Refutation of Aquinas' First Way! :(

Skip to: New Posts  Last Post
Page:  Next »
Posted by Dan K.
3/03/2016 4:14 pm 		#1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYzPqCz62qQ

What do we do now?!

 
Posted by iwpoe
3/03/2016 5:22 pm 		#2

Oh man, I knew from the first quibbly moment that this was going to be the strongest refutation I'd ever heard in my life.

Fighting to the death "the noonday demon" of Acedia.
My Books
It is precisely “values” that are the powerless and threadbare mask of the objectification of beings, an objectification that has become flat and devoid of background. No one dies for mere values.
~Martin Heidegger
 
Posted by Jeremy Taylor
3/03/2016 5:44 pm 		#3

One of the suggested videos to the right of that one was even better:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3yKxvW9yNA


 ​I'm just waiting for the next installments: Plato sucks; Aristotle sucks.

 
Posted by iwpoe
3/03/2016 6:00 pm 		#4

Aristotle's physics is old and wrong (for reasons!), so all he thought was wrong.

Fighting to the death "the noonday demon" of Acedia.
My Books
It is precisely “values” that are the powerless and threadbare mask of the objectification of beings, an objectification that has become flat and devoid of background. No one dies for mere values.
~Martin Heidegger
 
Posted by BillMcEnaney
3/03/2016 7:56 pm 		#5

The Deconverted one knows nothing about St. Thomas's metaphysics.

 
Posted by Mysterious Brony
3/04/2016 12:25 am 		#6

Oh gosh! I always get a bad feeling when internet atheists try to "refute" the arguments for God's existence. 

 
Posted by Incessable
3/04/2016 7:24 pm 		#7

I'm a theist but I have never found any of Aquinas' Five Ways convincing. But the problem with this guy, is if you want to counter an argument, you look for the weakest premise and attack there. Instead, he feels the need to attack every premise, even the most obvious like "Our senses prove that some things are in motion". He is just wasting his time arguing that "oh, but can we be sure that motion is really there?". Attack the most controversial/non-obvious/non-trivial premise(s), and leave the obvious/trivial premises alone

 
Posted by iwpoe
3/04/2016 7:46 pm 		#8

Also, just from a rhetorical standpoint, he clearly gives away his bad faith and lack of trustworthiness. I'm unwilling to hear him out for a whole 20 minutes if he's going to blather about the unreliability of our senses on even knowing that things are in motion. I suspect he would never subject a scientific proof to that kind of quibbling: "There's a margin of error so you *could* be totally wrong.".

Fighting to the death "the noonday demon" of Acedia.
My Books
It is precisely “values” that are the powerless and threadbare mask of the objectification of beings, an objectification that has become flat and devoid of background. No one dies for mere values.
~Martin Heidegger
 
Posted by iwpoe
3/04/2016 7:51 pm 		#9

I'm going to contact him. I think it would be a good PR kinda thread.

Fighting to the death "the noonday demon" of Acedia.
My Books
It is precisely “values” that are the powerless and threadbare mask of the objectification of beings, an objectification that has become flat and devoid of background. No one dies for mere values.
~Martin Heidegger
 
Posted by Dennis
3/04/2016 8:26 pm 		#10

I liked the optical illusions. Good luck, iwpoe, tell me how that fairs.

 


Page:  Next »

 
Main page
Login
Desktop format