Leontiskos

So you want to criticize people who use the words "right" and "wrong," because you think the words are meaningless. And then when I avoid using these ...

That's a good example of a complete non-argument.

- True, but there is a particular culture that accounts for why one is made to focus on the Westboro's and then seek validation for their focus, and i...

This is a misreading. @"Count Timothy von Icarus" is saying that humans will choose what they deem best, not that humans will choose what Count deems ...

I think the only recourse for @"J" is to say that the decision to do nothing at all does not count as a decision, or equivalently, that the claim, "x ...

I think the kind of atheists who the OP is referring to get their idea of God from New Atheist sermons. That group is disproportionately represented o...

Yes, but I would say the impasse is alive and well. :razz: Okay, but you've defined morality as, "The debate between right and wrong," and I'm not sur...

A healthy body of law and regulation depends on moral realism, and in a culture where moral realism is waning the body of law becomes unhealthy. Like ...

Okay, but it's an important issue. If we don't mean the same thing by 'morality' then we will be talking past each other. Sure. Sorry, my bad. I don't...

How was I hiding the ball? I said it at the very outset: You've misrepresented the argument by interpreting a moral judgment as a hypothetical ought-j...

Great points. :up: We have fundamental societal reasons for separating males from females. The reasons hold whether those males have long hair, or hav...

They will receive special attention on the basis of their strength alone, actually. You've simply misrepresented what I've said. I spoke specifically ...

I gave the argument in <this post>, and particularly in the final paragraph. Give that a read and let me know if I am incorrect in claiming that, "you...

So happy to see you, Srap. :up: My point is that the ought-claims of complete strangers have force for us, and this jibes with your claim about the "r...

The burden of proof you are attempting to push is wild, in my opinion. You may as well go to a women's shelter and say, "You need to demonstrate how t...

Then let's separate husbands and wives too. So what? You're not being rational. What you are engaged in is a red herring. Again, you seem convinced th...

But it's not a mechanistic if/then. More precisely, it's not a hypothetical imperative. He didn't say, "Don't drink the water if you don't want to get...

- It seems like you're intent to avoid the central issues, here. I'm not sure what your claim that husbands rape their wives has to do with the centra...

Hmm, okay. Well, why do you think we have separate men's and women's prisons in the first place. Is it for the safety of the men? The idea that I need...

- Lots of strawmen being discussed among the atheists.

- It sounds like your objection is, "The lobbyists' motives are bad." Is that the only objection? On the view of those of us who are far removed, it l...

Interesting thread, . I am relatively new to Adorno. I looked at Wikipedia, Britannica, IEP, SEP, and read the SEP section on Negative Dialectics. His...

A short and related article I stumbled upon: "Getting Serious about Seriousness, Aristotle on the meaning of Spoudaios," by Matthew Lu.

So when a complete stranger warns you not to drink the water, you don't see any 'ought' involved in this? I don't believe anyone has claimed that mora...

I agree, and those points follow from the argument you gave. I am just looking at that argument and seeing where it leads. So then instead of, "If hum...

Let's just pretend that this is a reasonable claim for the sake of argument. What then is the position? That women can rape women, men can rape men, m...

I recently listened to a very interesting discussion between Sam Harris and Tom Holland. It is about the ties between secularism, liberalism, and Chri...

Are you concerned that trans men are going to rape women? Do you think someone without a natural penis can rape a woman? Unaided penetrative intercour...

- I don't know that you've provided me with many arguments, but I think you are short on time and I am glad to see you offering Count Timothy argument...

But it doesn't even make sense there. For example, Janus implies that <People have faith in authorities who they have no reason to believe are credibl...

"Leontiskos has demanded an explanation for X, but I have not claimed X." What is X? What is this thing you speak about? Please tell me. :roll: I'm ac...

Sure, but the key point is that if you give a controversial premise then you must defend it. P2 is part of what we are differing over, and therefore i...

No, you said, "This is the basic difference between faith in science and faith in religion," and that's what I asked about. The question is and has al...

Did I start a thread on the defense of faith against New Atheist types? Nope. This is a thread about the meaning of faith, and when folks like Tom or ...

The reason the anti-religious folks are struggling so much is this. They want to define faith as some form of irrationality or some form of belief san...

- That's fucking shameful, man. :down: - Janus: This is the basic difference between apples and bananas. Leontiskos: What is the basic difference? Jan...

I pointed you to this question: What was I asking you? What claim of yours elicited that question of mine? Go back and have a look. :roll:

Lol - You're changing the subject again, just like you did <here>. You made a claim about "the basic difference between faith in science and faith in ...

So you are saying, "The basic difference between faith in science and faith in religion is that evidence is observation-based or reason-based whereas ...

Lol - I take it that you haven't been following this thread very closely. I made all sorts of unaddressed points in my last two posts to you. Feel fre...

The meaning of a word is a matter of linguistics, not logic. No one believes authorities who they do not believe are credible. Once you recognize this...

This is real argument, which is great. This is what this thread needs much more of. I don't think this is linguistically correct, though. You give two...

I think we have to establish a proper methodology if we are to avoid begging the question in these matters. The first way to do that is to speak and l...

- That's actually a much more serious appraisal than anything Tom Storm has attempted in this thread, and so it is at least a step in the right direct...

Okay, thanks for the correction. Usually when someone speaks about things like ignorance they aren't speaking about things like negligence, but I see ...

Have I claimed that the central act of atheism is a form of irrationality? Of course not. You are reaching. What does that have to do with anything? I...

- :up:

No, I don't think so. "Bears are furry; water is wet; and Bob's last name is Ross." On your reckoning that would be a syllogism, given that it is a se...

This is another example of your unseriousness. On the pejorative definition of faithath, anyone who believes something without evidence must be engage...