Fallacy Boy,
There has to be a time of realisation of full humanity coupled with a state of bestial nobility, connectedness to nature and awareness of the divine prior to which there was none. How long lasted that was, seconds, minutes, days, I know not.
There doesn’t have to be ay such thing, even if that thing is itself gibberish.
…what infinite regression problem? actual ability is not dependent on anything.
The problem is therefore yours. Explaining an infinite regression of derived ability without actual ability. Be my guest.
The infinite regression problem inherent in your cosmological argument – if you decide that everything must have come from something before it, then the same problem applies to that prior something. Your only way out is to magic it into being itself uncaused – which takes you back to the cartoon of the blackboard with the long formula in the middle of which it says “miracle happens here”. “God’” in other words adds nothing of explanatory value.
No I think he would agree the ability to build a termite mound is derived. At the very least how does a termite move to do it without deriving that ability moment by moment from something else. So he can hardly deny the derived. He therefore has the problem of demonstrating physically where all this derivation actually has it's source.
You’re as confused as always. A termite mound doesn’t exist because termites know about termite mounds. Part of the problem here is trying to guess what you think you mean by “derived”, but if you think there must be a sort of master planner with all the blueprints in his head then emergence shows you to be wrong.
If not, that then takes your basic “if there’s stuff then other stuff must have preceded it”, which also collapses very quickly (see above).
If he denies a source he proposes things are actually not derived. What does he propose is not derived? what can he point to? He is therefore invariably on an errand to find where it comes from or he remembers that he is just a New Atheist whose mission is actually to duck things like this.
This from the king of ducking and diving?
Anyways, it has nothing to do with atheism but rather with basic logic – and your inability to harness it.
As I said we agree that it is derived.
As I said, stop lying. Tell us what you think you mean by “derived” and I’ll tell you whether or not I agree.
You seem to want a derived in the sense of not being derived. Same old Hillside.
Do you lie this much in normal life, or is it just something you enjoy doing here?
