I get it that you really are not able to follow my critique of his laughable presentation of classical theism as the strongest version of the god idea. You can't follow philosophy which is why you just parroted his conclusion but can't offer any counter argument to my points other than sophist distractions.
My statements about a guy on a blog who is not in a give and take discussion with me are in no way parallel to chatting directly with a person on a forum like this and derailing the discussion with personal attacks. I know that you will never understand this point. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <authfriend@...> wrote : I can't resist highlighting this example of Curtis's typical hypocrisy; it's so blatant: You know what you COULD have done? Presented why you find classical theism to be the strongest version of the god idea. You know, like a real discussion of ideas between people who disagree but like to express their opinions. But you don't have a conversational handle on the philosophical ideas do you? So instead you do your formulaic Judy thing. To each his or her own. Have another look at Curtis's critique of Feser and ask yourself whether he followed his own recommendation, or whether he repeatedly viciously attacked Feser personally. Excuse me, I have to go take a bath now.
