Do you believe in God? Why/Why not?

[JWeinCom]

WolfpackN64 said:

JWeinCom said:

And this is what you keep doing.  Insisting that anyone who disagrees with you is wrong without actually being able to explain why.  And this is probably why your interactions with everyone are so testy.

Your conclusion is absolutely that there is a god.  I quoted you on that twice now since you don't seem to know your own argument as well as I do.  So that part of my post is 100% demonstrable correct.  

Here is a definition of validity from the internet encyclopedia of philosophy.   

"A deductive argument is said to be valid if and only if it takes a form that makes it impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion nevertheless to be false. Otherwise, a deductive argument is said to be invalid."

If you presented an argument that ends in god, but (and I'll quote you again) " the deductive Cosmological argument ends at the necessary being" than your argument is clearly invalid, because it does not end at the conclusion.

Perhaps I simply don't possess your superior logical acumen, but I fail to see how anything I said was wrong. I would suggest you practice some epistemological modesty and brush up on logic 101.

I've stated multiple times the argument ends at a necessary being in the thread, only for some people to ask where god is in the picture. So then I used Aquinas' argument which includes God in one argument.

It changes nothing at all about the formal corectness of the argument. When I present an argument that stops at God, it stops at God, when I present one that stops at a necessary being and uses a second argument to reach God I'm doing just that.

Evry singly time I actually take time to try and explain what I'm trying to do or what a certain philosopher does, you turn it against my argument in a way that makes no sense. Then you proceed to continuously claim I make my argument difficult.

I've explained everything six times over now. if you can't be bothered to go back, read the Standford Encyclopedia page on the Cosmological Argument, which presents a nice range of versions you can contend yourself with.

I'm tired of you people turning my arguments in circles and claiming they're not sound. You make the damm circles.

Dude, I've clearly been talking about an argument that ends in god and is deductive.   Ive quoted it twice so we know we are both talking about the same argument. I made sure to ask if it is deductive.  I've asked you several times to define what you mean by god, which you have yet to do.  I've asked you several times to explain how you reach the conclusion from your final premise, which you've failed to do. I made it ABUNDANTLY clear what argument I'm referring to.  And despite that, you're talking about, as far as I can tell, three separate arguments in this post.  

I've been trying my hardest to be polite, but I'm really getting kind of annoyed with your insistence than anyone who disagrees is either too dumb to understand your brilliance, or is deliberately trying to be dishonest.  If you are making claims that I am either wrong or dishonest, explain it.  Otherwise, stop it. It's childish. 

Last edited by JWeinCom - on 11 September 2018