Thursday, January 7, 2010
"... what a surprise - Stewart constructs an argument defending Obama in Afghanistan - analog: Aquinas was brilliant, but I know that if I could travel back in time armed with my Hume and sit down for a chat with him no matter how many times I raised doubts concerning the existence of a God and the rational foundations of any faith in such he would always be constructing arguments to prove me wrong - and that's because the first premise in any argument Aquinas would make is that there must be a God and therefore faith and the universe must be rational. So to with the Obamaphiles: they start out with an unshakable conviction concerning the truth of their beliefs and then construct an argument to demonstrate how it all makes sense. Open with a gambling conceit! Prejudice your audience with false premises - because of course no one really wins at gambling, any stolen victory is transitory, an illusion - and therefore a truly rational and enlightened man, if forced to engage is such an evil game, would play it safe - presto! - exactly what Obama, brilliant man that he is, has chosen to do in Afghanistan. QED. Our devotions are defended and our faith preserved. Credo in unum Deum, Patrem omnipotentem, factorem caeli et terrae, visibilium omnium et invisibilium..."
