Debating a christian - how would you destroy this argument?

Discussion of the nature of Ultimate Reality and the path to Enlightenment.
Steven Coyle

Re: Debating a christian - how would you destroy this argument?

Post by Steven Coyle »

All humans are to some extent bi-sexual?

Even Steven?

Well...

Walks with one wooden arm.
Dave Toast
Posts: 509
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2003 6:22 pm

Re: Debating a christian - how would you destroy this argument?

Post by Dave Toast »

Diebert,

I'm not so sure a part if the opposite of a whole. If a whole is all of, its opposite is none of.

I think decrement (the amount by which something is decreased) would be the noun you're after, or something like that.
User avatar
David Quinn
Posts: 5708
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Debating a christian - how would you destroy this argument?

Post by David Quinn »

Philosophaster wrote:
David Quinn wrote:Not surpisingly Adler is an eminent philosopher, probably highly esteemed within academic circles.
Not really. Even in his time, lots of people saw him as a throwback, doing variations on the Cosmological Argument while other philosophers moved on to work in logic, epistemology, and philosophy of mind. Almost no one in the academic philosophical community cites Adler or discusses his ideas today.
You're probably right. It doesn't really matter either way. I have yet come across an academic who doesn't engage in the same level of wishful thinking as Adler, in one form or another.

Because a lack of understanding and clarity is at the basis of all worldly thinking, there is always a point where reasoning ends and wishful thinking begins. Even the greatest of academics, behind their sophisticated language and intricate forms of argument, invariably slide into wishful thinking and become indistinguishable from young New Age girls.

The best of them are honoured precisely because of their ability to conceal this slide behind the sophisticated language and intricate arguments.

-
User avatar
Philosophaster
Posts: 563
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2005 10:19 am

Re: Debating a christian - how would you destroy this argument?

Post by Philosophaster »

Well, that's certainly a perspective I've heard here before. I think you paint with too broad a brush. On almost any philosophical question you'll find plenty of academics on either side.
Kevin Solway
Posts: 2766
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2001 8:43 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Debating a christian - how would you destroy this argument?

Post by Kevin Solway »

Diebert van Rhijn wrote:Anyone, what is the opposite of remainder? There's no word for it?
The principle.
User avatar
David Quinn
Posts: 5708
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Debating a christian - how would you destroy this argument?

Post by David Quinn »

Philosophaster wrote:Well, that's certainly a perspective I've heard here before. I think you paint with too broad a brush. On almost any philosophical question you'll find plenty of academics on either side.
I've seen none on the side of truth yet.

-
Locked