Atheist's inability to know how the truth and reality works.

[Tercon]

Neither of those things, actually.

And when it comes to our refutations of our arguments? Do you have belief or unbelief with respect to those?
Are you denying that belief is necessary for the knowledge that our refutations of your arguments are true?

Actually I would just like for you to explain how and why my arguments false and illogical.

How athletic of you. Does this abyss actually exist? If not, then how can this claim possibly be true?

Presently your abyss spans from your left ear to your right ear. And I am not claiming that there is any truth existing in that expanse.

I am reasoning with them, sharing my thoughts without evasion or insults.

Actually what you are doing is showing everyone how and why the truth and reality isn't known to you.

 

[Tetsugaku]

Actually I would just like for you to explain how and why my arguments false and illogical.

See anyone of my prior posts to you. Note how you didn't answer any of what I just asked you. Here's what you dodged:

And when it comes to our refutations of our arguments? Do you have belief or unbelief with respect to those?
Are you denying that belief is necessary for the knowledge that our refutations of your arguments are true?

Presently your abyss spans from your left ear to your right ear. And I am not claiming that there is any truth existing in that expanse.

Ah, more insults. Again, does this abyss exist? If not, how can what you just said be true?

Actually what you are doing is showing everyone how and why the truth and reality isn't known to you.

Strawman and projection.

 

[Tetsugaku]

Am I not a believer who believes in the truth and reality of God?

It seems you are an unbeliever in many things, such as the truth of refutations of your arguments, the existence of atheists, rocks and trees, the abyss you imagine yourself to be spanning, normal epistemology, the meanings of words, and objective reality in general.

 

[Tiburon]

All unbelievers in God's truth and reality (His Kingdom) disbelieve belief is capable of making the truth and reality known to them.
As if YOU "don't believe" "belief is sufficient to make the truth known", then you disbelieve in belief's ability to make the truth known to you and this now becomes your default position that is impossible to make the truth known to you. This wouldn't be a problem, but in reality; belief is still necessary in order to make reality known to you.

Strawman.
You still don't understand the difference between necessary and sufficient.
You have yet to provide any justification for believing, that what you claim, is actually the truth. As you previously agreed "no-one believes something for no reason". So what is your reason?

 

[mikeT]

Strawman and more projecting.

Am I not a believer who believes in the truth and reality of God?

Dishonesty and more willful ignorance.

You're an unbeliever who disbelieves belief's ability to make falsehoods known to you as truths.

Thus, according to you, you cannot know truth or reality.

 

[The Pixie]

Actually it isn't a "trick" at all. Rather it is knowing what and from Whom the truth in reality Originates and He has a Believing Mind. So, we too require a believing mind in order to make His truth and reality known to us.

I do not feel guilt.

Does that mean that I must therefore know what and from whom the truth originates?

And as I do not believe in God, that must mean God does not exist.

Including deceiving others into thinking there is no means in which the truth and reality is known. And your punishment for doing so is your own exclusion from the truth and reality of God.

We are talking about feeling guilt.

Actually employing indentured illegal immigrates to operate farms (plantations) today is slavery too; that is occurring right in under your nose and the Biden administration even encourages such slavery and is the governing body who is making this possible.

Indentured servitude is a form of slavery in which a person is contracted to work for a lower salary or without salary for a specific number amount of time. The contracted slavery is called an "indenture", and even some enter into it "voluntarily" for purported eventual compensation or debt repayment to pay off the debt they owe to the cartels and/or a contractor in the US. And may even include an imposed judicial punishment if not fulfilled.

Slavery is occurring around us if not in all countries, then most.

None of that makes slavery right.

If I owned a slave I would feel guilt. It I picked up a stick on Saturday, I would not. This is the opposite of the morality of the Bible.

How about remaining complicit when governments around the world including your own enslave people today right in under your nose. And your virtue signaling about what occurred in the past; even hundreds and thousands of years ago in which we right now can't doing nothing about, because it occurred in the past.
What about the slavery occurring today seen over by leftist governments under another name like "unrestricted immigration", do you at all feel guilty about that? Or do you lie to yourself and say this isn't slavery?

Do you feel guilty about that? Or does your faith allow you to turn a blind eye to it?

Or is your point that slavery is morally okay?

Strawman. Actually what he meant was that you can't look at a woman and lust in your heart after her, because this type of lusting and fantasizing is what leads to taking action and pursuing her.

Not quite. He says even if you think about it with no intention of doing it and no chance of it happened that is as bas as if you actually did it.

Seems to be saying you might as well go for it!

Strawman. That's not what I am doing here. You need to believe that belief makes the truth and reality known to you, otherwise; truth and reality is unknowable to you.

Irrelevant; we are talking about feeling guilt.

What does not caring "about the truth (in a philosophical sense)" even mean?

They do not care about the big truths such as whether God exists, even if they do care if their spouse if lying to them.

