[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/his/ - History & Humanities


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


A few years ago it seemed like everyone was a presup, but nowadays you almost never run into anyone employing this style of apologetics.
>>
idk my fav argument is fine tuning. and atheists suck at refuting this. best they can do is bring that marvel level ah multi verse shi.
>>
>>18254915
Multiverse is not my favourite rebuttal to fine-tuning, but it's a surprisingly elegant solution if you phrase it correctly. In its essence, the fine-tuning argument is asking why is there this specific universe and not another one. The multiverse rebuttal basically just runs with that question and goes "Yeah, why would that be the case? Maybe it just isn't."
In a way, it treats the question more seriously than the theist.



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.