Seems you are again in full retreat…. Can’t back up your allegations….unable to participate in any sort of rational discussion.
Sorry you missed the point, guess I couldn’t dumb it down enough for you to either understand or offer any sort of thoughtful reply.
Meh…
You didn't "dumb it down", you created a straw man.
Nope, don’t think so. Just tried to illustrate ….that one need not know HOW something was made to know THAT it was made.
Seems he either can’t admit that….or….?….who knows….
So….here we are again…. Must we know HOW something is made to know THAT it exists?
Simple question….
You're conflating exists with "being made" by a sentient being. They are not synonymous.
Nope…. Keep the concept simple…..if one sees, holds and something….does that one need to know how it came into existence to KNOW it exists?
Just stick to the basic point….
Say did you just try to insert a “straw man” here?
Regarding you comment about conflating…are trying to make a case that something can be “made” without the involvement of a sentient being?
Edit to add: gotta get some sleep….will check on this tomorrow
Nope:
From The Century Dictionary
made mād noun
Created; wrought; fabricated; constructed.
Artificially produced; formed independently of natural development: as, made ground (ground made up of earth from another place); a made word. Drawn from various sources; formed of several parts or ingredients: as, a made dish; composite; built up: as, a made mast (a mast composed of several sticks bound together by iron hoops, in contradistinction to a single-spar mast).
Concocted; invented; fictitious: as, a made-up tale or excuse.
Your many words simply divert from the main issue…
So, you seem to have hinted at something and I would like to see some clarification from you….
If one is confronted with something that is been “made” or “fashioned”…..can one conclude that a sentient being was involved in the action act if “making” it?
Words have meaning.
You are intentionally conflation words with different meanings to confuse the point.
Whoa.... lots of bobbing and weaving here.....
You seem to be willing to comment on others opinions yet here you are... starting topics and making statements that you refuse to acknowledge nor defend.
You made previous comments about hypocrisy and here you are..the kettle, calling the pot black. Whew!
So, first, the question that DBT runs away from.... simple, but both you and DBT avoid it.....
#1 "Must we know HOW something is made to know THAT it exists?"
I also tried to make it easier on the two of you... I restated: "...if one sees, holds a nd something... does one need to know HOW it came into existences to KNOW it exists?
This is ludicrously simple yet you two avoid it..... why?
You also objected to a previous wording of this question and implied that "conflation" paid a visit and the word "made" implied "being made by a sentient being". OK, that is a good comment, so I ask simply if there is evidence that something has been "made"... does that .... logically infer that a "sentient being was involved.
Again, very simple.... YOU brought this "sentient being" aspect up, not me.
The tax collector said: “Lord Jesus, have mercy on me, a sinner.” Jesus said he went home “justified.”
