|
Post by Worldquest on Feb 18, 2012 21:27:13 GMT
What did you think his books and talks were for? You still haven't answered my questions. I will answer your question when you answer mine. I think it is important to follow chronology in a debate. I don't believe that you would answer my question. I base this on the fact that you have avoided answering one of my questions previously. Dawkins' purpose in writing his books and giving his talks is to persuade people to reject theism in favour of his view (atheism), and that fact makes him a preacher. If you think his purpose is something else, you're welcome to your opinion. However his books and talks speak for themselves.
|
|
|
Post by flyingteapot on Mar 20, 2012 10:56:29 GMT
You still haven't answered my questions. I will answer your question when you answer mine. I think it is important to follow chronology in a debate. I don't believe that you would answer my question. I base this on the fact that you have avoided answering one of my questions previously. Dawkins' purpose in writing his books and giving his talks is to persuade people to reject theism in favour of his view (atheism), and that fact makes him a preacher. If you think his purpose is something else, you're welcome to your opinion. However his books and talks speak for themselves. Still waiting for evidence.
|
|
|
Post by Worldquest on Mar 20, 2012 13:02:23 GMT
You can't expect to have this discussion without some give and take.
|
|
|
Post by flyingteapot on Mar 21, 2012 3:16:41 GMT
You can't expect to have this discussion without some give and take. You are absolutely right. You give me some evidence of your claim. Person A: I claim X! Person B: Provide some evidence for your claim please. Person A: You can't expect to have this discussion without some give and take. Person B: Ummm..
|
|
|
Post by Worldquest on Mar 21, 2012 14:09:29 GMT
You're cheating. You've already refused to answer one of my questions and now you talk about me avoiding yours. That's not fair. If you want to follow chronology in a debate, why don't you wind back to when I asked you my hypothetical question, then we'll take it from there.
|
|
|
Post by flyingteapot on Mar 22, 2012 4:35:32 GMT
You're cheating. You've already refused to answer one of my questions and now you talk about me avoiding yours. That's not fair. If you want to follow chronology in a debate, why don't you wind back to when I asked you my hypothetical question, then we'll take it from there. No I'm not. Starting with reply #36, you have been repeating the same assertion over and over. I asked you why you think he is a preacher and I asked you to provide some evidence for your assertion, which you have failed to do, and instead asked me a rhetorical question 'what did you think his books and talks were for?'. If we are to follow chronology, you must answer my questions first. However, I will tell you what I think his books are for. They are for education and providing a point of view. Your turn!
|
|