Question for the Author of the Question for the arborist Thread

Nouveau

Well-known member
Just because you don't like what's being said doesn't mean it isn't true silly. Unbelievers like you destroy people, pretending that you can have knowledge of the truth and reality without believing it first silly.
You're strawmanning again. I've never denied that knowledge requires belief.

More strawmanning. YOU can't know the truth and reality without believing it first, no matter how hard you lie silly.
What was my strawman? Quote it.

JTB is belief silly.
Yes, but not all belief is JTB. The subset of belief that is JTB is what we refer to as knowledge.

Neither "fictional knowledge" nor "knowledge of fiction" relates to reality.
Knowledge of fiction relates to reality. For instance, in reality George Lucas created Star Wars and wrote that Vader was Luke's father. This is knowledge of fiction, and it is true in reality (i.e. it is true that this is what Lucas wrote).

If all knowledge of the truth and reality requires a justified true belief and atheism is just a lack of belief, then atheism can't be known to exist or occur in reality silly. I mean really, if truth and reality requires and entails a believing mind and atheism requires and entails a unbelieving mind, then how is atheism known to exist in reality silly.
Atheism exists in reality because not everyone believes in God.
 

Tercon

Well-known member
You're strawmanning again. I've never denied that knowledge requires belief.

Not true. You pretend that you can know the truth and reality without believing first and that's a lie.

What was my strawman? Quote it.

That is true, but irrelevant to my point, which is that you reject the truth that knowledge is JTB.
You choose unbelief instead when this truth is presented to you.

The above is a misrepresentation of my position. I am the believer here and you the unbeliever. So, my position is for and from a position of belief and what is necessary in order to make the truth and reality known to me. And yours is against belief and for unbelief as the mode by which the truth and reality is known. You can't have it both ways silly.

Yes, but not all belief is JTB. The subset of belief that is JTB is what we refer to as knowledge.

Irrelevant, because belief STILL MUST occur before the truth and reality is made known to you. It is belief that makes the truth and reality known and you can't know anything about the truth or reality without belief.

Knowledge of fiction relates to reality. For instance, in reality George Lucas created Star Wars and wrote that Vader was Luke's father. This is knowledge of fiction, and it is true in reality (i.e. it is true that this is what Lucas wrote).

Strawman. Stars Wars does NOT represent nor depict reality silly.

Atheism exists in reality because not everyone believes in God.

Atheism is just a lack of belief and lack of something that does exist and occur in reality in this case belief does NOT represent or depict something that does exist or occur in reality.

Atheism is the delusion that a state of unbelief exists in reality, when unbelief just refers to nothing knowable in reality, because ALL knowledge of the truth and reality requires belief and NOT unbelief silly.
 

Nouveau

Well-known member
Not true. You pretend that you can know the truth and reality without believing first and that's a lie.
Quote me saying that belief is not required for knowledge then. Or admit you are strawmanning.

The above is a misrepresentation of my position. I am the believer here and you the unbeliever. So, my position is for and from a position of belief and what is necessary in order to make the truth and reality known to me. And yours is against belief and for unbelief as the mode by which the truth and reality is known. You can't have it both ways silly.
It was not a strawman. When it comes to the JTB account of knowledge, you are the unbeliever and I am the believer. You refuse to believe that knowledge is defined as JTB, even though you keep refusing to offer any alternative definition.

Irrelevant, because belief STILL MUST occur before the truth and reality is made known to you. It is belief that makes the truth and reality known and you can't know anything about the truth or reality without belief.
You also can't know anything about reality if your beliefs are not true and justified. No-one denies that belief is necessary for knowledge. The point you keep failing to understand is that belief alone is not sufficient for knowledge.

Strawman. Stars Wars does NOT represent nor depict reality silly.
Thank you for labeling your own comment here as a strawman. Obviously I never said that Star Wars depicts reality. What I said was that "George Lucas wrote that Vader was Luke's father" depicts reality, because in reality that is what Lucas wrote.

Atheism is just a lack of belief and lack of something that does exist and occur in reality in this case belief does NOT represent or depict something that does exist or occur in reality.

Atheism is the delusion that a state of unbelief exists in reality, when unbelief just refers to nothing knowable in reality, because ALL knowledge of the truth and reality requires belief and NOT unbelief silly.
Atheism exists because people exist who don't believe in God, just as baldness exists because people exist without hair.

Theism is the delusion that a God exists in reality. All knowledge requires truth and justification and NOT just belief, silly.
 

