> Do you see the irony? Nope, there isn't any. > You really need to read more about intrinsic value before you dismiss it. Nope, I don't think I do. But feel

> Do you see the irony? Nope, there isn't any. > You really need to read more about intrinsic value before you dismiss it. Nope, I don't think I do. But feel free to make a concise argument as to how I am wrong. > Your arguments have been made and debated in academia, some of them have been refuted, and some of them are still being argued. By anyone serious, or just theologians? The fact that something is "debated in academia" does not really mean anything, unfortunately. > Most of what you're saying is exactly as convincing as someone who argues that God must exist because nothing can exist without a cause. Well, except that the gap in that argument can trivially be shown in one sentence. > Also given how grayed out most of your responses are, maybe consensus isn't self evidently preferable. More importantly, it shows that consensus is all that ultimately matters, whether that is good or not, which was exactly my point.