>Rosa Rubicondior: Refuting the Arguments For God

>Rosa Rubicondior: Refuting the Arguments For God


One comment

  1. Carneades Hume

    >What do you opine about her article? The empirical argument is that no evidence exists for His very existence. Lamberth's teleonomic argument presupposes the efficacy of science that no wanted outcomes exist so that to posit God not only violates the Ockham by requiring convoluted, ad hoc assumptions but also by contradicting teleonomy,divine teleology-wanted outcomes contradicts science rather than adds to it, aming for obfuscation rather than enlightment. And the atelic argument notes that theists beg that very question of those wanted outcomes. What do you think?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s