Cephus

Faith without reason is worthless though. You're just making asinine claims without a shred of evidence and expecting anyone to take you seriously because you've accepted a ridiculous position hook, line and sinker.

As soon as you start talking about faith, you've lost the argument.

__________________
I'm not anti-religion, I'm anti-hypocrisy.

Blog me! http://BitchSpot.JadeDragonOnline.com

obvious Child

Do you realize that your ENTIRE argument can be summed up in one word?

MAGIC

Hymns

What if I used faith and reason? Besides, I have already proven all of this to myself; now I'm trying to prove it to others. I come from a position of certainty, so i do have a shred of evidence. Many shreds, actually, and it is not a ridiculous position.

__________________
être et durer (to be and to last).

Lachean

The two are mutually exclusive. If you had reason for what you had faith in, then why call it faith? Of what use is faith in things you have evidence for, as the late Pope put it.

Just because you are certain, does not mean that what prompted this dogma constitutes "evidence." But we are all more than willing to hear you out; whats your evidence?

__________________
"The original, and still the best!" - Grifter

Cephus

Proving it to yourself means nothing. People who sit on street corners and argue with invisible friends have already "proven it to themselves" but the rest of us recognize that they're insane. You don't come from a position of certainty, you come from a position of gullibility, you've bought into a load of hooey and now you want everyone else to tell you it's okay.

Go back to talking to your invisible friend on the street corner and come back when you can factually prove your invisible friend exists.

obvious Child

Sssh. You don't to make his magical, invisible friends angry.

Hymns

Not neccessarily. Reason is not made up of a set of rules or guidelines to follow to arrive at a conclusion. Nor is faith. Two men may use good reasoning to solve the same problem and arrive at two completely different answers. How can you say that faith and reason are mutually exclusive when one man's faith and reason may be intertwined?

My evidence is not for you, its for me. Imagine a man who has seen Atlantis. He is going to tell people that he has seen it, but will try to convince them in a way other than saying, "I have seen Atlantis".

scourge99

There are good ways to reason and there are bad ways to reason. If you can't define HOW you reason and what methods of reasoning you use that's VERY bad!

This is a non-sequitor. We are not discussing solutions. We are discussing the reasoning that used for ascertaining truth or a high probability of truth.

Faith is provably BAD reasoning. Its actually a lack of reasoning altogether.

Proving to yourself that you have seen Atlantis is NOT the problem. Its proving it to others. Likewise if I talked to Zeus the otherday I don't need to prove it to anyone. But if I want to convince other people that I had tea and krumpets with Zeus then that's the problem we are discussing.

__________________
Petty Desire or Grand Ambition?

Cephus

If it's only for you, stop posting about it. But if you do insist on posting that you have evidence, then expect to be challenged, and if your so-called evidence is as ridiculous as it has been so far, expect to be laughed at.

Lachean

Actually there are rules, they're called logical fallacies, and if you break them then your logic and thus your conclusion can be called into question.

Yes but only the man who's logic followed from true premises without fallacy that is to be believed. You're right that a person can arrive at a true conclusion with bad logic, by sheer luck though.

Because either you have good reasons (or evidence) for what you believe, or you do not.

You are entitled to your own beliefs, but not your own evidence. "Evidence" is objectively true and can be verified, its not a subjective notion.