Search:

Didnt know the Democrats were running comedian this year: "we havent said one word tonight about race, are you kidding me? We have the most diverse party!"

...cut to a wide screen shot of a bunch...

Has anyone tried to kill the person who claims to have flipped a coin 50,000 times? No?

Would the person have died for the claim? No?

Is your hypothetical something that actually occurred in...

Since you need me to break it down: comparing a hypothetical that is not historical, that no one died for, and has no relationship to a foundation for truth, being, and reality to something that does...

You can only demonstrate what something is not by first having a conception of what something is. Same reason why a purely apophatic theology is self-contradictory.

Everyone is a philosopher - everyone has a theory of the world. Yours just doesn't line up with the way the world actually is.

If you had any literacy regarding history - and it doesn't seem you do, as you are essentially holding to logical positivism (see above), which has been long dead - you would know that the authors of...

This is how I know you have no idea about the history of philosophy. Ironically, in deriding metaphysical categories, you presuppose them. Logical positivism is long dead - the logical positivists...

Okay, but when we say we know the truth, that has to refer to something definite. For example, truth is propositional. Propositions have objective meaning - more than one person can think them at the...

Define "objective reality." Isn't truth real? Isn't truth objective?



You put "materialize" in quotes as if you are making an analogy or metaphor, but you need to literalize the meaning too in...

Finally, an objective truth we can both agree on :)

I wouldn't expect someone skeptical of objective truth can teach me much of anything. Appreciate the confirmation.

Who are you "agreeing" with? Not me, because I never said it wasn't "necessarily knowable." Again, the point is that you even being open to a position which rejects objective truth is self-defeating...

But you are just making this up, and not even "for the sake of consistency" :)

I'm not "backing into" anything. I just made a point about the implications of your post, a point which you are "proving" for me by how and that you are living your life - e.g. you are responding to...

Rejecting objective truth essentially would commit you to existential nihilism and purposelessness. I think that the inconsistency in how persons live their lives even though their own words would...

Logical consistency is a minimal criterion for truth. The purpose of the point I made about the limits of science is to show that it is not a minimal criterion for truth.

People can talk all they...

Rehashing that you are not convinced is not relevant. Anyone can say that they are not convinced by something. Global skeptics are convinced by nothing - not mathematics, not epistemology, not...

As do I.

I think that when a person decides to resort to quipping "babble" and "lol" - such as you have done in this thread - in responses to substantive points, he or she may want to take a step...

No one is forcing you to respond - if you even can - to the points that I am making. That is your choice. You don't find it relevant to explain how an atheist (or whatever you would call yourself)...

You don't need reply further if you don't understand or are unwilling to admit that mathematics as a discipline does not in, of, and by itself furnish a defense for truth, being, and ethics. As both...