Christians love to act skeptical of science and say something to the effect of, “Proof is not the entirety of truth. Believing that the world was a sphere (roughly) before it was proven to be so did not make that person wrong or delusional.”
This is a call to ignorance, radical skepticism and complacency. We can behave upon the grounds of what seems likely, and do so daily because that is the only practical way to live. From here the theist straddles the line between the God of the Gaps fallacy, or solipsism. The empty rhetoric these people use really says that we should not tentatively attach more credibility to what seems probable. They’re in effect saying, “No one knows the truth, so I will keep believing in what seems less probable.”
Let’s fix this stupid word game these tricky sophists are playing quickly by demanding they answer one of Aristotle’s question.
“There are no truths. Is this true or false?”
No matter what they say, Aristotle has got them cornered.
If they say “true” then they’ve admitted there are objective truths in reality, and have contradicted the solipsistic position. If they say false, then they have to retreat from solipsism. It’s a good line to have so you don’t need to waste time arguing with a plant. Thanks to this video for putting it so well:
Now if you want to subscribe to solipsism and pretend we can never have so-called “justified belief”, or act upon what is probable, then Aristotle has already killed your obsolete argument. In doing so you are also
1) using intellectually dishonest rhetoric
2) a hypocrite (no one really believes this or they would act like the ultimate egotist)
3) impeding progress towards the truth
4) You have already “lost” to yourself and me, and are only trying to save face. Someone who doesn’t believe there are objective truths that we can find out about is not worth arguing with, so you need to address this.
Or you can just save your breath and say:
I don’t want to argue with a solipsist, and if you’re saying I can peg you as one, then we never need to debate anything again. A discussion on solipsism is the probably most counter-productive and intellectually dishonest discussion possible.