Guest gssq Posted April 21, 2005 Share Posted April 21, 2005 I knew it was only a matter of time before someone used the following cheap trick on me. Lucky I anticipated this beforehand (call it a premonition): Someone: why do you refer to 'god' as an exclamation if you feel the concept has no relevance to life today? Wouldn't some other word be more appropriate, like "*gnash teeth furiously*"? : ) Me: why do you use the words "wednesday" and "thursday" if you do not worship the pagan gods? despite your professed religion, in your daily life, in word and in deed you pay homage to the true gods of the north! Someone: haha - no, there is practical use in that - objecting to that would be like you objecting to your living in a society with laws broadly based on judeo-christian moral values if you believed there was no judeo-christian God - you do not, I presume, because you still think there is value in at least some of these legally imposed obligations. Me: I use the english language so do you and the laws society has are based more on universal values than so-called judeo-christian values such values appear in most societies and some appear in all Someone: our particular interpretation of the law tends towards Roman, in the formulation imposed after the formation of the Roman Catholic church - but I think that we've strayed from the original point made. : ) Me: yeah that you're using your cheap tricks again don't worry. I have cheap tricks too I would like suggestions on dealing with the cheap trick that is the denigration of reason. Any forthcoming ideas? eg "How can we take Reason a priori?", "Why are you so confident of the efficacy of Reason?"; "I assume that my God exists, and that he gives me reason. How about you?" My own not-so-cheap tricks in reply: - How can you assume your god's existence (or your god's giving you logic) without using logic? (Logic can be buttressed by their god, but it cannot be pulled out of thin air at the start) - Why obey your god in the first place? If your god tells you to do something, why must you obey him? (This question's implications are deeper than they might sound at first glance) I tried the "you've disproved Reason using Reason. Therefore Reason works" line, but the person I was talking to wasn't convinced. He claimed that the efficacy or veracity of Reason still wasn't established. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Choscura Posted April 21, 2005 Share Posted April 21, 2005 you can easily nail them on being mentally ill. think about it. they're concerned with invisible men who live in the clouds. they talk to these invisible men. some of these people are evil and want to hurt them. others tell them what to do. others are kind and gentle. and these invisible men are EVERYWHERE! another fun trick is one I used against a preacher, concerning one-night stands. the preacher said sex outside a marriage is wrong, end of story. he gave me a one-sentence argument to walk around. my reply was that as sexual beings, as god had created us, and being obligated to reproduce and given minds of great capacity, we were obligated not only to reproduce, but to do so in the kinkiest ways imaginable: porn was simply a way of education for such an end. furthermore, a person met in a bar who you had known for little over an hour had no personal depth and no attachment, and so was not valued as a person, rather as an object: a toy, if you will. thus, one night stands could not be adultery as they involved only one person on a mission to further understand the greater workings of sexual contact for the better fulfillment of his significant other. anyone here with half a brain can tear that to pieces just reading throguh it, but the point is that he didn't realize the fundamental flaw in that logic: that the other person IS a person (not an object)- and I wasn't about to ruin that perfect look on his face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
narcissist Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 Someone: why do you refer to 'god' as an exclamation if you feel the concept has no relevance to life today? Wouldn't some other word be more appropriate, like "*gnash teeth furiously*"? : ) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Perhaps you could say something like "You know, you're right! I never thought of it that way before. From now on when I need to exclaim I'll say 'Oh Satan, Lord and Master!'. That's much more relevant for today. Thanks." Another idea: if you can get a Christian to say, or make reference to "you shall not take/use the Lord's name in vain.", you can simply remind them that, "It's only in vain if He doesn't exist!" See how these go. PS. Nice work Choscura Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gssq Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 Nah mentally ill isn't cheap. Too obvious :0 Argh I still need to buttress Reason. How? Ah, what is truth? I shall tear down Reality as well - how can we take reality a priori either? - and throw us all into epistemological nihilism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gssq Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 Morg? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spamandham Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 Someone: why do you refer to 'god' as an exclamation if you feel the concept has no relevance to life today? Wouldn't some other word be more appropriate, like "*gnash teeth furiously*"? : ) Proper response, "who said I was referring to your god?" Alternative response: "Boy you sure got me there. Won't you join me in a few hymns?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts