Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 21 to 23 of 23
  1. #21
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    850
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Applying rational skepticism to claims of possible or impossible

    Again, this line of questioning is irrelevant to whether it's an argument from ignorance to say that something is X just because it hasn't been proven to be Not-X.
    Either make your point which I'm clearly missing, or provide support for why "X is true because not-X isn't proven" should not be considered a fallacious appeal to ignorance.

  2. #22
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington USA
    Posts
    7,472
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Applying rational skepticism to claims of possible or impossible

    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy View Post
    That's all well and good, but when one wants to involve such rigorous standards as truisms based on our core logical foundations, "given what I know I think" just doesn't make the cut.
    Like is hard like that and there are things you just don't know. And such uncertainties are why we have the word "possible" it exists to describe a lack of knowledge and to say something may be true, or may not be true but we don't really know.

    Truisms require truth. Possibiliites require ignorance of truth.
    Feed me some debate pellets!

  3. #23
    Administrator

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Fairfax, VA
    Posts
    10,752
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Applying rational skepticism to claims of possible or impossible

    Quote Originally Posted by futureboy View Post
    Again, this line of questioning is irrelevant
    The point is easy to make if you answer the question. Is this statement coherent or self-contradictory: I don't get the point you're making here

    If yes, then why didn't you offer support of its coherence?

    If you can answer that second question, you'll have answered the question posed in your last post.
    "Suffering lies not with inequality, but with dependence." -Voltaire
    "Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions. -G.K. Chesterton
    Also, if you think I've overlooked your post please shoot me a PM, I'm not intentionally ignoring you.


 

 
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Similar Threads

  1. Why does God allow skepticism?
    By Dr Gonzo in forum Religion
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: June 13th, 2011, 11:15 AM
  2. Replies: 53
    Last Post: September 10th, 2007, 06:53 PM
  3. Replies: 1
    Last Post: December 29th, 2006, 01:08 PM
  4. Skepticism, take 2
    By Zhavric in forum Philosophical Debates
    Replies: 74
    Last Post: May 30th, 2006, 02:24 PM
  5. College to think of applying to
    By KneeLess in forum Community Advice Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: January 3rd, 2005, 07:43 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •