At 03:49 PM 6/4/97 EDT, you wrote:
>Russell writes:
>
><<However, by showing that other possibilities exist, I have shown that the
>logic of the "lord, liar, lunatic" argument is far from compelling. Indeed,
>given the array of possibilities, Occam's razor would force us to choose
>almost any one except for the "lord" hypothesis.>>
>
>Occam's razor only works with plausible hypotheses. You have not provided any.
I have provided several, and I have even supplied scriptural quotes to back
up some of them. Isn't that your absolute standard of evidence?
Oh, that's right. You only believe scriptural quotes when they support what
you want to believe.
>Besides which, Occam's razor has long been called into question in
>philosophical circles.
I thought we were suppoed to be using logic, not philosophy.
>The quntilemma demonstrates that only the proposition "Lord" is left when we
>operate in the real world.
If "the real world" is defined as "what's left when we throw out what Jim
Bell doesn't like to hear".
_____________________________________________________________
| Russell Stewart |
| http://www.rt66.com/diamond/ |
|_____________________________________________________________|
| Albuquerque, New Mexico | diamond@rt66.com |
|_____________________________|_______________________________|
2 + 2 = 5, for very large values of 2.