Hi, Mikey.
mike the wiz writes:
The argument wasn't in the least flawed but is logically sound.
It is absolutely true, that whether God does or does not exist, this will never affect what you choose to eat.
"Logically sound" isn't just a quality that some statement has: it's a description of the methods used to obtain a result. When you say something is "logically sound," you are not simply saying that it makes sense, but that you defined a number of premises, and drew a conclusion from those premises using systematic formulae.
So, what premises are there to your argument that God's existence does not affect a person's decision?
Well, the only premise you have is that God's existence does not affect a person's decision.
Unfortunately, you chose this as your
conclusion, also. Whenever your premise and your conclusion are the same thing, your argument is referred to as "circular."
Thus, your argument is not logically sound.
-----
If you wanted to make it logical, you'd have to do more than just make a statement. For instance, let's add a couple premises:
Premise A: God has a health code that forbids the consumption of chocolate.
Premise B: I know that God will strike me down if I defy His health code.
Premise C: I like chocolate
Now, I can do some logic. Given these premises, will my decision to eat chocolate or fruit change, depending on whether or not God exists?
Of course it will: I like chocolate, but, if God exists, He will kill me for eating chocolate. So, I will only eat the chocolate if God does not exist.
That is what a logically sound argument looks like.
Yours is just a statement that "makes sense" to you.
"Makes sense" and "logically sound" are two very different things.
Edited by Bluejay, : Re-formatted list of premises
-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)
Darwin loves you.