What made you JUMP to this ASSUMPTION and CONCLUSION, which is Wrong, by the way?Astro Cat wrote: ↑Thu Jun 30, 2022 11:32 amOK. I think the OP's interesting, you don't. That's fine.Age wrote: ↑Thu Jun 30, 2022 11:25 am If ANY one is 'trying to' argue 'for' God, by putting up some so-called 'transcendental argument', starting with the premise that God is transcendentally required for logic (or "the laws of logic"), and that therefore non-theistic positions are doomed from the start since they must rely on logic to be argued, then this is just circular reasoning and therefore just a fallacy in the argument. End of story.
One does not need to 'argue' against faulty reasoning. Just point out or show the fault or flaw in their reasoning, and that ends 'that argument', completely.
Are you not at all interested in having the flaws, faults, inconsistencies, and/or contradictions in your writings pointed out and shown here?