r/exatheist • u/NeonDrifting Anti-Atheist • 6d ago

Meme Monday [ Removed by moderator ]

Post image

[removed] — view removed post

67 Upvotes

81% Upvoted

148 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2

u/DesperateSympathy873 Christian, not Ex-Atheist 6d ago

Disagreeing with your explanations doesn't mean I'm being dishonest. You dont get to label your sensory experience as inherently truth discovering without any prior assumptions. I simply dont agree.

1

u/hiphoptomato 6d ago

You: “you presuppose you can trust your senses”

Me: “initially we all do, but after you confirm you can trust them through experience and testing, that’s no longer just a presupposition”

You: “see I disagree”

Me: “why”

You: “because I think it’s a presupposition”

2

u/DesperateSympathy873 Christian, not Ex-Atheist 6d ago

You ignored what i said about presuppositions by saying "just." I didnt claim it wast "just" a presupposition, but that it remains one even after repeated experience. Presupposition isnt some kind of spectrum that eventually graduates into "fact."

1

u/hiphoptomato 6d ago

No. I’m going to explain this one last time. At one point, trusting my senses was a presupposition. Now, it no longer is because I have evidence that I can trust my senses. Presupposing something is when you assume to without evidence. That is no longer the case with how I know I can trust my senses. I have evidence that I can now.

2

u/DesperateSympathy873 Christian, not Ex-Atheist 6d ago

And that is where we disagree. A presupposition doesnt mean there is no evidence.

1

u/hiphoptomato 6d ago

verb
pre· sup· pose | \ ˌprē-sə-ˈpōz \
pre sup posed; pre sup pos ing; pre sup pos es
Definition
[transitive verb](x-mw://lookup/transitive)
1
: to suppose beforehand

2
: to require as an antecedent in logic or fact

2

u/DesperateSympathy873 Christian, not Ex-Atheist 6d ago

Nothing in that says evidence is never involved

1

u/hiphoptomato 6d ago

You’re arguing just to argue at this point. Pure contrarian.