness of such a boat.


we may say for sure about some things that are impossible, while staying within a system of axioms and postulates. if we cannot trust those, then nothing can really be known and we might as well burn all science books.

Originally posted by Great King Rat
Yes, I assume it holds back the tears of constant failure, doesn't it?

What percentage of people that you bothe...... I mean talk to on your door-to-door trips is actually interested in what you're telling them?

not many respond, but mostly people are polite if disinterested, apathetic is the word i would use 😀

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
not many respond, but mostly people are polite if disinterested, apathetic is the word i would use 😀

I think once they've closed the door most of them use a highly similar word.

Originally posted by Great King Rat
I think once they've closed the door most of them use a highly similar word.

so many sleepy people out there, we have to wake them up gently

The Zen master

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
so many sleepy people out there, we have to wake them up gently

The Zen master

What's fun is surprising them with my Super Soaker!®