Search results

Yes. Unless it's Hitler. Then it's fine.

Any statement indicating suicidality should be taken very seriously. Was there ever any follow up? Make sure that the counselor you are bringing your daughter to is 1. properly qualified and 2. is aware of the prior statements about suicide.

IT doesn't matter if newton knew about gravity or not. it's still true regardless. that your average turtle doesn't understand the inverse square doesn't mean it isn't the case.

What ensures that the self-correcting system itself doesn't get corrupted?

It isn't wrong to wear 666... it was wrong to fire him for him not wanting to wear it.

The definition also leaves religion open to the same avenue of attack as reason, so grats I guess.

Yes, because ignoring questions is so much better than actually having an answer. Why didn't I see it before. Keep your ministry.:preach:

I guess I can declare this thread for Isabella of Spain. /win /thread

Basically.

The problem is that Voltaire does not explicitly state your additional premises. You're applying premises that are not strictly stated. Earlier in your posts you suggested to the rest of this board that we were applying our arguments to a reading of Voltaire's argument not found in the strict...

So when a Christian asks for assistance with apologetics we're supposed to ignore that? What ever happened to witnessing? Ministry? Are you just too good for that or something?

I'm pretty sure cogito ergo sum is beyond question. The question is the structure of consciousness. It's like a mirror trying to find out what's behind it.

So, let's take a look. I'm operating under the belief that periods denote propositional statements. P1: Voltaire would not wish to deal with an atheist prince, on the condition that the the atheist prince would find it in (the prince's) interest to grind Voltaire into powder so Voltaire...

So... true soldiers of God shouldn't bother talking about God with people who aren't believers? That's absurd.

In the immortal words of Bugs Bunny: "I like it!"

You never actually listed the two premises and the conclusion in any kind of formal way. For the sake of clarity, would you mind posting precisely what the two premises are, what the conclusion is, and the deductions that one uses to proceed from the premises to the conclusion? Given our...

Paradoxum, your signature paragraph ia lifted straight from Nietzsche and you don't even know anything about it? Yikes.

If you're going to have the audacity to lift an entire passage from one of the major works of one of the major philosophers of modernity, you should at least have the decency to know who wrote it and the context in which it was written.

You're signature is a quote from Nietzsche. In the paragraph the person speaking is distressed.

That they were possible as a result of that person's situations and were not taken.