is god a witch? made of wood? weighs the same as a duck?

Does he float? Get the wood pile! Light it up!

ezackly

Better yet... I'm a CIO/CTO of a 9 figure company, whose owner believes "Macs are sent to earth by the devil" when picking out his new phone. (Because of the Apple logo - I'm guessing. I didn't stick around long enough to ask his reasoning after laughing and going red faced when he exclaimed, "No, I'm serious!" and gave me a death stare.)

@snrgevo Macs rule, PC's drool!

@Stenz I had a Mac and it went 'rotten to the core' inside 12 months, my present P.C. has been with me for well over 7 years now and it is NOT a Mac.

@Triphid I have a seven year old Mac I still use daily, and a five. I have a 20 year old one in the basement that still works. No PCS that age though, they are crap!

@Stenz Ah, but I'll bet you don't an IT Whizz Kid in your family like I'm fortunate enough to have.

@Triphid I'm an IT Professional, I am the IT whiz kid!

a bit of WYSIWYG too.... you see a dolt, you get a dolt. eh?

a pound is a pound the whole world round. i.e. they would be equal if a pound of god could be got.

A pound is a pound.

@Donna_I But a pound of nothing, which god is in fact, is still a pound of nothing and as such weighs exactly nothing, so hay would be heavier since hay actually exists.

well... since a fake belief system does not exist, only the hay has weight or exists in reality. eh ?

Trick question! A pound of god doesn't exist!

well of COURSE they do. sheesh!

Yes, I think I've heard it called "god in the gaps"....if something hasn't quite been figured out by scientific methods, some folks insist on inserting 'god'. However, many social scientists have discovered morality in their studies of primates.... so we don't really require a supernatural explanation for morality (moral knowledge) or ethical behavior.

@mojo5501: And, the original post was evidently put out by a "Bible-believing" Christian who thinks her murdering, genocidal, misogynist, slavery-approving , hell-creating, god sets the standard for morality--pretzel logic.

There is no reason to think any god sets a standard for morality and every reason to think the god of the Bible is, by standards we have today, completely immoral.

nicely said.

WHO ????

I was picturing this sketch:

@BD66 I got better.

The church down the road has a sign that says “Pursuing Jesus.” I always get the image of Jesus running and looking worriedly over his shoulder at a bunch of pursuing worshipers.

either of them are not sketchy ? are you being serious?

@lakota_5 Yes. The second premise is solid though. Unfortunately you need both to be true both to draw a conclusion.

@indirect76 ok dear.

@lakota_5 You don’t think moral knowledge or thunder exists?

@K9Kohle789 Oh no, the logic is just fine! Logic has to do with the “form” of the argument, and the form used for both is valid. What you criticize is the “content,” but false (or meaningless) content is not the fault of the form—i.e. of the logic.

I suppose you are just using “logic” in a broader sense, but that’s not the standard, textbook definition. Check it out.

@K9Kohle789 No, False Analogy and False Dichotomy are informal fallacies and Monty Python did not make either in the examples. It (they) simply took a valid logical form and put false (or meaningless) premises into it. That’s my position and I’m sticking to it!! Of course, you can create a logically valid proof of ANY falsehood if you start with the relevant false premise(s)—and Monty Python was good at doing that.

I’ll message you further.

@K9Kohle789 the argument is modus tollens format and is logically valid. In logic, valid arguments can have false premises and false conclusions. Validity, as was mentioned, is concerned only with whether the conclusion is logical given the premises. It is a logically valid argument, but not logically sound.

o no no no no no just no.

if you are going to postulate some sort of mathematical theorem, then USE either numbers or other symbols, not "faith" bullshit.

of course Thor existing is FAR more believable than "god" existing. IMHO

@K9Kohle789 I agree with you that it's not a logic table. I also agree that Spock would agree because it's a modus tollens argument, not a table.