CuratorExistsQ1: To Jukia, Johnny, Phy (each separately): Can you, without equivocation, indicate whether or not you exist?
ThePhy said:
Correct. So far Phy, you're scoring 100%, A+.
CuratorExistsQ2: To Jukia, Johnny, Phy (separately): If my report is accurate (that curator of the Denver Museum of Nature and Science, Dr. Kirk Johnson, when asked repeatedly, could not affirm that he exists), does this undermine Dr. Johnson's credibility as a scientist?
ThePhy said:
No Answer. Now Phy, you've brought your average down to 50%, for a final score of... F.
However slow Descartes may have been or not, his
Cogito ergo sum, "I think therefore I am," is sufficient to prove one's own existence. Phy, the question of whether I exist, or you, or Captain Kirk (Johnson), that question, for each of us, is a trivial question. If I had no other proof of its triviality, I could maintain it by the fact that even you were able to answer it
. If someone is slow to figure out if he or she exists, if that makes
you think the question is non-trivial, then I'm happy to let that stand as the difference between you and me, and our abilities to admit reality.
ThePhy said:
Would you have called into question Descartes' mental competence if he did not respond freely with what you seem to think is the only logical answer? (emphasis added)
"I exist,"
IS THE ONLY logical answer. Don't equivocate Phy.
And I certainly didn't intend to question Captain Kirk's IQ. It was his intellectual temper tantrum that I exposed. And that tantrum was sparked by his fear. Surely you agree that many atheists/secularists/evolutionists refuse to unequivocally admit the existence of truth. (Remember Zakath in
BR VII equivocated as to whether truth exists: for the purpose of this debate; as defined here by a tautology; etc.). Admitting truth gets an atheist much too close for comfort to the Lord's words, "I am Truth." Hence, many of them even fear truth itself. Thus their real fight is not with us Christians, it's with truth itself.
ThePhy said:
As to Dr. Johnson, I have no idea of what he thought you were getting at... I would probably suspect, as Dr. Johnson may have, that the question was trying to lead into some kind of philosophical trap, which indeed it was.
His existence. I was getting at his existence. (After all, when I debate someone who doesn't exist, I use a different approach
.) And if, indeed, he could admit that he existed, that would be a statement of truth, and hence, of common ground between us, that we could both admit the truth of our own existence, and hence, we admit truth.
And really Phy, regardles of WHAT Captain Kirk thought I was getting at, REALLY NOW, should that cause him to doubt his own existence? My, what power we theists have over weaker vessels. Captain Kirk should be sufficiently self-assured of his own existence that a little sparing with a creationist should not cause him to waiver. No? And that, in front of a crowd... AND a reporter for the Colorado Springs Gazette!
And so, Phy, you think it's a philosophical trap to admit that you exist? Huh! Then why step into such a trap yourself? What? All of a sudden you've found the courage to risk debate with me on the existence of truth, i.e., on my chosen turf? (After all, you'd have far more room to obfuscate on the nature of time than on the existence of truth.)
And then Phy, you obfuscated about "how much of the science that was presented in that museum was Dr. Johnson the primary originator of?" That's irrelevant to the question that Phy didn't answer. I'll ask the question in another way:
CuratorExistsQ2a: If Doctor Kirk cannot affirm his own existence without equivocation, does this undermine his credibility as a scientist?
Phy, I'd love for you to answer CE2, and CE2a.
And finally:
ThePhy said:
If the truth be known, in asking the existence questions of him, wasn’t it your intention to undermine his credibility as a scientist?
Truth is known. And in this case: OF COURSE. You've uncovered another sinister plot. Imagine that. I figured I could undermine his credibility by getting him to admit he doubts his own existence. And of all the unlikely absurdities, that wild, long-shot gambit worked! And another atheist illustrates that atheism leads unbelievers, kicking and screaming, inexorably toward its logical conclusion: utter ignorance.
-Bob Enyart
