This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

If you believe in any of the Abrahamic faiths, you believe in literal magic.

#61ryan0991Posted 3/16/2013 8:55:02 PM(edited)
From: jasten | #056
So.. back to the "I want evidence, not actually use logic and formulate an argument!"? Look, I am not saying magic exists or doesn't exist. I am pointing out that you can have a logical and sound argument that magic existed or exists. The same way you can reverse that and counter with a no it doesn't. But neither or more logical, which is the claim he was making.

Of course, he probably doesn't understand the actual definition of logical and is using it as a substitute as probable or "realistic".

Can you give an example of a logical argument in favor of magic? Just to get an idea of exactly what you mean here...

Though given we have anecdotal mentions worldwide... that actually does operate as a form of evidence.

A very poor form of evidence. Especially when it comes to the supernatural.
---
http://www.xboxlc.com/cards/sig/newblack/BOBtheMASTER.jpg
Could care less = you care at least somewhat. Couldn't care less = you don't care at all.
#62OrangeWizardPosted 3/16/2013 8:53:51 PM
From: mrplainswalker | #058
You've obviously never taken a history class in your life. There are ways of addressing credibility, reliability, validity, etc. The idea that "Everything written down is equally credible" is laughably stupid.


To give context, I was responding to TC who said "I think it comes down to what evidence there is to believe in it, and if that evidence is sound..[list of things with only written and eyewitness evidence]..But it is illogical to believe in them."

He did not mention anything about credibility, reliability, etc. He only implied that, keeping in line with his topic, that "because there's no evidence (other than written evidence), we shouldn't believe in it"
---
Trolling and making valid arguments are not mutually exclusive things.
#63mrplainswalkerPosted 3/16/2013 9:21:30 PM
Sound evidence implicitly includes things like credibility. Even if they actually did exist, one-source eyewitness accounts that fly in the face of all reason are not sufficient. After all, it's possible for a liar to tell the truth; that doesn't mean it's reasonable to believe them.

So yeah, I'm not understanding your criticism of TC.
---
Failure to at least give this show a chance gives anyone you see the right to punch you in the face.
- Spiritclaw on Battlestar Galactica