I did indeed get the debate I was looking for, and it was with a preuppositionalist, to my delight. I'll post a link to the transcript of the debate. I copied and pasted right off my phone. The only changes made were a few spacing issues and one or two misplellings that made it hard to understand. Everything else is exactly as it was typed in Kik.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-ht9dasrgJD8fubYYuFhwOwUQTJ1v3Gng7qu...
Subscription Note:
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
Note: This is, hopefully, just part one of the debate. If he agrees to continue, I will post the rest as well.
wow 6 pages to get him to accept "I think therefore I am".
LOL, yeah pretty much.
yea, he never accepted or answered decently your question.
Shows what type of dishonest person he is.
good analogy with the eye though.
Good Job
btw avoid saying 100% certain you are a female :p
That was the only mistake you made, overall you smashed him.
Good Job
I said I could be 100% sure about it because I can. Female is just a description we give to certain attributes, which I possess.
"Female is just a description we give to certain attributes, which I possess."
A description is an interpretation.
You cannot be 100% sure of an interpretation of something.
If you are a brain in a box you might think you are a female but in reality you have no sex at all but are programmed to have those feelings.
I think it is a chance for those theist to attack your position with that you should avoid.
It was wise of you to divert the argument on the "I think therefor I am" though.
but it is up to you.
just pointing it out.
Very well done and executed with patience care and just the right amount of tact. ECA
The whole conversation reminds me of the Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy by Douglas Adams bit about the Babel fish where God's logic rules himself out of existence:
The Babel fish is small, yellow, leechlike, and probably the oddest thing in the Universe. It feeds on brainwave energy received not from its own carrier but from those around it. It absorbs all unconscious mental frequencies from this brainwave energy to nourish itself with. It then excretes into the mind of its carrier a telepathic matrix formed by combining the conscious thought frequencies with nerve signals picked up from the speech centers of the brain which has supplied them. The practical upshot of all this is that if you stick a Babel fish in your ear you can instantly understand anything said to you in any form of language. The speech patterns you actually hear decode the brainwave matrix which has been fed into your mind by your Babel fish.
Now it is such a bizarrely improbable coincidence that anything so mind-bogglingly useful could have evolved purely by chance that some thinkers have chosen to see it as a final and clinching proof of the NON-existence of God.
The argument goes like this:
`I refuse to prove that I exist,' says God, `for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing.'
`But,' says Man, `The Babel fish is a dead giveaway, isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don't. QED.'
`Oh dear,' says God, `I hadn't thought of that,' and promptly disappears in a puff of logic.
`Oh, that was easy,' says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed on the next zebra crossing.
It was an exciting debate and you just proved how good you are with the topic. Looking forward for more debates that you will share. I hope a bishop or a priest will have a debate with you.