 

[Tercon]

I do not feel guilt.

Does that mean that I must therefore know what and from whom the truth originates?

And as I do not believe in God, that must mean God does not exist.

No. That just means that your unbelief of belief's ability to make the truth and reality known to you as made the truth and reality unknowable to you. That's the consequence of your unbelief of God's ordained means of making the truth and reality known.

We are talking about feeling guilt.

None of that makes slavery right.

Actually that too is slavery and your indifference to it shows your lack of morality.

If I owned a slave I would feel guilt. It I picked up a stick on Saturday, I would not. This is the opposite of the morality of the Bible.

No. Your inability to see what is today slavery and your indifference "is the opposite of the morality of the Bible".

You have a morality that values pride, wealth, fame and power over biblical morality that values truth, morality, kindness, empathy and mercy.

And you are fully onboard for the enslavement of anyone fool enough to listen to you; when you don't even know how the truth and reality is known.

Do you feel guilty about that? Or does your faith allow you to turn a blind eye to it?

No, because I am not on the side of those who support it, as our side as been trying to stop it. And I am not turning "a blind eye to it", rather I am pointing it out and telling you that this modern form of slavery we are actually able to do something about; 'stop voting for authoritarian regimes' like the Biden regime who support open borders.

Or is your point that slavery is morally okay?

No. The point is that there is modern day slavery right under your nose that doesn't seem to bother you at all that you are able to do something about and you refuse to. Leftists support slavery today.

Not quite. He says even if you think about it with no intention of doing it and no chance of it happened that is as bas as if you actually did it.

No, you just don't know what it means. If you keep thinking about it; then eventually you will act on it.

Seems to be saying you might as well go for it!

Of course, if you keep thinking about it. But as believers we have more important things to think and dwell upon; like eternity.

Irrelevant; we are talking about feeling guilt.

Yes, the guilt you should have for supporting modern day slavery.

They do not care about the big truths such as whether God exists, even if they do care if their spouse if lying to them.

Actually it is not caring about and disbelieving of how the truth, reality and morality necessarily exists and is known that leads to having a lying spouse to deal with.

 

[Tercon]

Dishonesty and more willful ignorance.

You're an unbeliever who disbelieves belief's ability to make falsehoods known to you as truths.

Thus, according to you, you cannot know truth or reality.

Strawman and projection, no silly that's according to you.

 

[Tercon]

Strawman. You still don't understand the difference between necessary and sufficient.

Sure I do. And you are conflating sufficient and insufficient, as if your claim is that belief is insufficient to make the truth and reality known to you, then that is insufficiency and not sufficiency.
I believe that a belief in reality is sufficient and fully capable to make the truth and reality known to me. And you disbelieve that belief is capable of making the truth and reality known to you, while fully knowing at the same time that your belief is necessary and must occur in reality before the truth is known to you. But I am quite certain that your unbelief (atheism) is insufficient to make the truth known to you.

You have yet to provide any justification for believing, that what you claim, is actually the truth. As you previously agreed "no-one believes something for no reason". So what is your reason?

Because knowledge of the truth and reality is impossible without first believing it exists and occurs. Knowledge comes after belief and not before or in other words belief is a form of knowledge.

 

[Tetsugaku]

Knowledge comes after belief and not before or in other words belief is a form of knowledge.

That's plainly contradictory.

 

[Algor]

That's plainly contradictory.

Klein bottle epistemology, I think.

I just made that up, but it can't be original...

Holy cow. First google hit:

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/437/1/012024

We present a unified principle for science that surmounts dualism, in terms of torsion fields and the non-orientable surfaces, notably the Klein Bottle and its logic, the Möbius strip and the projective plane. We apply it to the complex numbers and cosmology, to non-linear systems integrating the issue of hyperbolic divergences with the change of orientability, to the biomechanics of vision and the mammal heart, to the morphogenesis of crustal shapes on Earth in connection to the wavefronts of gravitation, elasticity and electromagnetism, to pattern recognition of artificial images and visual recognition, to neurology and the topographic maps of the sensorium, to perception, in particular of music. We develop it in terms of the fundamental 2:1 resonance inherent to the Möbius strip and the Klein Bottle, the minimal surfaces representation of the wavefronts, and the non-dual Klein Bottle logic inherent to pattern recognition, to the harmonic functions and vector fields that lay at the basis of geophysics and physics at large. We discuss the relation between the topographic maps of the sensorium, and the issue of turning inside-out of the visual world as a general principle for cognition, topological chemistry, cell biology and biological morphogenesis in particular in embryology

 

[Tercon]

Klein bottle epistemology, I think.

I just made that up, but it can't be original...

