Argument from smugness
God exists.
I don't give a crap whether you believe it or not; I have better things to do than to try to convince you morons.
Therefore, God exists.

Argument from meta-smugness
F|_|ck you.
Therefore, God exists.

Okay, we've been differing on what "the first side" and "the second side" are. You brought up the equivalence of a->b and ~b->~a, which is wholly irrelevant, so I was addressing that: I was referring not to "a" as the first side, but to "a->b".

Now, starting over, let's let a(x) = "x is intelligent", and let b(x) = "the process which produced x is intelligent". Now, that means the following statement you made is the same as "a->b":

Agreed?

Then, you took the claim "I am intelligent", which can be expressed as: a(Perham), and deduced "my creation process is intelligent", which is b(Perham). In other words, the following quote is equal to: a(Perham)->b(Perham):

Got that?

Now, the problem here is that in order to deduce that b(Perham) is true, you can't just show that a(Perham) is true. You must also show that your original implication is also true: a(x)->b(x).

It is true that if a(Perham) and a(Perham)->b(Perham) are true, then b(Perham) is true. However, I am only willing to accept that a(Perham) is true. The point of the discussion, was for you to prove the implication itself, a(x)->b(x), to be true.

So god is nothing more than reason? what happened to all powerful and omnipresent?

__________________
True knowledge exists in knowing what you don't know.

PERFECT example of my complaint.

I like your attitude man! calm down!

__________________
I crave therefore I am and that is all I ever feel
I hoped you'd understand, One love, One pain, One enemy
I toast to misery, as I dig into the devil's bone
And for eternity the pain became me
Unholy me alone...

why isn't this true? I support it as a model. this is the implication, isn't it?

__________________
I crave therefore I am and that is all I ever feel
I hoped you'd understand, One love, One pain, One enemy
I toast to misery, as I dig into the devil's bone
And for eternity the pain became me
Unholy me alone...

Bad form! herk Bad Form!

Just injecting a little humor into this.

Apologies.

I agree Perham.


all knowledge is not known, the supposition that God doesn't exist must encapsulate all knowledge.

Yes, that is a(x)->b(x). When you say you support it as a model, you're saying that you're *assuming* a(x)->b(x) to be true. However, I am not drawing into question your logic in here: "I assume a(x)->b(x), I know a(Perham), therefore b(Perham)." That is valid logic.

The logic of that deduction is, again, not the issue. The issue is in the assumption. Your original goal was (ostensibly) to show b(Perham), i.e. "The process which created me is intelligent", to be true. You can't simply assume one of the prerequisites (a(x)->b(x)) while attempting to prove b(x). In fact, because I agree with your logic and am willing to assume a(Perham) is true, if you show a(x)->b(x) to be true, that is precisely all you need to do to convince me of b(Perham).

---

Now, if you do not care to convince me of a(x)->b(x), then I won't be surprised. It is a common pattern of behavior in religious debate: Someone attempts to convince someone of something, then when they fail, they fallback to "oh, I don't care if you actually believe me." and then say something to the effect of "I'm content believing it myself".

This is giving up. An argument should end in the "loser" reconsidering their belief decisions, but instead, these people lose the argument and then withdraw from it as though they were never arguing and go back into their shell of "I know I'm right, they just don't get it". If you're right, you should be able to present something to back it up. Well anyway, then they lash out again with another faulty argument, lose, and repeat. It'd be nice if someone actually admitted that they were arguing and that they might have been wrong, once in a while...

How do you operate as a person? Personally, I make sense of a situation, decide what to do and act on those decisions.

A Universe with no Creator makes no sense to me, I decide to follow a Religion.

A Universe with no Creator makes sense to you, you decide not to follow a Religion.

We're both going to die.

Same journey, same end, different path.