TAG is still a failure.... Sorry!

I just watched Matt Dillahunty’s debate with Matt Slick over his version of the TAG (Transcendental argument) on the Atheist Experience. While I think that Dillahunty did a much better job then the last time, when a different host debated slick, he still failed to get at the most effective and simple refutation of TAG which is to point out that the argument is circular. TAG claims that there are logical laws which are absolutes, that those absolutes are mind dependent, and then that because “our minds disagree” we cannot be the source of those absolutes, so there must be an absolute and perfect mind behind reality. The problem here is that in a hypothetical universe without minds, either these laws would not exist, and thus not be absolutes or they would exist, making them non-mental. If these laws are mental then the absolute nature of these laws is contingent on there being an absolute mind, which is what the argument attempts to conclude. Ergo, it is circular. It simply amazes me how many theists parrot this argument mindlessly none the less.

Let me also state that Matt Slick is a whinny bitch. I actually could not make it thought all 5 pars of the video without having to turn it off for wanting fly to Idaho and smack him upside the head.

The debate can be found here:
http://www.youtube.com/FFreeThinker

Another atheist experience channel
http://www.youtube.com/AtheistExperience

The official Atheist Experience website
http://www.Atheist-Experience.com

Matt Slick’s version of TAG
http://www.carm.org/secular-movements/atheism/transcendental-argument-existence-god

Religulous

So, the other thing which I have been pestered about as of late is whether or not I have seen Bill Maher’s movie Religulous. I can now finally say that I have now seen it. my over-all opinion of it is that it was better then I thought. It was not a heavy handed, in your face, fuck all religious people, sort of movie one might expect it to be. I am still amazed on a daily basis how the faithful can simultaneously constantly be on the retreat when it comes to giving reason and evidence and yet at the same time be on the advance when it comes to asserting their dogma is “truth”. How is it that the human mind can call something “truth” then they cannot even give a valid reason for why it should be believed, let alone for why it actually is the truth. That said, the movie was somewhat of an edifying experience, but over all told me nothing I did not already now, and in some ways only dealt with things on a very surface level.