Holy cow. First google hit:

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/437/1/012024

We present a unified principle for science that surmounts dualism, in terms of torsion fields and the non-orientable surfaces, notably the Klein Bottle and its logic, the Möbius strip and the projective plane. We apply it to the complex numbers and cosmology, to non-linear systems integrating the issue of hyperbolic divergences with the change of orientability, to the biomechanics of vision and the mammal heart, to the morphogenesis of crustal shapes on Earth in connection to the wavefronts of gravitation, elasticity and electromagnetism, to pattern recognition of artificial images and visual recognition, to neurology and the topographic maps of the sensorium, to perception, in particular of music. We develop it in terms of the fundamental 2:1 resonance inherent to the Möbius strip and the Klein Bottle, the minimal surfaces representation of the wavefronts, and the non-dual Klein Bottle logic inherent to pattern recognition, to the harmonic functions and vector fields that lay at the basis of geophysics and physics at large. We discuss the relation between the topographic maps of the sensorium, and the issue of turning inside-out of the visual world as a general principle for cognition, topological chemistry, cell biology and biological morphogenesis in particular in embryology

That's plainly contradictory.

maybe you're minds are just upside down.

 

[Tercon]

That's plainly contradictory.

Does belief come necessarily before knowledge or after?

 

[Tetsugaku]

maybe you're minds are just upside down.

No, you just contradicted yourself. You said belief has to come before knowledge, and that belief is a form of knowledge. But that would require knowledge to come before knowledge, which is clearly nonsensical.

Does belief come necessarily before knowledge or after?

Sometimes before and sometimes simultaneously. But that wasn't the contradictory bit. The contradiction was where you went on to say that this makes belief a form of knowledge.

 

[Tercon]

No, you just contradicted yourself. You said belief has to come before knowledge, and that belief is a form of knowledge. But that would require knowledge to come before knowledge, which is clearly nonsensical.
Sometimes before and sometimes simultaneously. But that wasn't the contradictory bit. The contradiction was where you went on to say that this makes belief a form of knowledge.

Strawman. No, that would just logically entail and require belief to be knowledge. Belief is God's form of knowledge, as belief is how God forms everything that exists and is capable of receiving life; IOW possesses a believing mind.

 

[Tetsugaku]

Strawman.

You again forget to show where.

No, that would just logically entail and require belief to be knowledge...

If belief is knowledge then you can't also require it to come before knowledge.

 

[Tercon]

You again forget to show where.

If belief is knowledge then you can't also require it to come before knowledge.

Strawman and projection. If belief is necessary for knowledge, then belief must come before in order to make knowledge. Are you done denying belief's necessity for knowledge?

 

[Tetsugaku]

Strawman and projection.

You yet again forget to even try to show where.

If belief is necessary for knowledge, then belief must come before in order to make knowledge. Are you done denying belief's necessity for knowledge?

I'm not denying belief's necessity for knowledge. Please pay attention. The problem is that you made TWO claims which are incompatible with each other - that belief must come before knowledge, AND that belief is a form of knowledge. It is this second claim that is tripping you up, as these cannot both be true.

 

[Tercon]

You yet again forget to even try to show where.

See below.

I'm not denying belief's necessity for knowledge. Please pay attention. The problem is that you made TWO claims which are incompatible with each other - that belief must come before knowledge, AND that belief is a form of knowledge. It is this second claim that is tripping you up, as these cannot both be true.

Strawman and projection. No, that's what's "tripping you" up and your strawman.

If I believe that knowledge comes from belief, then I must believe that belief is what forms knowledge.

The contradiction comes from your unbelief that "knowledge comes from belief", then how can belief form knowledge. But if I believe that "knowledge comes from belief", then I must also believe "belief is a form knowledge" or belief forms knowledge. The contradiction you are picking up comes from your own unbelief of what I believe. Understand? Are you really saying that you can't see that, as I don't know how it can be made anymore plainer for you.

 

[Tetsugaku]

See below.

You didn't support your charges below either.

Strawman and projection. No, that's what's "tripping you" up and your strawman.

You still haven't shown where.

If I believe that knowledge comes from belief, then I must believe that belief is what forms knowledge.

The contradiction comes from your unbelief that "knowledge comes from belief", then how can belief form knowledge. But if I believe that "knowledge comes from belief", then I must also believe "belief is a form knowledge" or belief forms knowledge. The contradiction you are picking up comes from your own unbelief of what I believe. Understand? Are you really saying that you can't see that, as I don't know how it can be made anymore plainer for you.

You are changing what you said. But that's progress, I guess. Knowledge can "come from" belief in the sense of coming after belief, and that belief can come to "form knowledge" by becoming a component part of that later knowledge. But that doesn't make belief itself "a form of knowledge". If belief is ever able to exist before knowledge, then obviously it can't also be that same knowledge which doesn't yet exist.

It seems unlikely, but perhaps an analogy may help. With the skill of a sculptor, clay can come to form a statue, right? But does that make the clay a form of the statue? Or would we rather say that the statue is a form of the clay?