Reply #181: The discussion ending issue is logic itself

[Qibing Zero]

If empirical knowledge is completely discounted from the start, what basis do you have to continue on? Once you start arguing over bible passages, you've accepted their faulty framework (as an attempt to 'reach' them, yes, I understand). It's like when people argue that the Iraq War was wrong because it was handled incompetently - that accepts the framework that the war would have somehow been okay if things 'went well'.

The point I'm trying to make is that if you don't argue the base issues (which are really what you disagree on in the first place), no real progress is going to be made.