I’m not really sure we should be having this debate since it’s not going to change anyone’s mind;)
Mike Ciprian Manea
1

I’m discussing in the spirit of Medium. The point of Medium is the exchange of ideas. If that’s not what either of us are interested in then Medium is not the place to post.

“Which of the options we choose will significantly affect the degree to which society at large will take our witnessing seriously in the years to come.”

I disagree wholeheartedly. Society’s lack of taking us seriously is at our own hands of how we live, how we’ve already undermined our own philosophy and worldview. All you have to do is turn on the news and read history and see why people don’t take Christianity and theism seriously and why people have turned to other philosophies.

What reason have we _shown_ them? That’s why they don’t take us seriously, not how well we do or don’t debate. We don’t take our own faith seriously, why should they? The cliche of, say one thing but do another. We give no foundation to our argument when it is only words, an empty form, a logical device.

Why engage in debate on the basis of Kantian rooted dichotomies anyway? You’re already operating on two different sets of epistemological suppositions.

I agree that faith is reasonable. But not all reasons are wholly intellectual. Why accept a reductionist view of faith or theism as the basis for disputation?

And really there is no debate going on except, as I mentioned, exhibitionally on youtube. The Atheist is already set. The debate is done. We’ve lost. And it isn’t because we don’t argue well enough.

Show your support

Clapping shows how much you appreciated Nature of the beat’s story.