by EdenOne 233 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
Are you talking monotheism or polytheism?
I didn't know I had to chose. The traits I gave apply to both monotheist god or polytheist gods. Let's just say that polytheist gods are specialized gods. Why not throw into the possibilities henotheism also? And still, why do I have to define?
Eden
Why not throw into the possibilities henotheism also? And still, why do I have to define?
Because by their very nature only one or the other can be true. Both polytheism and monotheism can't be true at the same time.
Viviane: As usual, you demonstrate you understand neither.
It was you who so insisted that we stick to 'agreed upon definitions'. That definition comes from an official page on atheism. What more can I say?
Eden
The traits I gave apply to both monotheist god or polytheist gods
To some deities. Others had wholly different traits altogether and thus would require an entirely new set of definitions and traits.
You could always say "For purposes of this discussion I choose Thor, and here are his traits and he is defined as ..." and replace the ellipses with the definition of those so we could determine whether or not there was evidence of him and whether or not we are lacking knowledge of this thing.
And still, why do I have to define?
Because you are the one who is trying to make claims about knowledge. You cannot claim we lack knowledge of a thing unless you can tell us what that thing is, how we could possibly determine if we lack knowledge of it or even if it exists to determine whether or not there is a thing we lack knowledge of.
Since expressed a wish to learn, this is a good lesson and example of building your argument. When constructing an argument for a debate, anything you wish to assert you have to have developed or borrowed (with proper accreditation, of course) and state that is what you are using for the purposes of your argument and debate. You also have to have developed any underlying arguments needed to support your position and have thought through any objections you may encounter to determine if they are valid or not, all without becoming emotionally involved with your position and argument.
This is why students have to defend their thesis and why in business, we have something called a rude Q&A, where we build an argument or position in just such a way and have friendly experts in the subject attempt to tear down our argument so we can find out where it may be weak or collapse, whether or not it is even valid.
It was you who so insisted that we stick to 'agreed upon definitions'. That definition comes from an official page on atheism. What more can I say?
Official? Which official certified that? And yes, I did. No one but you is agreeing that is the definition. In fact, you've been told multiple times what the problems with it are. That you found a website that agrees with your mistake is irrelevant.
And "Sorry..." would be a good start.
That definition comes from an official page on atheism.
Um, who appointed the owner of that website as the final authority on what "atheism" is and what all atheists believe.
Just because Austin Cline writes what he thinks an atheist is or isn't, hardly settles the issue for all time.
Sorry ... is there an official certification program for quality atheist websites? Please enlighten me. Because if one demands 'agreed upon definitions', then it would be expected that a website that offers research tools for someone who's interested in learning about atheism, presents an article written by someone who claims to be an expert in agnosticism and atheism [Mr. Austin Cline], and then gives definitions that are incorrect? Seems to me that there's confusion in the atheist side of the fence. Why then should your authority be more credible than that of Mr. Cline? Just curious about credentials.
Eden
That definition comes from an official page on atheism.
Why then should your authority be more credible than that of Mr. Cline? Just curious about credentials.
Ah, the appeal to authority. The last gasp of a failed argument.
Seems to me that there's confusion in the atheist side of the fence.
Since you can't seem to grasp the nuances of the terms and how it's applied, I am not surprised at your confusion.
