Arcane Sandwich

The proofs have already been given, since a proof is (to my mind) the same thing as an argument. As such, proofs can be sound or unsound.

Not really. I'm open to the idea that God might exist, and that Jesus might be God.

This is good, I feel like we're making progress here, but there's still a lot of distance to cover before we can reach an actual agreement on anything...

The theory of the Big Bang, which is currently accepted in contemporary science, was first proposed by Georges Lemaître, a Catholic priest: In his vie...

Yet that wasn't always the case. As Hegel suggests, in The Phenomenology of Spirit, the history of philosophy is like the maturing of a plant. We woul...

Well, not quite. The ancient Greek episteme, as well as the ancient Roman and Medieval scientia, weren't necessarily alien to ontology and theology. A...

I don't see why I can't deny that as well.

Interesting comments, but I'm going to have to ask you both if you have a horse in this race, otherwise it seems (per some folks' deluded opinions) th...

Exactly. That's the "problem" (if it can be called a problem) with classic Christian arguments for the existence of God, such as the ones provided by ...

I'll just quote someone who is better than me: You could, sure. The argument would look like this: 1) If Jesus is God, then God exists. 2) Jesus is Go...

:up:

Sure, at the end of the day, humanity started in Africa. So, no one is really indigenous to anywhere except the African continent.

I believe that predicates are linguistic, while properties are ontological. The latter exist out there, in the external world, in the things themselve...

Good question. I've no idea. I can see arguments for, as well as against. Could be.

Very informative reply , thanks. Yeah well, except in Norwegian Black Metal, right? For the most part, at least. Swedish Death Metal bands don't seem ...

I follow Bunge in conceptualizing existence as a real property. The table in my living room has the property of existence. When I say that it exists, ...

Are you averse to a statement such as "John Doe exists"? Replace "John Doe" with any other individual if you prefer.

Etc. Is Charles Taliaferro's entry in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy also bigoted, in your view? Must he have a horse in the race to be able ...

For an implication to be false, the antecedent has to be true and the consequent has to be false. Take a look at the truth table for conditional state...

This part doesn't say that Jesus is identical to God, it only says that he's God's son. This part does say that, if we read it literally. If we read i...

Could be. Yet the SEP entry on Philosophy of Religion begins with the following words:

Nope. These statements can only be false if their antecedent is true while their consequent is false. In this case, the antecedent in FTI1 is "God exi...

All of that is for you to decide. It seems like it would be in your best interest to accept the Christian argument, and to reject the non-Christian on...

Fun fact: springtails are six-legged arthropods that are not insects. They're an example of how morphological classifications are not quite reliable. ...

Sure. Morphological classifications tend to be more useful in botany, for example, or in microbiology. They're not that useful in zoology nowadays. Bu...

Except for 's reply, I'm a bit disappointed with the overall quality (or lack of thereof) that his Thread has received thus far in the other replies. ...

Then I can simply deny your statements.

That's an ad hominem fallacy. And it's also trolling.

Issues in Philosophy of Religion and issues in theology are not mutually exclusive, at least not necessarily. Can you prove that they are?

But I do indeed have a horse in this race, since I accept the non-Christian argument and I deny the Christian one. No, it isn't. My opinion as an athe...

Yes, it is. It's Philosophy of Religion.

Doesn't matter, the arguments have been stated in the OP, by yours truly, if no one else. As such, they can be accepted or rejected, on whichever grou...

In that case, their position is consistent with the denial of premise FTI1 in the case of the Christian argument. Those groups would also deny premise...

Doesn't matter, your reply is consistent with the denial of premise FTI2, which is the same premise that I deny as well.

So, I take it that you accept the non-Christian argument, and you reject the Christian argument. And it seems that you deny the second premise, FTI2. ...

What do you mean by "standing"? And why wouldn't I be able to talk about it? What is it about me or my post that makes me a religious bigot, in your v...

Well, that's morphology that you're talking about there, as in, the phenotype. It's not the most reliable way of classifying living beings. It used to...

I'm curious about it, since it sounds like a real word. That's why I looked it up, it sounds like a real word that I've never read or heard. Is it a c...

Ok. It seems to me that their small population is due to the fact that their ancestors were forcefully assimilated into the nation-states of Scandinav...

Anti-essentialism can only get one up to a certain point. "Essence" might be an ugly word for an analytic ear, yet Kripke argued that the essence of a...

Could be. Metaphysical permissivism is a serious contender. It sounds less crazy when one takes a look at their arguments, but it still sounds insane ...

Is it still a sheep, though? Are there such things as scattered objects? If there are, then this is the slippery slope towards affirming that there ar...

Welcome to professional philosophy. The next step is to use first-order logic to give more credibility to whatever nonsense you feel like saying, such...

Then I'd say that your intellectual honesty as a philosopher is commendable. Some philosophers seem to say crazy things just to see who can say the cr...

I mean, you could, if you wanted to. It's not like philosophers haven't been saying crazy things for the past two or three millennia. What is Parmenid...

If you're asking if there could be a fourth position, "only extraordinary objects, none of the ordinary ones", then I would say two things: 1) Yes, it...

"It's complicated", is what I would say here. Argentina has a strange history.

It's actually the hardest position to maintain. Eliminativists and permissivists seem to think that their positions are far more consistent, which is ...

There's three options: Eliminativism: none of them (neither ordinary nor extraordinary). Or at least almost none of them. Conservatism: some of them (...