Quote:
|
No answer huh? Is a smart assed remark really the best you can do? You made the claim that we are not human beings from the time we are concieved. Either we are not, in which case we undergo some metamoprhosis in which we change from non human to human or we are. You don't seem to be able to prove your point so you switch to smart ass mode in an attempt to get yourself out of the corner you painted yourself into.
|
I pointed out the basis for your reasoning is obsolete under modern logic. It was your obligation to agree, and in doing so lose the argument, or say no and explain why your essentialism remains valid. You are in no position to accuse anyone for not answering when you yourself didn't explain why you are justified in thinking under the logical conditions you do. Right now, you seem to be faking pretty hard that essentialism is the strongest current of thought in science, as if it were a "given" rather than your very strange exception to the rule. For you see, thanks to the groundbreaking research of the 20th century, the dominant way of thinkng in science is
relativism, not essentialism.