Re: Criticism of philosophical materialism (and a comment on someone2)


"urthogie" <urthogie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1178210814.335565.16880@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On May 3, 12:38 pm, "Robert Barstead" <barste...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

....snip


As far as I can tell, SomeoneN didn't make any argument at all. If
you
think otherwise, perhaps you would like to summarize his argument
here.
Are
you capable of doing this? Give it a try. The exercise might give
you a
better appreciation of our responses to him.

Bob Barstead

Like I said, he's a goofball, but many of the responses to him were
excessive and irrational in my view.

If you can't even summarize his "argument", how did you reach the
conclusion
that the responses to him were excessive and irrational?

Bob Barstead

By looking at those responses. If people claim they can get evidence
that they simply can't get, or deny that things exist when we know
they do, it doesn't matter what they're responding too-- they're being
excessive and irrational.


So you can't summarize his argument, and you cite no specific examples of
people claiming that they "can get evidence that they simply can't get".
Very weak indeed.

At least with this series of posts you've abandoned the idiotic robot
analogy. I suppose that's progress. Now if you'd only learn something
about evidence and argument then maybe we could make some progress.

Bob Barstead

.