Comments on: The Case Against Presuppositionalism http://urbanphilosophy.net/philosophy/the-case-against-presuppositionalism/ Your Thoughts, Everyone's Wisdom Tue, 31 Jan 2012 13:14:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: MitchLeBlanc http://urbanphilosophy.net/philosophy/the-case-against-presuppositionalism/comment-page-1/#comment-706 MitchLeBlanc Tue, 05 Jan 2010 20:23:26 +0000 http://urbanphilosophy.net/?p=576#comment-706 Of course this is the first post in what was a series of posts, culminating in my most recent paper. In many ways, it is a progression of thought that has led to what I feel is my strongest case against the TAG and presuppositionalism. I'm glad you agree that it is incoherent to state that the principles of logic are created by God, unfortunately you have not dealt with the further criticisms of the view you espouse. Might I suggest dealing with my most recent material on the topic: <a href="http://urbanphilosophy.net/philosophy/the-transcendental-argument-for-the-existence-of-god/" target="_blank">http://urbanphilosophy.net/philosophy/the-transce...</a> It is generally considered polite to deal with an opponents strongest material on the topic. Cheers. Of course this is the first post in what was a series of posts, culminating in my most recent paper. In many ways, it is a progression of thought that has led to what I feel is my strongest case against the TAG and presuppositionalism. I'm glad you agree that it is incoherent to state that the principles of logic are created by God, unfortunately you have not dealt with the further criticisms of the view you espouse.

Might I suggest dealing with my most recent material on the topic: http://urbanphilosophy.net/philosophy/the-transce…

It is generally considered polite to deal with an opponents strongest material on the topic. Cheers.

]]> By: MitchLeBlanc http://urbanphilosophy.net/philosophy/the-case-against-presuppositionalism/comment-page-1/#comment-9865 MitchLeBlanc Tue, 05 Jan 2010 20:23:00 +0000 http://urbanphilosophy.net/?p=576#comment-9865 Of course this is the first post in what was a series of posts, culminating in my most recent paper. In many ways, it is a progression of thought that has led to what I feel is my strongest case against the TAG and presuppositionalism. I'm glad you agree that it is incoherent to state that the principles of logic are created by God, unfortunately you have not dealt with the further criticisms of the view you espouse. Might I suggest dealing with my most recent material on the topic: <a href="http://urbanphilosophy.net/philosophy/the-transcendental-argument-for-the-existence-of-god/" rel="nofollow">http://urbanphilosophy.net/philosophy/the-transce...</a> It is generally considered polite to deal with an opponents strongest material on the topic. Cheers. Of course this is the first post in what was a series of posts, culminating in my most recent paper. In many ways, it is a progression of thought that has led to what I feel is my strongest case against the TAG and presuppositionalism. I'm glad you agree that it is incoherent to state that the principles of logic are created by God, unfortunately you have not dealt with the further criticisms of the view you espouse.

Might I suggest dealing with my most recent material on the topic: http://urbanphilosophy.net/philosophy/the-transce…

It is generally considered polite to deal with an opponents strongest material on the topic. Cheers.

]]> By: Joshua http://urbanphilosophy.net/philosophy/the-case-against-presuppositionalism/comment-page-1/#comment-705 Joshua Tue, 05 Jan 2010 20:04:48 +0000 http://urbanphilosophy.net/?p=576#comment-705 Yes, I found it interesting that he based his article here off of a faulty premise, I didn't have to read too far to find out that the rest of the article was just a waste of his time. Nor does he make a case for how the preconditons of intelligibility can be accounted for in his own world view. This is yet another example of an atheist cutting off the very branch of the tree their sitting on. Yes, I found it interesting that he based his article here off of a faulty premise, I didn't have to read too far to find out that the rest of the article was just a waste of his time. Nor does he make a case for how the preconditons of intelligibility can be accounted for in his own world view. This is yet another example of an atheist cutting off the very branch of the tree their sitting on.

]]> By: Joshua http://urbanphilosophy.net/philosophy/the-case-against-presuppositionalism/comment-page-1/#comment-9864 Joshua Tue, 05 Jan 2010 20:04:00 +0000 http://urbanphilosophy.net/?p=576#comment-9864 Yes, I found it interesting that he based his article here off of a faulty premise, I didn't have to read too far to find out that the rest of the article was just a waste of his time. Nor does he make a case for how the preconditons of intelligibility can be accounted for in his own world view. This is yet another example of an atheist cutting off the very branch of the tree their sitting on. Yes, I found it interesting that he based his article here off of a faulty premise, I didn't have to read too far to find out that the rest of the article was just a waste of his time. Nor does he make a case for how the preconditons of intelligibility can be accounted for in his own world view. This is yet another example of an atheist cutting off the very branch of the tree their sitting on.