Tercon

Well-known member
Quote me saying that belief is not required for knowledge then. Or admit you are strawmanning.
This is a strawman. vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
It was not a strawman. When it comes to the JTB account of knowledge, you are the unbeliever and I am the believer. You refuse to believe that knowledge is defined as JTB, even though you keep refusing to offer any alternative definition.

It was not a strawman. When it comes to the JTB account of knowledge, you are the unbeliever and I am the believer. You refuse to believe that knowledge is defined as JTB, even though you keep refusing to offer any alternative definition.

Strawman.

Do you believe that Justified True Belief is knowledge of the truth and reality?
OR
Do you disbelieve that a Justified True Belief is knowledge of the truth and reality?

You also can't know anything about reality if your beliefs are not true and justified. No-one denies that belief is necessary for knowledge. The point you keep failing to understand is that belief alone is not sufficient for knowledge.

Do you believe that Justified True Belief is knowledge of the truth and reality?
OR
Do you disbelieve that a Justified True Belief is knowledge of the truth and reality?

Thank you for labeling your own comment here as a strawman.

Strawman.

Obviously I never said that Star Wars depicts reality.

Actually I said that:

Strawman. Stars Wars does NOT represent nor depict reality silly.

What I said was that "George Lucas wrote that Vader was Luke's father" depicts reality, because in reality that is what Lucas wrote.

And I didn't say otherwise.

Atheism exists because people exist who don't believe in God, just as baldness exists because people exist without hair.

Reification of unbelief. And conflating a physical object (a bald head) and unbelief. Atheism is just unbelief and the lack of belief, so it has no object of belief. But a bald head does have an object of belief.

Theism is the delusion that a God exists in reality. All knowledge requires truth and justification and NOT just belief, silly.

Belief in the God of the Bible is the belief that the truth, logic, consciousness, existence, morality and reality itself is the result of God's believing mind, because outside of a believing mind none of these things are knowable and nor can they be known to occur. It is ONLY a believing mind that has the capacity to make these things realized. And without a believing mind nothing is realizable.
 

Nouveau

Well-known member
This is a strawman: "It was not a strawman. When it comes to the JTB account of knowledge, you are the unbeliever and I am the believer. You refuse to believe that knowledge is defined as JTB, even though you keep refusing to offer any alternative definition."
How is that a strawman? You've repeatedly and explicitly rejected the JTB account, making it very clear that you are an unbeliever in the JTB definition.

Do you believe that Justified True Belief is knowledge of the truth and reality?
OR
Do you disbelieve that a Justified True Belief is knowledge of the truth and reality?
The former. I believe the JTB account, according to which all knowledge is true, and belief alone is not sufficient for knowledge. Do you believe the JTB account, or do you have unbelief in knowledge being defined as JTB?

Actually I said that: Stars Wars does NOT represent nor depict reality silly.
Yes, that was your strawman. No-one is saying that Star Wars represents reality.

Reification of unbelief. And conflating a physical object (a bald head) and unbelief. Atheism is just unbelief and the lack of belief, so it has no object of belief. But a bald head does have an object of belief.
If baldness exists and has an object of belief, then so does atheism. Both refer to properties of existing people - respectively, the properties of not having hair, and of not having any belief in God.

Belief in the God of the Bible is the belief that the truth, logic, consciousness, existence, morality and reality itself is the result of God's believing mind, because outside of a believing mind none of these things are knowable and nor can they be known to occur. It is ONLY a believing mind that has the capacity to make these things realized. And without a believing mind nothing is realizable.
No, belief in God is just that - belief in God. The rest is your own personal delusion that other believers need not share.
 

Electric Skeptic

Well-known member
This is a strawman.
Here's an excellent example of you not knowing what the word 'strawman' means.

Two posts ago you stated, of Nouveau:

"You pretend that you can know the truth and reality without believing first"​

In his next post, in response to that statement by you, Nouveau replied:

"Quote me saying that belief is not required for knowledge then."​

He asked you a question directly responsive to your own explicit claim. That's as un-strawman as you can possibly get.

You were wrong, just as you are every time you use the word 'strawman'.

No doubt you'll call this post a 'strawman'.
 

Tercon

Well-known member
Here's an excellent example of you not knowing what the word 'strawman' means.

Two posts ago you stated, of Nouveau:

"You pretend that you can know the truth and reality without believing first"​

In his next post, in response to that statement by you, Nouveau replied:

"Quote me saying that belief is not required for knowledge then."​

He asked you a question directly responsive to your own explicit claim. That's as un-strawman as you can possibly get.

You were wrong, just as you are every time you use the word 'strawman'.

No doubt you'll call this post a 'strawman'.

Strawman.
 
Top