Specter of Reason

Presuppositional apologists make the following two claims: 1. All valid arguments do not beg the question. 2. All knowledge presupposes the existence of God. Atheism may here be defined as any explicit or implicit denial of the existence of God. Thus, if one presupposes the existence of God in an argument, one begs the question against atheism. Now consider that all valid arguments presuppose knowledge. Combining this with the second claim above, we find that all valid arguments presuppose the existence of God. Therefore, all valid arguments beg the question against atheism. Therefore, all valid arguments beg the question . This contradicts the first claim. Therefore, at least one of the two claims is invalid. To avoid contradiction, presuppositional apologists must abandon one of their two claims. They must either claim that valid arguments can beg the question, or they must claim that there is knowledge which does not presuppose t...

I’ve been involved in a discussion at Triablogue , a Christian blog whose “default mode” is Calvinism. A couple weeks ago, I hadn’t even heard of Triablogue. Then they picked up on my harsh treatment of Rhology and decided to make a point of criticizing my arguments and views. I’ve been trying to respond to all of the posts aimed at me, but there are many I haven’t gotten to at all, and others which I haven’t been able to respond to in full. The discussion might be dying down, but I can’t be sure. At the moment there are a total of three Triablogue discussion threads devoted to me (links: one , two , three ). I don't know if I should be honored or dismayed. I can’t say I’m impressed with the argumentative tactics being employed over there. There are a few contributors who might be genuine, thoughtful and sincere, and who I could probably have a simple, intelligent discussion with. Those few are unfortunately overshadowed by a handful of arrogant, manipulative, and seemingl...