Re: Physics and metaphysics

From: Atheistagnostic (atheistagnostic_at_nospam.net)
Date: 03/08/05 

Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2005 09:15:51 -0800

Virgil wrote:
> In article <APednW0ujOhocbHfRVn-3g@comcast.com>,
> Atheistagnostic <atheistagnostic@nospam.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Virgil wrote:
>>
>>>In article <ksadnWSCGuGzaLbfRVn-sA@comcast.com>,
>>> Atheistagnostic <atheistagnostic@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Virgil wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>... has proposed that gods are impossible ...
>>>>
>>>>That's a lie. Your side makes the proposition in question, that there might be
X (whatever you imagine X is) anyway, even though there is nothing in evidence
you can point to and say, 'There, that's what I'm talking about', all you can
do is keep trying to shift the burden of proof to anyone who questions your
lame ideas.

Your argument _ad ignorantiam_ is is no better disguised than that of these
theologs of Galileo's time:

<quote>
Famous in the history of science is the argument _ad ignorantiam_ given in
criticism of Galileo, when he showed leading astronomers of his time the
mountains and valleys on the moon that could be seen through his telescope.
Some scholars of that age, absolutely convinced that the moon was a perfect
sphere, as theology and Aristotelian science had long taught, argued against
Galileo that, although we see what appear to be mountains and valleys, the moon
is in fact a perfect sphere, because all its apparent irregularities are filled
in by an invisible crystalline substance. And this hypothesis, which saves the
perfection of the heavenly bodies, Galileo could not prove false!
</quote>
(Copi and Cohen, _Introduction to Logic_, p. 117)

[In this case the term, 'hypothesis' means a speculative, 'might be' imagining
with no basis in fact.]

>>>
>>>
>>>Actually, Simple Septic, under several aliases, has often claimed (in
>>>response to suggestions that there might be a god or that gods are not
>>>known to be impossible) "False, there are no such things"
>>
>>That's not an assertion, moron, it's the denial of one, and you can't shift the
burden of proof to the denial, so the denial is the only reasonable
pressumption. Didn't your daddy teach you the basics?
>
>
> Then let us by all means ignore it as it should be ignored.

So you want the denials (the negations, like, "Not guilty," for example)
ignored, and default acceptance of every assertion ("Guilty" for example) as
true by default? Well, that certainly shows where you are coming from. Now, if
you are true to your principles, then you will put me in your blocked sender
list and ignore me for the rest of your life. Do you have the courage of your
convictions? We'll see. 8^)

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Physics and metaphysics
    ... X (whatever you imagine X is) anyway, even though there is nothing in evidence ... mountains and valleys on the moon that could be seen through his telescope. ... Galileo that, although we see what appear to be mountains and valleys, the moon ... > response to suggestions that there might be a god or that gods are not ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Physics and metaphysics
    ... X (whatever you imagine X is) anyway, even though there is nothing in evidence ... mountains and valleys on the moon that could be seen through his telescope. ... Galileo that, although we see what appear to be mountains and valleys, the moon ... is in fact a perfect sphere, because all its apparent irregularities are filled ...
    (sci.physics)