Bartricks

Yes, but that doesn't mean that God lacks the ability to cease to exist, for he can cease to be perfect whenever he wants. You don't really understand...

Okay, now I'm waiting for the insult that inevitably follows such statements... Yes, because I have good arguments for them and I know what I am doing...

Yes. There are dogmatists who are uninterested in what reason has to say until or unless they think reason supports their own view. It's kind of pathe...

Again, Descartes is talking about what he can conceive of. And he does not mean that God lacks the power to do anything. That's precisely why he is as...

You didn't even get the number of meditations right, remember? You thought there were 5! He does not deny that God has the ability to lie, he just fin...

Descartes: I am in agreement with that. It has been some years now since I realize how great Bartricks is at thinking, and how wise it is to agree wit...

Gregory: God can't change Jesus:with God all things are possible. Are you dumb mate? Gregory: he can't change Jesus: I'll take that as a yes. Me almig...

Not my problem you don't understand them. Jesus: with God all things are possible Gregory: he can't commit suicide though Jesus: yes he can. What did ...

I am not, just noting that they are on my side.

Well, it is possible I am ok and thus i am. And possible also that i am not, and thus i am not. I am, thus ok and not ok. That's your view, yes? If x ...

Clearly they do not. They should.

Because he said with God all things are possible. Not that I consider that evidence.i'm just noting that jesus agrees with me. First some, that may co...

Geach: master Dummo is surely correct and has expressoriumed my point to, I may say, a pointus perfectum pointlessium. As the Greeks might say, he is ...

Geach: that God can do absolutely anything - anythingius regorium fingertorium ad nautium - must be admitted to be incoherent - incoherentius noveltiu...

There's no criticism there! I read that section. What is the criticism? Note, it can't be that such a god could violate the laws of logic, for that's ...

Yes. It is certainly true that I exist. Yet I exist contingently.

There's some confusion here. You were talking about science. Science doesn't investigate whether God exists. Philosophers do. That doesn't mean that e...

Not sure what you mean by relativism.

I don't understand. I was not born believing in God (some may be, but not I). And it seemed far from common sense to think he existed until I encounte...

I have already told you! That God exists is a toity truth, not a hoity one. Toity, not hoity. Contingent, not necessary. Toity, not hoity. Again, ther...

No, it's forced you to do what you know not how to do. Why do you keep asking me questions that you know my answer to, yet do not answer any of mine? ...

Science investigates the sensible world. There's no reason to think God has a sensible body, and even if he did, it would be beyond science to establi...

Wishful thinking. Not all believers are alike. I am a believer in God and I will stop believing if you refute my argument for God's existence, as it i...

Yeah, you don't know what necessity means. It means the same as hoity. That is, nothing. You have still yet to show how my claim that there are no nec...

Ah, so you don't know. Ok. Thought so. I too don't know what necessity means, at least not when it is used descriptively. Did you know that a hoity tr...

What do you mean by a possible world?

So not their meaning- ok. What does necessarily mean, then? I think it means hoity. Or it functions expressively. But what do you think it means, give...

No, Banno, denying there are necessary truths is not equivalent to saying that necessarily there are no necessary truths. That's as bonkers as thinkin...

Your example didn't work. I explained why. You need to describe a conceivable scenario. You just asked me to imagine God watching time without being i...

The claim that change does not require time is a conclusion. I concluded it from the fact God created time, which was itself a conclusion. One can als...

I mean by 'might', not necessary. As I said. Did you read what I said, or did you not understand your own definition of necessity? I don't believe the...

Yes. Now, once more, without assuming that necessity is real, demonstrate that by claim that it isn't commits me to a contradiction. For I accept that...

What?

I deny that there are any necessary truths. So you have to generate a contradiction without assuming that there are necessary truths, otherwise all yo...

Part of why I think it is no great loss to deny that necessity is real, is precisely because if one tries to say exactly what one means by 'necessary'...

Oh good grief. I knew someone would start talking about language. Look, take the moral it was designed to convey and focus on the thread's OP. This th...

No, this is the problem with you - you think that 'logic' is squiggling and squoggling. No, that's just a language that some of those who are using lo...

Yes, but triangle, goat, walnut, worm, square, windy road. What about that? Surely if chicken tree hole, then hole chicken tree? There are no true pro...

A better one. Obviously.

No, it is fair comment - you 'think' he made an actual criticism. He didn't. Find it. He just went 'hoity toity' and 'hotium totium, as we said in my ...

I don't claim that the law of non-contradiction is true in all possible situations! Christ. You literally just said you understood. You don't. I think...

It's question begging (and has other faults beside). You need to show that my claim - that no true proposition is also false - generates a contradicti...

No true proposition is also false. I think that's true. I just don't think it is necessarily true. Telling me over and over that most philosophers thi...

I mentioned the tree merely because you seemed to think it was something about minds specifically- and more, my immaterialist conception of them - tha...

The view that everything Reason says is true is not a view I have ever expressed. It's not one I hold. It's a view you hear in your head when I say so...

That's just you being crude. Once again, let's go through the process. You asked me a question. You asked me how I knew that the law of non-contradict...

Loads of questions are stupid, including 'why trust reason?' I explained why. But again, someone who thinks there are no stupid questions is someone i...

Incidentally, i don't think Reason doesn't lie; I have never said that. The point is that one default trusts Reason; that's compatible with finding so...

No, regardless of what one ends up concluding Reason is, it is stupid to ask "why trust Reason?" It's intrinsically stupid, for the reasons I outlined...

Squirm squirm squirm. Take a tree then. Describe to me how a tree and time can exist, yet the tree not be present, future or past. Oh, and your silly ...