Total posts: 3,159
-->
@TheRealNihilist
Because I thought you would be interested
Created:
Posted in:
Ok guys if we don’t get our shit together this entire day will be wasted
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
If there aren’t 5 people in a lunch, will the DP count as a no-lynch?
Created:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
You were in the previous discussion thread
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Speedrace
Just vote Wylted
We have no time left
We can use the information from the Lynch as additional information for DP2.
Created:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
Why what?
Created:
-->
@Mopac
@3RU7AL
@TheRealNihilist
@ludofl3x
@Athias
Hi
Created:
A continuation of this thread:
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WaterPhoenix
I know. I’m saying we can infer from whether or not Wylted is scum information about other people.
Created:
Posted in:
I have a whole bunch of reads, but they depend on whether Wylted is scum or not.
Created:
Posted in:
I really don’t think that being inactive automatically means scum. But since we have like, an hour left, let’s just lynch Wylted, take whether he is innocent or guilty, and go from there.
Created:
Posted in:
I guess if we have no other options, then we can lynch Wylted.
As for other scumreads, I’m still suspicious of Pie immediately VTLing Mhar after Warren’s statement. It could be scum trying to bandwagon.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@warren42
@oromagi
@Speedrace
I’d place Wylted at the bottom of PoE list. We shouldn’t focus so heavily on Wylted DP1. Oro, can you explain why you think Wylted is scum, other that him being offline?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
I am specifically referring to this:
This is the argument you have a burden to substantiate:The reason theists use deist arguments is because there is no evidence (outside of holy texts) of the existence of their particular god.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
The reason I want this in a debate instead of in a forum setting is because, given the complexity of the argument, it would require a separate debate to prove/satisfy.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
As for this:
Theists are resorting to deistic arguments in the absence of theistic ones (as evidenced by this thread).
I was referring to 3RUTAL’s first post of this thread, and the argument made in it.
If you wish to start off on a clean slate, then we can do so on a superset debate.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
If you want to debate me on this specific premise (since you kinda already are), then I’ll happily oblige.This is the argument you have a burden to substantiate:...there is no evidence (outside of holy texts) of the existence of their particular god.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
Answer me this question: Do fairies exist in the real, physical universe we inhabit?
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
/ \
/👁\
/____\
Created:
Posted in:
Actually I realized an error to my proof. It should read "If no theists are using such an argument, then no such argument exists." instead of "If there is no such argument, then no theists would use it." Woops, I just caught that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
Also I think there was a misunderstanding about #14. It was basically what a theistic argument is trying to prove (that there is specific evidence for one particular god/set of gods which cannot be applied to any other). Oh well, at least this’ll make you stop whatever you were going to say about my “argument from ignorance”
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
Also, please elaborate on how my fairy logic was unsound
Created:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Yeet
I love Scientolo... I mean science!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WaterPhoenix
???
That doesn’t sound like Trivago to me...
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
I could definitely make a plane joke, and it would have nothing to do with 9/11
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
If you go to the debate section and look at all the debates (for whatever reason), you will notice that in some debates, the Instigator waives the first round. The reason people do this is because it would be extremely impractical to BoP a negative claim first round. So in a debate, what I did would be considered valid.
Anyways, since you insist on it, I'll fulfill your BoP requirement in the simplest way I can think of.
I will be using modus tollens to prove that there is no theistic evidence that mankind has yet created.
The premise of modus tollens is as follows [1]:
If P, then Q. (premise – material implication)If not Q, then not P. (derived by transposition)
Not Q . (premise)
Therefore, not P. (derived by modus ponens)
Applied to this case, the logical structure of the proof looks like this:
If there is a theistic argument, then theists would use it.
If there is no such argument, then no theists would use it.
Theists are resorting to deistic arguments in the absence of theistic ones (as evidenced by this thread).
Therefore, there is no theistic argument.
According to the above proof, until the day that theists start using theistic arguments, it can be logically proven that no such argument exists.
Happy now?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
Right now DDO is a toxic wasteland.
Nuking it would turn it into a radioactive toxic wasteland.
;)
Created:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
BUT WHAT CREATED THE WOOD, THE ROCKS, THE PEOPLE, AND THE PERSON TELLING US THIS STORY?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
Sorry I couldn’t think straight for the last few days
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
There’s no confusion. I understand that Wylted is a very good player. I’m just saying that he is of no help to us if he isn’t here.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@warren42
Wylted can’t be the best player here if he isn’t even here, lol
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
There are only two possible stances that you could take for this subject: either there is evidence for theism or there isn’t. Since no evidence has been provided, the stance that there is no evidence for theism is the default position. Proving that there is no evidence for theism would require me to comb through literally every single webpage, book, and other source of information in existence. This is extremely impractical, if not impossible, to do. It’s like having to scour every single cubic centimeter of space in the universe just to prove that fairies don’t exist. Until someone provides evidence that fairies exist, it can be concluded that they don’t. Same logic applies to this case as well.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
You can believe in whatever you want. I’m not here to say what you can or can’t believe in.
Created: