Quote:
Originally Posted by Steerpike
If it (appeal to ignorance) worked, then it(appeal to ignorance)would be proof of these claims. It (appeal to ignorance) is not proof of these claims. Therefore, it (appeal to ignorance) doesn't work.
Either the entity exists or the entity doesn't exist. You want to discuss criteria for proof.
Discussing criteria for proof could be another topic.  |
And we're back at the
beginning it seems. Claims that must solely rely on the products of the mind for truth or falsehood (even though they are claims about something outside the mind) are true or false if the mind says so.