That's my point. If you pretend to know something when you're only sure, you don't come across as knowing what you're talking about, much less able to help anybody else understand anything.
We may have the free will to create our own arbitrary "purposes". That's not the same thing as "life having purpose".
No it isn't.
Yes is it, but so what?
It may or may not have a purpose. There's no way to know.
True.
Not necessarily. Sometimes I do things unintentionally.
Not necessarily. For all we know, we are an accident. You have no way of knowing.
For cryin' out loud, stop telling us to read and try to understand. If we are not getting your meaning it is because you have not clarified your intended meaning sufficiently.
If there is a creator.
No. The creator (if any) may have had a purose in mind for his creation - and he may have hoped to impose HIS purpose on his creation.
If there was a creator, "almighty" or otherwise, he would certainly be a failure. Giving us free will and expecting us to follow HIS will? Come on. It shouldn't have been difficult to figure out that that wasn't gonna happen.
Well, I don't see it as totally illogical. I prefer to think of it like lab rats. The lab scientist breeds the rats and sets up the maze for the rats, then lets them loose in the maze to observe their behavior. If the rats escape the maze, he captures them and puts them back in so they don't get eaten by the cat.
Until he no longer has a use for them and kills them.
Alas, we can no more defend this claim than Dicart can defend his that there is one.
We can say that lack of evidence is evidence.
You can argue that the opponent's claim is not defended adequately, but you can't claim there is no God and be able to defend it.
