This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.


← A very atheist Christmas

digofthedump's Avatar Jump to comment 99 by digofthedump

Thanks Alan4discussion

You are once again confusing the validity of the reasoning process with the material validity of conclusions.

No I am not!! You are though (although I would rephrase the ending as '...with the actual definitive truth of conclusions'). You are confusing the content of perception (the way reality appears to us) with the origin of perception itself. You're assuming that because of the fact that reality can be revealed as naturally follows that the subject is simply a passive observer of a fundamentally object-based reality....this despite the fact that reality only ever consists of subject and object. If you want to call reality 'material' fine go ahead...but the same thing can equally be called 'spiritual'...not because there's evidence of anything external beyond what we already know....but because the subject HAS ALWAYS AND WILL ALWAYS BE PART OF WHAT WE definition.

Reasoning works like arithmetic. It is possible to follow a correct process (formula) of calculation, but unless the initial numbers are correct the conclusion is false.

I couldn't agree more....!!!....(you can fill in the rest of the sentance I trust).

Mon, 26 Dec 2011 13:34:43 UTC | #902764