>>81851789
>1. False dichotomy: It assumes that if something is conceptual, it's automatically subjective or arbitrary
if logic only exists in minds, it dies when minds do. calling it "conceptual" doesn't solve that. either logic is universal or it's brain fog.
>2. Assumes your metaphysical view is the right one, even so, metaphysics can be entirely avoided, read Carnap
carnap used logic while claiming to avoid metaphysics. that's a metaphysical move. you can't escape it, you're just sneaking it in.
>3. Begging the question
not assuming god. i'm asking how you justify logic, morality, or science *without* something transcendent. show your grounding.
>4. it very much is, also define ''god''
god = eternal, immaterial, rational source of all logic, order, and moral law. not thor, not zeus, not a sky dad.
>5. Multiple ''gods'' which arent consistent still doesnt debunk anything
sure, but if they contradict each other, they can't all be true. most don't even try to ground logic or morality.
>6. In the case of true omnipotence yes, which is why omnipotence is a logically incoherent concept entirely
then you're admitting logic is above god. congrats, you're back to needing logic to exist eternally, which materialism can't explain.
>7. And?
and it means your god is useless for knowing truth. no revelation = no foundation = cope harder.
>8. My god is the most powerful thing possible and created everything and all logic and all science, also morality isn't truth apt
k, now justify that god and show it accounts for reason. otherwise you're just riffing off the christian framework you mock.
>9. it's fallacious on the grounds working down from everything i categorically debunked
you didn't debunk anything. you asserted stuff without proof and relied on logic the whole time while denying its grounding.