4 ms·
At some point the bot presents a false scientism-based dichotomy that boils down to: either you have evidence for something, or it's not true. This conjecture g
by nukeop 9y ago
At some point the bot presents a false scientism-based dichotomy that boils down to: either you have evidence for something, or it's not true. This conjecture grounded in empiricism is self-refuting, as you by definition cannot have evidence that only evidence can be a source of truth. In fact, we often accept truths with no evidence, especially in more abstract branches of intellectual pursuits.
- xchip 9y agoWhat would be a good example of accepting truth without evidence?
- nukeop 9y agoAny axiom accepted as a starting point or any conclusion reached by intellection alone in the Schuonic sense. Abstract notions such as existence of numbers or Platonic forms. At any rate the bot is heavily biased towards atheism and offers several ineffective counterarguments against what I perceive are author's misconceptions about certain concepts found in major religions.
- xchip 9y agoFeel free to discuss in the website comments the questions you find objectionable. If you find questions/answers too biased feel free to suggest new ones and I will add them. After all we are all seeking truth!