|
all i can say at this point is: goddamn i love me some willravel.
asaris, if you want to have a specialized conversation, then it would seem that roach's post makes a great point of departure. it gets to the heart of the axiomatic proofs posted by yourself and halifax, in as far as i can understand them. without doing extensive research on the positions referenced in the thread, the point of necessity which is raised seems to me to the pivotal issue. i think, without wanting to put words into will's mouth, that he would agree. God or gods does not seem to be necessary, if you do not start from a position which presupposes the existence of God.
as far as the slight to will, i would have to say that a formalized study of philosophy does not make one a good philosopher. please understand that i'm not applying this to you in particular. generally, that phraseology did seem a little rude. i'm only pointing out that will has some very well grounded points, even if he doesn't know the correct terminology. frankly, neither do i.
__________________
You don't love me, you just love my piggy style
|