Good for you. But since you don’t seem to understand what an argument is, what logical fallacies are, or when they’re to be used, I don’t see a point in continuing.
that is a poisoning the well fallacy. Just because I have used a illogical argument in the past (hypothetically speaking), does not mean that I would use it all the time, or in the future. So that would be a fallacy as well. I thank you for your time on this thread, I sincerely hope and pray that you find faith in Jesus. It is amazing and wonderful to hear story after story of Jesus turning people’s lives around, bringing them out of despair, setting them free from drugs, restoring marriages and changing lives. You can be part of that. The first step is coming to this forum, the second step is opening your mind toward God. Then the third step would be admitting you are a sinner, and in need of salvation. Turning from any known sin. And believing and accepting Christ as your saviour is the last step. IT is a free gift, not of works. It's the best investment one can do in their life. Is to invest in the eternal Gospel. (supernatural and powerful).
So you are ok with making non argument fallacies just because you are not in debate mode? Logic is something you should practice at all time, not just on the clock. I have read the forum rules, because it is a christian site, of course proselytizing a christain faith is perfectly acceptable. so far I have not seen many truthful statements, just fallacy. If you think you can make fallacies all day, and get away with it, think again. The rules plainly state: any denigration of the views, character or intelligence of another member will not be accepted under the site rules on flaming. That is disregard less of if you are making an argument or not. This is your last warning. I will permanently block you if you flame again, or use fallacy again.
The phrase “non argument fallacies” is an oxymoron. And you can just as easily look up the rules as I can.
Like I said, using logic is not something you can just turn off when you want to flame someone off the record. I have blocked you from further posts, permanently. Again I believe if you opened your mind up to Jesus, repented of sin and accepted Him. These answers would auto correct for you. Right now you are forced to believe life came from an electrocuted mud puddle, that the universe was caused by nothing, and that there is no purpose for life. God has created you on purpose, and for a purpose. If you humble yourself, and realize that without Jesus you are headed for eternal hell, turn your life to Jesus, and accept Him. you will be saved. Right now, you are not in a logical framework, you are forced to live with so many contradictions that it creates logical errors in any given comment you make. I believe you don't have logical answers against the case I presented about the moral law, so you resorted to mocking, belittling, trying to make me feel small. These are logical errors, even if you are not making an argument. Anyway, good luck on your endeavors. I am afraid we will not talk again. I hope and pray your future conversations are nicer and politer, and that more than anything I pray for your lost soul. We are dead alot longer than we are alive. We are alive for only 80 or so years, and dead for eternity.
I have unblocked you like I said I would, if you want to continue this debate let me know. Take care.
what word again, do you need a definition for? If spirituality. Yes I define spirituality in the quantum realm and other metaphysics that relate to in on a variety of levels as I have stated already.
yes that is why you were blocked. I blocked you because of posts like this. I could just as easily say your posts are mythological and you remind me of Zeus. I used an extreme example that has no truth to it. But that would be an insult to you, that would be addressing you as individual, which the rules say we can't do. Also it would be an ad hominem. Using well know debunked views, and connecting you to them. It's logically fallacious. It's not honest in debate. That's why if you do it again, you will be permanently blocked. As I have given you several warnings on this.
Supernatural was the word I needed a strict definition for, since the main thrust of your argument was that morality must be supernatural because of x, y, and z. I need to know what you mean before we can get into whether x, y, and z are properly in support of your thesis.
yeah that would have the same definition as they are synonyms. So you can just reply to that post.
I have given a definition for both of those terms, but I think what you really want is proof of the supernatural and or spiritual. But for sake of argument, it is very very difficult to prove anything. Can you prove Hannibal crossed the alps for example. Some documents say so, but how are we to know if they are true. But what I can do is offer my perspective that we see the supernatural every day. There are literally thousands of eye witness encounters of ghosts, apparitions, and other more sinister demonic possessions. In fact it hits home so much in fact with the general population that almost every new horror film has demonic possessions in them. If it was so far fetched as to be unbelievable to the general public, the horror aspect would lose it's effect. To scare someone, (other than startling them), you must give them a story that is believable or at least have some truth to it, that it could happen. If there was a horror film about flying purple elephants for example swooping in on their pray, killing thousands. Well that would be ridiculous and would lose money, because it does not hit home, nor is it believable or rooted in truth. Elephants are not purple and nor do they fly. But demonic possessions happen all the time. Here is a peer review that explains that paranormal experiences are typical and normal for the average person in their life time: https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1992-37947-001, granted the article would not fly in a normal peer review setting, so this particular article is in a mental health journal. So it is unclear if the author is saying these particular people are unhealthy mentally and need help. But the point is to say that it is not uncommon for someone to have an experience that is supernatural or in this case paranormal.
Well, that’s a bit of a problem, because the definition you provided was “metaphysics,” which you had defined as “areas not investigable by science.” I have already explained that this definition is too broad as there are plenty of areas of metaphysics that do not invoke the supernatural. Unless you’re saying there’s a supernatural solution to every question of metaphysics, I don’t think your definition is coherent.
I have replied to this in my last post. You are not looking for a definition you are looking for proof, so please read my last post.
I gave all the information you needed. You replied to it over and over again. You simply disagree with it, and I understand that. So that is why I am moving on to proof and will be addressing that from now on, as that is what you are truly after (not getting caught up on a technicality of a definition). So if you wish to further debate this please reply to post 435 The Moral Argument (revamped). If you don't wish to contend my evidences for the supernatural, then we can politely agree to disagree and end this debate.
