First rebuttal part 3

he's a moron I'm afraid. I think it may be some congenital defect

Response to part 4 of his rebuttal: He managed to make one coherent point and that is that colors are different parts of the electromagnetic spectrum. Shwanerd however fundamentally misunderstood my point about colors being abstract objects and properties. and even if we accepted that light isn't an abstract and isn't a property and can be reduced, it does nothing to the existence of other abstract entities and properties. He never even onced addressed my arguments for mind/body dualism

Category:

Education

Tags:

• shwanerd

[Ishta5]

how an atheist know what is moral. Are consequences of an act important? Always minimize both actual and potential suffering; always maximize both actual and potential happiness.

[migkillertwo]

alright. so why is it good to reduce suffering and increase pleasure?

[mikecampochiaro]

The irrational atheist has some great ammo doesn't it!?

[migkillertwo]

one of the best books I ever read

[Theologica37]

hey that was mine

"ivory tower of idiocy"

[migkillertwo]

and I stole it! MWAHAAHAHAHAHA!

[Comptech224]

It does because it contradicts one of the premises (hence making it unsound). The argument may be valid, yet it is not sound.

Morality is "philosophically interesting" because there are numerous situations where there is NO objective morality to make a decision. It is entirely up to your judgment and reason, which is typically different for each person.

[Comptech224]

My official diagnosis: I have 5 years tenure of study in this topic. You have no apparent experience at all. If you're arguing from the point of philosophy, I have the right to use VALID and SOUND philosophical concepts (such as Descartes) to defeat your point.

If I were delusional. . . Then I've already won.

[Ishta5]

evolutionary principals, the brain awards what is good for us, and gives pain when it is not. Usually not just for you but for the spices. we take care of cute things. use emotions, calculate possible outcomes from there and chose what is best for you, the ones closest to you and then the others.

[bamboo4tameshigiri]

Oh, I left out Anatomy and Physiology, another A.

[bamboo4tameshigiri]

This person? What were your grades in biology, psychology, medical law and ethics, earth science, world religions, medical terminology *and* pathology? Mine were all solid A grades. Honestly I don't care what you philosophize. I can tell this kid is working really hard at being as delusional as possible. He will grow up to regret this wasted time in theology.

[Comptech224]

Oo, goody, I think you've finally earned your video response. I will happily fuck you up considering I am not in an arts program, nor is this class I'm taking "Reason and Responsibility" an "arts" based class. Oh and mind you this person is a doctor with a medicine background.

I feel ready to undo you entirely.

[bamboo4tameshigiri]

Until you abandon these pathetic "arts" based studies and have some medicine and other applied sciences under your belt, I can't respect your opinion on this.

[Apologist325]

I don't think this guy is a very good debater.

[TheIrrationalAtheist]

ShwaTard

[poetsonghotmail]

You miss the point. The idea is that there seems to be objective morality, a natural morality inside us. One need to not believe in God for this to be the case, but if there is not a God than this natural law morality is not really objective or authoritative. It is merely an instinct.