SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Should God be replaced?
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: James Calladine who wrote (12801)6/24/2002 9:02:15 AM
From: Solon  Read Replies (1) of 28931
 
"Any conventional "proof" is based on a set of assumptions which usually are not either known or declared, and so the sort of proof you are talking about is not so rock solid or definite as you may think."

I do not ask you to close the gap between mere subjective and naked assertion, and something "rock solid and definite". I simply say that humankind have developed an objective set of beliefs based on observation, replication, and consistency, and that these beliefs are not naked, but are buttressed by a common set of accepted facts, and so may be discussed as to their evidentiary supports.

If you have no basis in generally accepted fact for your assertion that everything is grounded in the Divine, then how is one to evaluate your assertion? And if one may not objectively evaluate your assertion, then why ought one to consider it as other than your personal illusion?
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News