>>511152221
>here's some random fallacies i've heard of. no, i'm not going to explain why they apply.
k
>Knowledge can be grounded in natural processes, intersubjective validation, and practical success, none of which require a transcendent referent.
3 problems with this

the conflation of reliability vs truth.
just because something "works" doesn't mean it's true. it could just be a useful fiction.
arguing for what's a useful fiction from an atheist standpoint is pretty funny, since Christianity is demonstrably a gorillion times more conducive to social flourishing than atheism.

there's also the subjectivity loop.
intersubjective consensus can stabalize falsehoods too, history is full of wrong ideas upheld by society.

and still! the biggest problem!
no ultimate grounding.
without something external and absolute, knowledge becomes probabilistic and vulnerable to skepticism or relativism.
leading to anomie, leading to suicidality.