Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Straw man. I never called you ignorant or intellectually remiss. I was just pointing out a logical fallacy and I said if you assert that is the true that would be an argument from ignorance. I said IF. Moreover, an argument from ignorance does not mean someone is ignorant.Egads... I just wish you could sense the level of internal sighing and eyerolling that is going on inside my brain at this very moment. You are delusional. Where did you EVER (hahahahahaha!) call anyone intellectually remiss? Why... in this EXACT reply no less. Here... let me jog your memory:
Trailblazer said:
Argument from ignorance asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false or proposition is false because it has not yet been proven true.
Claiming that I made a logical faux pas because I dismissed your claims out of hand (due to complete lack of evidence, which even you admit you are working within) IS claiming that I have been intellectually remiss.
Argument from ignorance asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false or proposition is false because it has not yet been proven true.
You said: “There are no consequences to my life to not heeding you, or these "messengers", etc. There are no consequences to my life to not listening to "god" or anyone's ideas of "god."”
I said: “Since you do not KNOW any of that, you can only believe it; but if you assert that is the true that would be an argument from ignorance:”
Straw man. I did not threaten you and I was not implying anything, I said “I do not KNOW if you can go about your business without a single issue or detriment, and I do not KNOW if there are or will be consequences to your life for not listening to "god" or anyone's ideas of "god" -- so that is why I do not assert any of that.”And the implication of all of this "you do not know for sure that there won't be consequences" is a form of threat. Albeit an extremely tepid and sort of cowardly threat, that's what it is.
What about the words “I do not KNOW” do you NOT understand?
Straw man. I never said or thought or implied that you cared what might be.. You are projecting what you think I think onto me.I don't care what there "might be." Hell... YOU don't know that you won't be rejected by the gods from entering Valhalla because you didn't die honorably on the battlefield. Do you walk around worrying about THAT your whole life? I guarantee you don't... and yet that sentiment is epistemologically equivalent to your own. You better start getting into some battles... you don't want to be found to be committing an "argument from ignorance" now, do you? Hahahahahahahaha!!!!! What a joke. Please embark on a quest of self-examination. You have no idea what you are doing, and it shows.
I know exactly what I am thinking and feeling, WHAT I say and WHY I say it, and I also know WHAT I mean by what I say.
I have plenty of battles, battles you can only be grateful you will never experience.
I was not name-dropping. I was just saying “I make no claims. I said that I only pass along the claims that Baha'u'llah made” because apparently you think I am making my own claims.If this is all from "Baha'u'llah," then I give him absolutely zero credit. Name-dropping does nothing to impress me. NOTHING. He didn't have the goods either. In my opinion, he never possibly could have. Do I KNOW that for sure? No. But that idea maps 1000 times better to the reality I experience than anything you've put in front of me from "Baha'u'llah."
You are welcome to have your opinion on who has the goods and who does not. I have a different opinion because I believe Baha'u'llah brought a message from God. I never said I could prove that, as beliefs can never be proven to anyone except oneself.