• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged The razor of Hitchens and the Spirits!

Calderaro said:
You are a victim of pseudoskepticism! So what is the question?
Click to expand...

The questions are those I asked in post #1516, in which I challenged your actual purpose here.

There are, of course, many others which you have totally ignored for your own selfish reasons.

Please bear in mind that a lot of us have been playing to the gallery in at least appearing to take you seriously, as this is a featured thread. Yet you have carried on behaving like...Oh, fill in your own insult.
 
Calderaro said:
You are a victim of pseudoskepticism! So what is the question?
Click to expand...
You pretend to be stupid, or what?

Just tell us what other methods exist too reliably find factual truths about the world!

You could say “If more than 10 people believe something is true, then it is factually true”. We’ll certainly disagree, but this is one thing you claim. Can you come up with other methods?
 
steenkh said:
You pretend to be stupid, or what?

Just tell us what other methods exist too reliably find factual truths about the world!

You could say “If more than 10 people believe something is true, then it is factually true”. We’ll certainly disagree, but this is one thing you claim. Can you come up with other methods?
Click to expand...


In this particular case I think it may be unfair to accuse him of that particular dishonesty...
 
P.J. Denyer said:
In this particular case I think it may be unfair to accuse him of that particular dishonesty...
Click to expand...
I don't: if it is the case that we are dealing with a not bright person, they are also doing a good impression of someone less bright than that. Hence my earlier suggestions about performance art or law students. I mean lawyers have learn how to spout their nonsense somehow, so maybe we are doing someone a service. In which case I want paying: I'll be generous and just use my rate from whern I retired, rather than current rate.

Just off to do some sums...
 
Last edited:
steenkh said:
You could say “If more than 10 people believe something is true, then it is factually true”. We’ll certainly disagree, but this is one thing you claim. Can you come up with other methods?
Click to expand...
many pseudoskeptics reduce everything to scientific materialism assuming that only what can be measured or observed is real
 
Calderaro said:
You are right!
Click to expand...
Yes, I know. Therefore I'm asking the question again. What method has a better history than the scientific method at determining reliable fact?

Calderaro said:
many pseudoskeptics reduce everything to scientific materialism assuming that only what can be measured or observed is real
Click to expand...
Name another method that is as reliable, or more reliable, at testing claims of factual existence.
 
Calderaro said:
beliefs in spirits challenge the strictly materialistic view of pseudoskeptics by causing cognitive dissonance to reduce discomfort they react with aggression or disdain
Click to expand...
No, the aggression you may be sensing has nothing to do with cognitive dissonance or a challenge to the skeptic's preference for testable data. You are being addressed aggressively because you personally are evasive and appear to be arguing in bad faith. You don't get to misbehave and blame the consequences on your critics.
 
Calderaro said:
beliefs in spirits challenge the strictly materialistic view of pseudoskeptics by causing cognitive dissonance to reduce discomfort they react with aggression or disdain
Click to expand...
Absolute nonsense of the highest order. You're just pulling this straight out of your backside.

Deal with the points and questions people have raised, or else concede you cannot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom