Re: Physics and metaphysics

From: Virgil (ITSnetNOTcom#virgil_at_COMCAST.com)
Date: 03/10/05 

Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 15:08:28 -0700

In article <yradnSuufpmZA63fRVn-2A@comcast.com>,
 Atheistagnostic <atheistagnostic@nospam.net> wrote:

> Virgil wrote:
>
> > In article <5c2dnRooMYFtFbLfRVn-tw@comcast.com>,
> > Atheistagnostic <atheistagnostic@nospam.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Virgil wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>In article <k7adnfslm79_wLLfRVn-sA@comcast.com>,
> >>> Atheistagnostic <atheistagnostic@nospam.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Virgil wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>Either claim that "False, there are no such things" is true or withdraw
> >>>>>it from consideration.
> >>>>
> >>>>It's not a claim (statement standing in need of proof), moron
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>I did not here say it was.
> >>
> >>Liar. "Any statement which one expects to have accepted as true is an
> >>assertion of that truth." -- Virgil
> >
> >
> > I thought you would be too stupid to read what I said, moron.
> > "Here" means here. I did not say it in that posting.
>
> So the world begins anew, _tabula raza_, at the beginning of each new
> message from Virgil? How do you plan to sell that idea, old boy?

If I say "here", it means "here". Simple Septic is not free deliberately
to misinterprete my statements and then hold me to his
misinterpretations.
>
> If you demand that I claim it, then you must be convinced that it is a
> claim (a statement standing in need of proof), right?
>
> The problem for your side is that it's not a claim (statement standing in
> need of proof), moron, it is the
> DENIAL

There Simple Septic goes with that same equovocations again. "Denial"
has two senses.
 
One sense means negation. To deny in that sense is to declare that
something is known to be false.

Another sense means to question. To deny in that sense means merely that
one is not convinced that the something is true.

Conviction that something is false is not the same as lack of conviction
that it is true. For example, in the matter of existence of a god, the
former is anti-theism (strong atheism), the latter mere (weak) atheism.

While any statement not supported by logically convincing evidence may
be questioned in the sense above, as most atheists and agnostics
question the existence of gods, negation of such a statement without
logically convincing evidence fits the classic pattern of Argumentum ad
Ignorantiam.

So that Simple Septic's equivocation on "DENIAL" is a fallacy in itself,
but as he does it, it is also the fallacy of Argumentum ad Ignorantiam.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: How did it all start?
    ... Why would he hate something he doesn't believe exists, moron? ... I CAN abide it. ... It is the idea that atheism is true, ... Here's a clue for the clueless: If God did something, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Ground Fault kills Church Pastor
    ... >> Hitler was an adherent of atheism. ... sacrifice of children to the Babylonian and Cannanite god ... "I am the LORD your God, ...
    (rec.audio.pro)
  • Re: Faith and Skepticism
    ... > reason than atheists imagine. ... You said that you "fully trust" your own reason because God ... You, like a lot of Christians, blithely claim ... > It is, rather, that IF ATHEISM WERE ...
    (soc.religion.christian)
  • Re: the God that never was
    ... As anyone watching the best-seller lists knows, atheism is big ... Belief in God is a vestige of ... the desire for sex untethered to morality ... religion demands moral ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: Richard Dawkins
    ... Theism is a _claim_ (God exists); atheism ... is a refusal to assent to that claim. ... matters of religion is almost always harmful. ...
    (rec.scouting.issues)