]]> By: Michael http://urbanphilosophy.net/philosophy/the-case-against-presuppositionalism/comment-page-1/#comment-619 Michael Tue, 29 Dec 2009 22:03:45 +0000 http://urbanphilosophy.net/?p=576#comment-619 Mr. LeBlanc's attempted refutation of presuppositionalism, particularly TANG, relies on, to the Christian mind, a faulty premise: principles of logic as being created by or dependent on God. To the contrary, principles of logic reflect God's thinking; they reveal something of His mind and of his unchanging nature. God alone is unchanging and eternal; He cannot contradict Himself. God is therefore the transcendental necessity for a rational reliance by mankind on principles of logic. Mr. LeBlanc’s attempted refutation of presuppositionalism, particularly TANG, relies on, to the Christian mind, a faulty premise: principles of logic as being created by or dependent on God. To the contrary, principles of logic reflect God’s thinking; they reveal something of His mind and of his unchanging nature. God alone is unchanging and eternal; He cannot contradict Himself. God is therefore the transcendental necessity for a rational reliance by mankind on principles of logic.

]]> By: Michael http://urbanphilosophy.net/philosophy/the-case-against-presuppositionalism/comment-page-1/#comment-9863 Michael Tue, 29 Dec 2009 22:03:00 +0000 http://urbanphilosophy.net/?p=576#comment-9863 Mr. LeBlanc's attempted refutation of presuppositionalism, particularly TANG, relies on, to the Christian mind, a faulty premise: principles of logic as being created by or dependent on God. To the contrary, principles of logic reflect God's thinking; they reveal something of His mind and of his unchanging nature. God alone is unchanging and eternal; He cannot contradict Himself. God is therefore the transcendental necessity for a rational reliance by mankind on principles of logic. Mr. LeBlanc’s attempted refutation of presuppositionalism, particularly TANG, relies on, to the Christian mind, a faulty premise: principles of logic as being created by or dependent on God. To the contrary, principles of logic reflect God’s thinking; they reveal something of His mind and of his unchanging nature. God alone is unchanging and eternal; He cannot contradict Himself. God is therefore the transcendental necessity for a rational reliance by mankind on principles of logic.

]]> By: Transcendental Argument for God: Mitchell LeBlanc, Pt. 1 http://urbanphilosophy.net/philosophy/the-case-against-presuppositionalism/comment-page-1/#comment-272 Transcendental Argument for God: Mitchell LeBlanc, Pt. 1 Sun, 13 Dec 2009 14:15:25 +0000 http://urbanphilosophy.net/?p=576#comment-272 [...] LeBlanc, Mitchell. “The Case Against Presuppositionalism” (13/Oct/09), “Part II” (23/Oct/09), and “Part III” (30/Oct/09). [...] [...] LeBlanc, Mitchell. “The Case Against Presuppositionalism” (13/Oct/09), “Part II” (23/Oct/09), and “Part III” (30/Oct/09). [...]

]]> By: An Illustration of Begging the Question | Choosing Hats http://urbanphilosophy.net/philosophy/the-case-against-presuppositionalism/comment-page-1/#comment-211 An Illustration of Begging the Question | Choosing Hats Fri, 27 Nov 2009 08:45:39 +0000 http://urbanphilosophy.net/?p=576#comment-211 [...] 1 Click to read the original post. 2 It should be submitted that in philosophical discourse the use of words such as “obvious” are [...] [...] 1 Click to read the original post. 2 It should be submitted that in philosophical discourse the use of words such as “obvious” are [...]

]]> By: The Case Against Presuppositionalism: Part III | Urban Philosophy http://urbanphilosophy.net/philosophy/the-case-against-presuppositionalism/comment-page-1/#comment-177 The Case Against Presuppositionalism: Part III | Urban Philosophy Fri, 30 Oct 2009 18:31:58 +0000 http://urbanphilosophy.net/?p=576#comment-177 [...] Case Against Presuppositionalism: Part IIThe Case Against PresuppositionalismA Response to Bolt’s [...] [...] Case Against Presuppositionalism: Part IIThe Case Against PresuppositionalismA Response to Bolt’s [...]

]]> By: The Case Against Presuppositionalism: Reformulation, Objections, and Replies | Urban Philosophy http://urbanphilosophy.net/philosophy/the-case-against-presuppositionalism/comment-page-1/#comment-175 The Case Against Presuppositionalism: Reformulation, Objections, and Replies | Urban Philosophy Fri, 23 Oct 2009 06:31:41 +0000 http://urbanphilosophy.net/?p=576#comment-175 [...] The Case Against PresuppositionalismInductive Reasoning and the Christian GodA Response to Bolt’s Misunderstanding [...] [...] The Case Against PresuppositionalismInductive Reasoning and the Christian GodA Response to Bolt’s Misunderstanding [...]

]]>