Paul Manata and TAG
Offline Paul Manata has "come out of the closet". The TAG closet, that is.
Those of us that have debated/argued with Paul Manata over the years or those who listened with interest to his debate with Dan Barker owe themselves a read. Paul describes himself as a former "right wing Van Tillian", and now acknowledges his belief rests on faith instead of certainty.
After Paul spells out in detail that the TAG doesn't do as it says, prove the impossibility of the contrary and publically not only admits it is a bad argument but challenges others to defend it, he makes this statement acknowledging his belief is faith based.
"I actually find zero psychological or emotional problems admitting this. Ultimately, at the end of the day, I trust in the word of Christ. The mere logically possibility that another worldview also can provide for preconditions of knowledge does not bother me. I don't see anywhere where God promises that I'll have this kind of certainty. I am called to trust in His word. I don't question it."
here
http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2006/10/coming-out-of-closet.html
and here
http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2007/04/more-on-tag-and-certainity_05.html
Now, I realize this threads aren't new, but they are new to me because I had pretty much given up on Paul. I could easily discern that he was increasingly well read and refined in his debating skills but believed he was so immersed in his dogma that he couldn't see the obvious flaws in the TAG argument. Apparently I was wrong.
Paul, if you read this, my respect for you has increased substantially.
That's a ditto from me. That puts him just barely above negative infinity on my respect meter.
"I basically subscribed after I checked out that thread that Sapient posted on expenses and the like. Groceries are one of the most important items, so I'm hoping I'm helping there and I'm hoping I help Sapient break even. If I can help stop him from dipping into the retirement fund, I'll be happy." - The Sarge
haha. I hear you. There are personal issues that I am setting aside and only talking about him dropping the transcendental argument. I also thought others here would perhaps find it significant that one of the most vocal internet TAG proponents would come out and publically denounce it. We all were pointing out the same problems to the TAGGERS and they would just go on attack. That one of them has now thrown the same critiques back at the others is very interesting. At least to me it is.
Operation Spread Eagle, Kent Hovind, Creation Science, Evangelism Ministries, Eric Hovind, Jo Hovind, Liar, Evolution, Copyright, Fraud, Youtube, Fair Use Law, EFF.
Excuse my ignorance, but WTF is TAG?
Invisible friends are for children and psychopaths.
Here's a Wikipedia article. TAG is akin to the argument which says the problem of induction implies a God.
“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.” -- George Orwell
Frankly, Manata wasn't that interesting anyway. The Reformed formulation is much better. Good riddance, eh?
Do not be deceived; God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows.
Galatians 6:7
After years of tossing insults and running away from backing up his inane assertions, he finally concedes the obvious.
After having people spell this out in detail to him, for years.
What an asshole. It took him years to figure out that faith doesn't get you anything, let alone certainty.
Those who know the good, do the good. - Socrates
: Operation Spread Eagle, Kent Hovind, Creation Science, Evangelism Ministries, Eric Hovind, Jo Hovind, Liar, Evolution, Copyright, Fraud, Youtube, Fair Use La
One thing that I've found about debate is that it rarely delivered instant results.
I know that I've never been instantly turned by an argument, and often during the debate I can miss a lot of the points being made, throw a lot reflex counters and not always fully address my opponent's point.
However, although I don't instantly 'get' these points, they often slowly seep into my subconscious, the functions of the mind that continually analyse data even when we're not aware of it.
Then after time the subconscious delivers results of this analysis, giving sudden insights or inspirations, and as the ideas swim around the points that I didn't really get before they finally start to convince me.
Changing an opinion on a position is a complex thing that happens over time.
So when people criticise debate, claim that it isn't going anywhere because both sides appear to be just shouting past the other, it seems that they have only a very shallow idea of what's going on in these minds.
I'd imagine that these anti-tag arguments finally sunk into this Paul guy.
Now we just after get onto the anti-faith ones... they should only take a couple of years or so to sink in!