Quote:
Originally Posted by tame_deuces
If the logical reasoning is valid, then a paradox implies faulty premises.
No, this is false, and it demonstrates an utter misunderstanding of what a paradox is. A paradox arises precisely when both premises are unassailable. Otherwise, it would not be a paradox.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tame_deuces
As for your argument, at this point it's just an extremely convoluted way of saying "I don't know". Which again, makes the acceptance of "God" a leap of faith. I think it's safe to say you've left the cosmological argument behind a long time ago.
My argument is an explanation of why we are incompetent to make intelligible commentary in such domains. Your previous argument implied that it was necessary to attribute certain traits to 'God', which is a non sequitur (see above). Now, perhaps after realizing you have no substantive retort, you proffer a fallacious summary of my position to avoid admitting its merit. Moreover, we're not exactly discussing the cosmological argument directly at this juncture, so your mention of it here is another attempt to shift gears. The argument is about the extent of reason as applied to first principles.
Lastly, as related above, the fact that the concept of first principles is itself not beyond reason implies that acceptance of 'God' is not necessarily a leap of faith. You're conflating a described god (e.g., one from scripture) with the concept of god.