M.D. Rawlings
Classical Liberal
The Little god Boss in the Gap Fallacy is Refuted Again!
Boss is arguing la-la. His "reasoning" is utterly arbitrary. Like all relativists, he's a slogan spouter. Those things that he likes that obviously hold true due to the logic we have he believes. Those things that he doesn't like that obviously hold true due to the logic that we have (For what other logic do we have but the logic that we have?) he disbelieves.
Nevertheless, I understand Boss' rational. I always have.
The bottom line: Boss necessarily holds that our logic anthropomorphizes God!
That's inevitably what he holds to be true. In fact, I know Boss has followed the line of reasoning that necessarily follows from his premise to its conclusion because he emphatically stated humans tend to ascribe sentience to God and, therefore, believe God desires to have relations with us due to the fact that human logic is the only means they have to think about God. And Boss is right. That's true. Our logic is the only means we have to think about God or about anything else. I do not dispute that.
But Boss doesn't stop there.
He goes on to say, that "only rubes like Rawlings actually believe that God has sentience or desires to have relations with us as our logic suggests. Rawlings is silly to believe that. I am more enlightened than Rawlings as I have a special logic that is not human. God created the logic we have for us because it leads us to believe spiritual things and to pursue spiritual things that are good for us [paraphrase]."
Hence, Boss knows for a fact that God does . . . not have sentience and does not desire to have relations with us!
Crickets Chirping
Non sequitur!
Rawlings: "So why do you refuse to believe that, Boss?"
Boss: "I refuse to believe that! We can only believe what's true, not know what's true, except what I know is true and you don't?"
Boss can't know that to be true, because his secrete knowledge does not necessarily follow.
According to Boss, there's no possibility at all that God theologized us. No. That's not possible. Nope. That couldn't be true. God didn't give us His logic. Nah. Human logic was created. There's no way in hell the logic we have is God's logic. That's stupid. Only idiots believe that.
In fact, Emily, you don't have Boss entirely right. He didn't just say that God created human logic. He said God created logic. Logic didn't exist before God created it.
(Though in his most recent post he wrote that in the absence of Logic is chaos. I wonder what that Logic is.)
Boss holds that God doesn't have logic. Doesn't use logic. Doesn't need logic. He also said that God doesn't have a mind or consciousness. Doesn't use these things. Doesn't need these things. Boss knows these things are true.
And how do we know that Boss is necessarily saying he knows these things are true, isn't merely saying that he believes these things are true?
Answer: Because when I tell him that none of these ridiculous ideas necessarily follow, he tells me that I'm an idiot. He tells me that anyone who believes (you know, like the billions of followers of the major monotheistic religions of the world) that God has sentience and desires to have relations with us are idiots.
So all these billions of people are idiots, but Boss has the inside track. He knows that our logic anthropomorphizes God for our own good, but God's . . . nonexistent mind . . . is not really like ours in anyway whatsoever. God didn't theologize us with His logic. That's not logically possible.
Boss knows this based on a non sequitur, based on something not recommended by logic at all, based on some special knowledge, some special logic, contrary to the ramifications of the logic we have . . . based on something he could not possibly know unless he were God Himself. (By the way, How does God known anything at all without a mind?) Boss thinks he's God. More to the point, Boss is a little god standing in the gap, just making things up as he goes along. He's a slogan spouter.
And Boss knows these things because according to him we can only believe things; we can't know things. Oh, wait! Apparently, Boss doesn't really mean we. He just means the rest of us mere mortals. He, on the other hand, knows things none of the rest of us can know.
That's weird.
Boss knows things that contradict the one thing that all the major religions of the word in history have in common, the one thing that all the major philosophical and theological constructs of divinity have in common, hold to be necessarily true, logically: God did not create logic, but bestowed His logic on His creation.
You see, the relativist is just an intellectual bully. He's arrogant, boastful, full of piggish pride. He's a petulant child. Smarmy. Some of the things that are logically true about God according to the laws of thought are cool. Other things that are logically true about God according to the laws of thought are not cool. It just depends on how this or that thing tastes in his mouth. The things that might have a tinge of obligation attached to them, curiously enough, aren't cool. Like I said, the relativist is a slogan spouter.
