• @myslsl
    link
    010 months ago

    How do you know my point is subjective if you do not understand my point in the first place?

      • @myslsl
        link
        010 months ago

        I’m “oh-so-focused” on that because you’re “oh-so-focused” on telling me about “empirical investigations” that disprove the existence of gods, which have literally nothing at all to do with my point.

          • @myslsl
            link
            010 months ago

            The lack of reading comprehension here is definitely on your end.

            Me (sans-snarkyness) in the original comment you replied to: “Hey, the field of philosophy where this stuff is studied is called philosophy of religion. Proofs for and against the existence of a god have been critiqued to shit there. You should read about it.”

            You: “Oh yeah! Well I can disprove any god you like.”

            Congrats? Do you want a gold star or something?

            Go study philosophy of religion. These kinds of proofs and disproofs are part of that field along with their critiques. That’s the point I’m making in the comment you originally replied to. Nothing about my point is subjective.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              210 months ago

              As I stated, you’re functionally illiterate. I’d recommend reviewing your basic literature curriculum from the start.

              From

              Point me to a god and I’ll dismantle them.

              You understood

              Well I can disprove any god you like.

              Instead of the well established concept

              Any supernatural phenomenon, upon rigorous delineation, becomes provably false

              • @myslsl
                link
                010 months ago

                Sorry for getting your panties in a twist over paraphrasing your totally irrelevant point. Please understand, I don’t give a shit about what you think you can prove or disprove.

                Any supernatural phenomenon, upon rigorous delineation, becomes provably false

                Great point, one of the MAJOR challenges with arguments about whether a god does or does not exist is that the whole notion of a god is incredibly vague and not “rigorously delineated” in a general sense. Literally any introductory course in philosophy of religion would point this out.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  110 months ago

                  Great point, one of the MAJOR challenges with arguments about whether a god does or does not exist is that the whole notion of a god is incredibly vague and not “rigorously delineated” in a general sense. Literally any introductory course in philosophy of religion would point this out.

                  So not only are you functionally illiterate, but you’re also largely ignorant of the field you claim to have some sort of knowledge on. Great going, chief. Just a little headsup - philosophy isn’t short for “we talk about shit while holding a beer”.

                  • @myslsl
                    link
                    -110 months ago

                    Have you studied philosophy of religion? Sounds a lot like you haven’t. Maybe reading up on it will help you? You can fix your reading comprehension and also learn not to say the dumbest shit possible on topics of religion. It’s really a win-win for you.