@InbornAtheism That's actually irrelevant; we KNOW how objects behave in gravity. I'm not buying your argument :) @rune0077
-
-
@emlynaddison If u know for a fact in
#evidential sense,but r missing to know it in#explanatory sense,then u don't fully know it @rune0077 -
@InbornAtheism So you're arguing certainty. Can we know *precisely* why humans are born with 10 fingers? Who cares, it's still 10. @rune0077 -
@emlynaddison Many geneticists actually work on
#explanatory reasons providing#explanatory knowledge of why we have 10 fingers @rune0077 -
@InbornAtheism I'm sure the science goes deep but, epistemologically speaking, it's not a requirement for predicting it. @rune0077 -
@emlynaddison Lets put it this way: I know for a fact that humans have 10 fingers, but I don't know the reason why we have 10 @rune0077
-
@InbornAtheism I know for a fact there is no god, and I can probably guess at several reasons/causes why others don't. @rune0077 -
@emlynaddison Your statement claims that your premise "there is no god" is fact. But you can't represent your premise as fact. @rune0077
-
@InbornAtheism You sound like a theist!! haha Gods: 1. are not provable 2. contradict physics 3. dispute our understanding @rune0077 - 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
@emlynaddison We've
#evidential knowledge that phenomenon of gravity is real, but we don't have enough of#explanatory knowledge @rune0077 -
@InbornAtheism It's still irrelevant. We KNOW that humans are typified by 10 fingers. We don't have to keep checking it to know. @rune0077 -
@emlynaddison I'm not saying we need to periodically verify such obvious & easy observable facts. I mean debatable information @rune0077
-
@InbornAtheism Gods not existing is, by the same reasoning, an "observable fact". @rune0077 -
@emlynaddison Some religions have observable candidate for god. Pantheism, panentheism & similar refer to observable god nature. @rune0077
-
@InbornAtheism Anyone can call anything by any label. It's up to society? scientists? our consciences? to decide what's real. @rune0077
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@emlynaddison When we simply say "I know it" without clarifying to what extent we know it, we mislead ourselves & others. @rune0077
-
@InbornAtheism To the extent that observable, testable, experience-able conditions uphold it. The rest is academic nit-picking! @rune0077
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@emlynaddison Thus: 1)I
#know something for a fact in#evidential sense 2)I#know -//- for a fact in#explanatory sense 3)Or both @rune0077Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.