He's the self-anointed arbiter of truth who gets angry and abusive when you point out to him the non sequiturs and contradictions of his intellectual bigotry . The relativist is insulted by these things. How dare the commonsensical rubes of the world point out the idiocy of the unexamined decrees of the enlightened folks of the world!
I have always plainly seen and understood what you presented in the above, Emily, on the grounds of epistemological skepticism. The cogitation that God must have bestowed His logic on us could arguably be a freak of nature, a mere fluke of the bioneurologically hardwired logic of human cognition. It might not be ultimately or transcendentally true beyond the confines of our minds. That's because I'm an objective observer of things.
Though I do not believe that to be true in the face of logical necessity and probability, I can clearly see that what Boss is asserting might be true as a matter of potentiality—a hypothetical that is not outside the bounds of possibility, even though it be a weak possibility that actually undermines the proofs for God's existence, which flies right over Boss' head. No wonder the atheists like it, that is . . . when they're not arguing against Boss' other irrationalities that conflict with their irrationalities.
Nevertheless, I allow, unlike Boss who allows no proposition but his own irrational proposition, that Boss could be right. But let's be clear about something: If Boss is right, our logic necessarily does anthropomorphize God and, therefore, is not directing us to understand anything that's necessarily true about God at all. Boss has no grounds whatsoever to assert anything about God, not even the idea that we instinctively know God exists.
Paradox. Contradiction. Incoherency.
That's just Boss contradicting the logic the rest of us have with the special logic of the little god in the gap that he is. That's what Boss is calling reasonable. That's what he's saying he knows to be true after saying that we can't know anything to be true. That's the paradox of his believe-know dichotomy, fraught with incoherency and chaos, that applies to everyone else but him.
The little god Boss in the gap fallacy.
Boss is arguing la-la. His "reasoning" is utterly arbitrary. Like all relativists, he's a slogan spouter. Those things that he likes that obviously hold true due to the logic we have he believes. Those things that he doesn't like that obviously hold true due to the logic that we have (For what other logic do we have but the logic that we have?) he disbelieves.
Nevertheless, I understand Boss' rational. I always have.
The bottom line: Boss necessarily holds that our logic anthropomorphizes God!
That's inevitably what he holds to be true. In fact, I know Boss has followed the line of reasoning that necessarily follows from his premise to its conclusion because he emphatically stated humans tend to ascribe sentience to God and, therefore, believe God desires to have relations with us due to the fact that human logic is the only means they have to think about God. And Boss is right. That's true. Our logic is the only means we have to think about God or about anything else. I do not dispute that.
But Boss doesn't stop there.
He goes on to say, that "only rubes like Rawlings actually believe that God has sentience or desires to have relations with us as our logic suggests. Rawlings is silly to believe that. I am more enlightened than Rawlings as I have a special logic that is not human. God created the logic we have for us because it leads us to believe spiritual things and to pursue spiritual things that are good for us [paraphrase]."
Hence, Boss knows for a fact that God does . . . not have sentience and does not desire to have relations with us!
Crickets Chirping
Non sequitur!
Rawlings: "So why do you refuse to believe that, Boss?"
Boss: "I refuse to believe that! We can only believe what's true, not know what's true, except what I know is true and you don't?"
Boss can't know that to be true, because his secrete knowledge does not necessarily follow.
According to Boss, there's no possibility at all that God theologized us. No. That's not possible. Nope. That couldn't be true. God didn't give us His logic. Nah. Human logic was created. There's no way in hell the logic we have is God's logic. That's stupid. Only idiots believe that.
In fact, Emily, you don't have Boss entirely right. He didn't just say that God created human logic. He said God created logic. Logic didn't exist before God created it.
(Though in his most recent post he wrote that in the absence of Logic is chaos. I wonder what that Logic is.)
