Leontiskos

That's an interesting account, but I don't know of any rule of logic which requires that a modus ponens where p=q magically has a different structure....

Same structure: p: God exists q: God exists 1. p ? q 2. p 3. ? q (The structure is modus ponens, and you yourself claimed that 1-2-3 is a modus ponens...

<Sure it does>. And when Frege first tried to introduce the material conditional he was resisted for decades for this very reason. But you yourself sa...

Yes, I agree. I had a conversation with Banno on this topic awhile back, such as <here>. One example exchange from that thread: What's interesting is ...

Sure, if you rely on the degenerate cases of the material conditional, where a false antecedent or a true consequent guarantees a true conditional. Bu...

According to your Wikipedia article you have the burden of proof, for you are the one who spoke. Or rather, you have simulated a scenario in which som...

For example, you said, "if FTI1 is true, then FTI2 must necessarily be false." Why? Why can't both premises be true? Okay sure, if you are appealing t...

- That gets into the questions similar to <this thread>. My point wasn't to claim that both first premises are false. That cannot be done if we are us...

I think was correct the first time (in challenging some of these claims). Let me just poke a few holes: First, if it is not possible to deny both prem...

- Because I am covering multiple posts of yours. Count Timothy already pressed your early, question-begging posts into the arguments that appeared in ...

Having read through Roark's paper and Klima's response to Roark, I think Klima successfully defends his positions. Let's look at the facet that was br...

Okay, I see what you are saying. Thanks for clarifying. --- See the section of my post from the first page beginning, "We actually saw this play out t...

Good stuff. :up: The absurdity of nominalism can hardly be overestimated. It's high time we stop letting people pass off absurd theories as normal.

:up:

This relates to your recent post as well (), but I am going to place it in this thread. (And I realize Arcane Sandwich will disagree with this.) I was...

- Well no one seems to want to give an argument for their claims. No one wants to be transparent. So I did the work for you. . But still, no one seems...

You are falling into yet another ignoratio elenchus, for Klima tells us explicitly that the intentional theory and the causal or historical* theory ag...

The sources are available, and it does not appear to be mistaken at all. Klima quotes Kripke in footnote 20, which attaches directly to your quote: Th...

Coming back to this, I think it's basically right, except that I think Klima sees that bracketing as bound up with parasitic reference. That is, for K...

I thought section 5 was helpful in filling out section 4. By the time Klima finished the quote from Gaunilo I thought his case was quite strong. Aquin...

Part 5. Conclusion: Parasitic Reference, Natural Theology and Mutual Understanding (Expedited for the impatient.) In this final section Klima reads hi...

Yes, it's pretty basic. A real Porsche is greater than the idea of a Porsche. I haven't seen anyone present an argument against this. Yes, you give gr...

- That's fair. You've definitely shed a great deal of light on the book, as have @"Wayfarer"'s synopses. It has helped to orient me to what it is all ...

Roark's paper is quite good. When I saw that it was hosted on Klima's page, I checked and found a response from Klima (both of which are now linked in...

Then premise (1) does not involve omnipotence for you. So what? As I said: - I addressed this in my . If you want to talk about Anselm's argument, the...

Some questions regarding section 4: 1. Is parasitic reference coherent? 2. Does parasitic reference adequately account for the atheist’s position? 3. ...

Part 4. Intentional Identity and Parasitic vs. Constitutive Reference In this section Klima appeals to his intentional theory of reference in order to...

- So are you saying that if someone wanted to be great, they would have to choose between being powerful and being moral, because to be powerful is to...

Well, one could argue the point of whether those specific conceptions actually do manifest concretely in political platforms. In the U.S. the two-part...

Hmm, okay. So Rodl is just telling us "what anyone always already knows." He need not jockey among "possible contenders of a true condition." He is ab...

Yes, that is definitely true. Agreed. Good points. Right, and this is reminiscent of Girard's work on the scapegoating mechanism. I don't know quite w...

"God is omnipotent, therefore he is obliged to do stuff (and anyone obliged to do stuff isn't as great as someone who is not obliged to do stuff)." I ...

- Thanks Kazan. Good to know that there are others paying attention. :up:

- It is not a "kindness" to hijack the thread and skip to section 4, but refrain from skipping to section 5. Part of this thread is experimental: are ...

- Not even 36 hours have elapsed since we began section 3. I have reiterated my desire to move slowly, in large part so that those who do not have as ...

- I'm glad you found the lecture interesting. I don't think the lecture had much to say about Trump. If I recall, the only reference to Trump was a re...

Are you trying to take over the thread entirely? No, we will open part four tomorrow. You can remove your post or I will appeal to the mods.

Ding ding. :100:

Okay, right. We are on the same page then. :up:

This came up earlier, but you seemed to be arguing something rather different. For example:

Well, no. He says that one could point to the tradition "showing." Obviously such arguments need to be shown to one who has never seen them. Klima doe...

He is summarizing the Anselm-Gaunilo exchange, and this is transparent in the paper. Except that's not what Anselm or Klima say at all, so this looks ...

That's pretty much par for the course, as all you've managed in responses to criticisms is, "I won't repeat myself." Clarifying one's argument is dang...

Roark is getting into complicated questions of whether Klima's quantificational formulation accurately represents Anselm's proof. This is somewhat imp...

I want to draw some connections between section 3 and what has already occurred in this thread (note that I did not read section 3 beforehand, and was...

- Great post. :up: Hopefully Roark's response can serve as an additional sounding board as we move along. Right. Yes, and the claim is a little bit od...

As I read it, this section is meant to drum up the possibility of a dialogical impasse between the atheist (who opposes Anselm's proof) and the theist...

All of this is interesting in its own way, but it reminds me of the adage, "Hard cases make for bad law." If Rodl is to subtly critique the various co...

I was listening to a lecture by Rusty Reno and he describes populism in a pithy way as follows: I thought the lecture was quite good. It speaks to Tru...

That's a fair and interesting way of reading it. :up: I need to think a bit more about section 3. I'm just trying to catch up on some replies. Right, ...