For the context of the following comments and to reply, please click on the DATE/TIME above them.
[This comment followed an extended conversation betweenn louismoreaugottschalk (aka. charlesburchfield) and BillYeager. I’m addressing BillYeager an atheist who was unsuccessful in dragging louis into that by now familiar wormhole called an “honest” debate.]
See? You got to say all that anyway. And he got to exercise the wisdom of letting you spit it out yourself.
Just think how hard it would have been to work your rap in under the guise of reason and unbiased assessment.
Your rules of debate were not discussed and agreed upon at the beginning by the way, so all that fussing was unmerited.
BillYeager – “Mmm, killer post there, fella. Strongly rebuts all the objective reasoning and valid assertions I made during my discussion with a guy who knew he had no way to defend his intellectual dishonesty so wanted to only respond by ‘saving me’.
But, hey, you sure showed me today!“
What were YOU intent on, if not “saving” him from HIS delusional world view?
The rules you wanted to play by don’t apply, since you can not allow any validity be give to the power of subjective experience. That being the foundation for him as well as for people like me. Though we may use different terms to speak of it.
Letting ourselves be boxed in by hyper rational empiricists actively trying to subvert the integrity of our best understanding is foolish. So I applaud the success of the demonstration.
As for objectivity, you should not kid yourself that you are in possession of it in this matter. Which was the main point of my comment.