Thursday, September 23, 2010
PB: Presuppositional Baloney
By now the three of you that actually read my rants have probably encountered Presuppositional Baloney. Practicers of this ancient art (two or three years) ask people how they "account for logic" according to their worldviews. Of course, the whole thing is nonsense. No one accounts for logic. It is necessarily axiomatic in any worldview. Any attempt to account for logic must use logic. Why do the Baloney-ists do this? It is a tactic to deflect examination of their postulated god. They demand an "accounting for logic" any time someone dares to ask for evidence of their alleged god. This tells me that even they don't believe their god is real.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
So your Skepticism of Presuppositionalism is with Foundationalism, or even Reliabilism?
Wow
Dan:
I have concluded that presuppositionalism is inherently dishonest. People who are sincere in their beliefs never resort to the tactic. While people may honestly dispute premises, it is always dishonest to require an "accounting" for premises. But I'm sure you know that.
Pvb,
Your prejudices are showing, the entire theory of knowledge (philosophy) is based on accounting for premises. But I'm sure you know that.
I am one to believe, although not yet justified, that you have no account for justified true beliefs.
No, Dan, all worldviews, all philosophies, all belief systems start with some set of beliefs which cannot be justified without reliance on assuming they are true. Some people like to play word games and claim that they have "justified" their premises. But it doesn't convince anyone who doesn't already believe those premises.
Any attempt to account for logic must use logic.
More importantly:
Any attempts to discount logic must use logic.
Post a Comment