If you can't disprove it utterly, it could exist :3 Not to say that it -should- exist, I mean, I don't want to see Cthulu walking around, but no one can disprove that God exists, it's impossible to do.OhJohnNo said:
Stupidest thing that someone has come back at you with in an argument.
- Thread starter Pebblig
- Start date
This is definitely true, but what you originally said seemed completely different. Not being able to disprove his existence is one thing, saying that he definitely exists because someone believes in him is quite another.Seives-Sliver said:
Indeed, I probably could have worded that a tad bit better, but often enough Captain Hindsight doesn't visit me until hours, if not days after the fact.OhJohnNo said:
I understand the concept of it well enough, it's already been brought to my attention how I worded it rather poorly.Eamar said:
Well, I was trying to use it as analogy for how if a person believes in God, then God exists, rather than someone being able to disprove God. Which I fixed the post so it should be more sensible, or at the very least, less open to being picked apart.Eamar said:
I see. Best steer clear of using philosophical concepts as analogies in future, I guess... leads to all kinds of headaches. It's a problem with philosophy in general- being picked apart is pretty much the nature of the beastSeives-Sliver said:
Sorry, what? This is the first time in a long while that my mouth just dropped. I cannot believe that someone said this.Spectral Dragon said:
OT: As usual, I get "You're gay" about a billion times in any given argument.
Dumbest thing I had... Someone called atheists a bunch of "genocidal neo-nazi's" and I simply replied "Hitler and the Nazis were closer to being christian than atheist" then he quickly replied with "Godwin's law at work again for the atheists!"
...as if he didn't mention them first, and I was merely making an observation off of HIS "point", plus Godwin's law doesn't state "discredit the entire conversation because I made an observance!" it simply says "It's bound to happen".
...The whole Godwin's law thing really gets me, the only reason I ever resort to using a Nazi analogy is if I believe the opposition is too stupid to understand any other form of point.
...as if he didn't mention them first, and I was merely making an observation off of HIS "point", plus Godwin's law doesn't state "discredit the entire conversation because I made an observance!" it simply says "It's bound to happen".
...The whole Godwin's law thing really gets me, the only reason I ever resort to using a Nazi analogy is if I believe the opposition is too stupid to understand any other form of point.
Ahh prayer, the best way to do nothing about a problem. The only reason that gets so under my skin as well is because I know FAR too many people that'll use prayer for ANYTHING. "Going to the mall <3" "Oh I'll pray for you!" Really people? Even if there is a God he wouldn't care about such insignificant things such as our daily duties. If anything he'd be looking at us like a bunch of ants on an anthill, does he care? no. can he tell the difference? no. does he occasionally get bored and pull out the magnifying glass?..Leon Declis said:
She was dead serious about it. She's hardcore christian to the point of...redisforever said:
"Well, you didn't SEE the big bang, so you can't be sure it happened!"
"Well, if you heard a crash, and saw a cat run out of a room, and you see a smashed cup in there, you can't be sure the cat knocked over the cup either, can you?"
"... I believe God saw the cat knock over the cup!"
And that's... Well, logical to her. She thinks nothing of my earthly logic, preferring her heavenly logic. Or something. There's plenty more quotes from that debate, but that's not why I'm he- oh wait. It's just a lot that require more context. But not believing in logic... I've never heard anything like it before or after.
Captcha: quotations. Oddly fitting. I'm quoting someone quoting me quoting someone else.
Her: "I've never seen Ghostbusters before, sorry I didn't get your joke."
Me: "How could you not have seen Ghostbusters? That movie's been out longer than you've been alive!"
Her: "I'm sorry, I was too busy being molested by my father when I was that age to bother watching movies."
Me: "...There may be less appropriate times to reveal that information, but damned if I can think of any right now."
Me: "How could you not have seen Ghostbusters? That movie's been out longer than you've been alive!"
Her: "I'm sorry, I was too busy being molested by my father when I was that age to bother watching movies."
Me: "...There may be less appropriate times to reveal that information, but damned if I can think of any right now."
the dumbest comeback I hear, and hear often, is some variation on "the unpopularity of my idea means it must be right". I'm sure you have all heard some jackass say this, I've seen it a couple times around here but my personal favorite instance was from some protestors at work stating that eating GMO's will cause your tissues to break down and the lack of evidence is clearly proof that this is true.
Also... Why is my captcha a Dunkin donuts ad? We don't have those in Winnipeg.
Also... Why is my captcha a Dunkin donuts ad? We don't have those in Winnipeg.
If I have a disagreement with one of my friends, no matter where we are or what we are discussing, he will tell me to prove my side of things there and then but, because I can't for whatever reason (like not being able to get on the internet right at that moment), it automatically proves him right. If I tell him to prove his side of things, he will just tell me to prove mine. It gets really annoying really quickly
Not necessarily. When I'm arguing religious people they tend to use idiotic arguments like "it says so in the Bible" or "you'll see when you die and when in hell you fry". I respond to those idiocies with "whatever" because I have no desire to deal with idiots.TizzytheTormentor said:
I find that if someone disagrees but deep down knows you're right and doesnt really have an argument they just go for grammar as a last resort. Like you'll give them a 5 paragraph response clearly proving them wrong but you'll accidently say "your" instead of "you're" and its like "its you're! you're so stupid, i win!" Grammar is always the last stand for the man with no argument.
And I also love how most uneducated morons on here suddenly become philosophy and logical thinking majors on here, whipping out terms like strawman or ad hominem to sound smart. Like its an internet argument, who gives a shit?
And I also love how most uneducated morons on here suddenly become philosophy and logical thinking majors on here, whipping out terms like strawman or ad hominem to sound smart. Like its an internet argument, who gives a shit?