Re: ICR and its slurs
Russell Stewart (diamond@rt66.com)
Mon, 26 May 1997 18:06:10 -0600At 10:18 AM 5/26/97 -0700, you wrote:
>Russell Stewart wrote:
>> Why does logic have to be the basis for everything? Sooner or later, as you
>> go back to the basis of an argument, you reach a point where there is a
>> foundation of simple assumption. This is true of *any* argument, no matter
>> how solid or true we know it to be. The central assumption in my argument is
>> that other human beings have feelings like myself, and that it is wrong to
>> hurt those feelings. Is this logical? No. But neither is the central
assumption
>> of Christian morality. If Jim Bell were honest, he would apply the same
scrutiny
>> to his beliefs that he has to mine, and he would be forced to either
throw out
>> his beliefs, or recognize the validity of mine.
>
>When you begin to deny logic as fundamental, then you essentially have
>*no* basis for argument. In fact, the very denial of logic is an
>application of logic. You just cannot get around that, Russell.
I am not trying to "get around" anything. I am merely showing that Jim Bell
is holding me to a standard that he himself has not met.
What logical basis has he provided for the Judeo-Christian moral system?
_____________________________________________________________
| Russell Stewart |
| http://www.rt66.com/diamond/ |
|_____________________________________________________________|
| Albuquerque, New Mexico | diamond@rt66.com |
|_____________________________|_______________________________|
2 + 2 = 5, for very large values of 2.