Right, as though a common practice of his isn’t in making accusations of this sort about me as though in asserting them, it makes them so. Me, I’ll let others decide for themselves if his points are applicable.
On the other hand, we hear accusations of this sort time and again here at ILP. In other words, whenever someone isn’t able to convince someone else to think like they do. It more or less goes with the territory in discussion venues of this sort. It’s just that the objectivists really do insist that all rational men and women must think like they do [here about the impossibility of god] or be charged with one or another of KTs allegations.
Again, my point about certainty here revolves around this:
But I’m certainly not suggesting to others here that it is mine. My points make sense to me, but only given the manner in which I myself am able to distinguish between what I believe and what I am in fact able to demonstrate. For the objectivists, I have found from vast personal experience that this gap is considerably narrower. And, for some, doesn’t exist at all.
And, in regard to this thread, my point is still this:
That’s his subjective take on me. My own subjective assumptions reflect more the points I made on another thread:
This still seems reasonable to me given my ample experience with objectivists over the years. But it is certainly no less an existential contraption than his own is here. And in focusing in on my sense of certainty, he needs to be reminded of his own in regard to me.
No, my point is that in regard to our thoughts and feelings about God, to what extent is the confidence one has in his or her own propositions, able to be reconfigured into demonstrable evidence that all rational people are obligated tlo believe the same.
To argue for the impossibility of God is not the same as demonstrating that God does not exist. That’s always my point. Where’s the actual evidence? And it is simply preposterous to argue that I can figure out what’s going on in another’s mind!!
All I do [can do] is to take an existential leap to one or another extrapolation based on my past experiences. After all, for any of us, what else is there?
The best way to explore these accusations is for him and I to focus in on a particular aspect of a belief in God or No God. Then agree on a context in which people hold conflicting assessments that then translate into conflicting behaviors.
We can discuss this. Thus allowing him to point out in much greater detail why his assessment of me is more reasonable.
For example, my argument regarding a fractured and fragmented self embedded in the manner in which I construe “I” as the embodiment of dasein…re my own particular belief in God/No God.
Or let him choose his own context. Anything to get us down out of the clouds.