Boss holds that God doesn't have logic. Doesn't use logic. Doesn't need logic. He also said that God doesn't have a mind or consciousness. Doesn't use these things. Doesn't need these things. Boss knows these things are true.
And how do we know that Boss is necessarily saying he knows these things are true, isn't merely saying that he believes these things are true?
Answer: Because when I tell him that none of these ridiculous ideas necessarily follow, he tells me that I'm an idiot. He tells me that anyone who believes (you know, like the billions of followers of the major monotheistic religions of the world) that God has sentience and desires to have relations with us are idiots.
So all these billions of people are idiots, but Boss has the inside track. He knows that our logic anthropomorphizes God for our own good, but God's . . . nonexistent mind . . . is not really like ours in anyway whatsoever. God didn't theologize us with His logic. That's not logically possible.
Boss knows this based on a non sequitur, based on something not recommended by logic at all, based on some special knowledge, some special logic, contrary to the ramifications of the logic we have . . . based on something he could not possibly know unless he were God Himself. (By the way, How does God known anything at all without a mind?) Boss thinks he's God. More to the point, Boss is a little god standing in the gap, just making things up as he goes along. He's a slogan spouter.
And Boss knows these things because according to him we can only believe things; we can't know things. Oh, wait! Apparently, Boss doesn't really mean we. He just means the rest of us mere mortals. He, on the other hand, knows things none of the rest of us can know.
That's weird.
Boss knows things that contradict the one thing that all the major religions of the word in history have in common, the one thing that all the major philosophical and theological constructs of divinity have in common, hold to be necessarily true, logically: God did not create logic, but bestowed His logic on His creation.
You see, the relativist is just an intellectual bully. He's arrogant, boastful, full of piggish pride. He's a petulant child. Smarmy. Some of the things that are logically true about God according to the laws of thought are cool. Other things that are logically true about God according to the laws of thought are not cool. It just depends on how this or that thing tastes in his mouth. The things that might have a tinge of obligation attached to them, curiously enough, aren't cool. Like I said, the relativist is a slogan spouter.
He's the self-anointed arbiter of truth who gets angry and abusive when you point out to him the non sequiturs and contradictions of his intellectual bigotry . The relativist is insulted by these things. How dare the commonsensical rubes of the world point out the idiocy of the unexamined decrees of the enlightened folks of the world!
I have always plainly seen and understood what you presented in the above, Emily, on the grounds of epistemological skepticism. The cogitation that God must have bestowed His logic on us could arguably be a freak of nature, a mere fluke of the bioneurologically hardwired logic of human cognition. It might not be ultimately or transcendentally true beyond the confines of our minds. That's because I'm an objective observer of things.
Though I do not believe that to be true in the face of logical necessity and probability, I can clearly see that what Boss is asserting might be true as a matter of potentiality—a hypothetical that is not outside the bounds of possibility, even though it be a weak possibility that actually undermines the proofs for God's existence, which flies right over Boss' head. No wonder the atheists like it, that is . . . when they're not arguing against Boss' other irrationalities that conflict with their irrationalities.
Nevertheless, I allow, unlike Boss who allows no proposition but his own irrational proposition, that Boss could be right. But let's be clear about something: If Boss is right, our logic necessarily does anthropomorphize God and, therefore, is not directing us to understand anything that's necessarily true about God at all. Boss has no grounds whatsoever to assert anything about God, not even the idea that we instinctively know God exists.
Paradox. Contradiction. Incoherency.
That's just Boss contradicting the logic the rest of us have with the special logic of the little god in the gap that he is. That's what Boss is calling reasonable. That's what he's saying he knows to be true after saying that we can't know anything to be true. That's the paradox of his believe-know dichotomy, fraught with incoherency and chaos, that applies to everyone else but him.
The little god Boss in the gap fallacy.
Last edited:
I believe that the phonies of the peanut gallery are "crazier than a paranoid schizophrenic with a megaphone haranguing a manic depressive hallucinating on LSD and holding a shotgun." 
I don't care who you are that's even funnier than a three-legged horse running in the Belmont Stakes. Would you please tell us how God's logic could be different from the logic of organic thought?
