Comment: Infinite Regression or Diminishing Returns

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Logical contradictions abound. (see in situ)

Infinite Regression or Diminishing Returns

I'm adequately well read, thank you very much, and as I assume that you are also well read as most of your comments drip with boasting of such. It's therefore quite logical to assume that we have read different material.

Speaking of logic, what in my comment ten inches above is not logical to you? What's quite evident to me is that we apparently hold differing systems of belief, nothing to do with logic whatsoever.

You are clearly beyond me in volume of studying a particularly focused theology, but you are incorrect in my failing Logic 101. As a Philosophy major in college [before switching to Religious Studies] I put in the time and effort to receive an "A" in that particular class.

I'm quite clueless about what you might find illogical about what I wrote in my comment. Any clarification would be greatly appreciated. Feel free to use quotes, for your previous attempt to abridge didn't quite match what I had written.

By the way, I have not suffered whatsoever in any fashion while engaging this post at any time. I've been quite happy and have thoroughly enjoyed my experience with all of it. Even now.

Oh, here's something regarding your logic that I don't quite follow...

"Lucifer is not a creator. The creator doesn't have a boss..."

Your articles ["a" and "the"] don't match. As such there is no flow of logic. The two phrases seem unrelated. As such there is no point made. It simply stands as haphazard bits of your belief splashed onto the page. My attempt to make sense of it compelled me to inject the simple notion of a plurality of creators. I didn't just make up that notion on the fly either. A well read scholar might know that it has been a common belief held for millennia. There is much to read about it, certainly all the way back to Plato and then some. It doesn't even necessarily deny the concept of a master creator, the one who created the lesser creators. Salvador Dali was a master. The bulk of painting attributed to him was actually done by his students. The bulk of Edison's invention was conjured by his employees. I am unconcerned with whether or not you believe "Lucifer" was a creator, but do you find the existence of multiple creators to be illogical?

Logic really has nothing much to do with the presumption we introduce. That is more to do with belief or speculation. Logic has to do with how and where presumption is carried. From what you've implied about my failed logic I assume you need no further instruction of it, but let me know if you need further "reminding" of its regard as I certainly won't suffer the task. I may even find it quite delightful, assuming we don't lose our heads to mere non sequitor.