re: #56 Nyet

I see the game you’re playing. I see it far later than I should’ve, I loathe to admit. I’ve stated all along that specific religious claims are falsifiable, but more general concept of god is unfalsifiable. Whereas you conflate the two, in order to argue that god is falsifiable and therefore agnosticism is a dogmatic position. That equivocation is the central premise to your argument, and you’re case rested on distracting from that equivocation by haggling over minutia. The very self-serving hair-splitting that I originally pleaded against. And to my shame, I fell for it anyway. I had every reason to know better, and yet you roped me in.

You accused me of making arbitrary distinctions because I pointed out that you conflated the generalized idea of god with the specific claims of religions. You accused me of moving goalposts because I pointed out that theists were the ones who moved the goalposts to the unfalsifiable as a necessary result of their previous falsifiable claims being falsified. I’ve been arguing all along that the theists current unfalsifiable position is the one that agnostics say is unknowable. But you re~ea~ally want to keep labeling them as dogmatists.

So congratu-freaking-lations on successfully baiting me. I hope that made you feel smarter and that you remembered to bring a towel.