User Tag List

First 78910 Last

Results 81 to 90 of 94

  1. #81
    Occasional Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    4,223

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DisneyFanGirl View Post
    I'm just going to say I believe in God and I don't want a whole discussion about why I'm wrong or why you disagree with me. I'm not changing my mind. Now back to the topic and don't mind me!!
    Aw; I wanted to argue.

  2. #82
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    Will
    Posts
    5,927

    Default

    This is what God does in my words:
    The meaning of life is becoming God, the Grand Architect, the Perfect One free of all restrictions, channeling the timeless electric flow of the luminous waters of Chi, Prana, Akasha, the living Force of Creation, controlling eternally whirling ether cycles, transforming into the infinite forms of evolution, shaped by focus and strength of willpower, harmoniously orchestrating superstring symphonies, rearranging the codifications of the Akashic Records, the Luminiferous Aether, the Universal Supercomputer, the Mind of God, destroying old laws and programming new laws into the Omniversal Existential Game, humbly awakening to all motion picture perspectives of the multidimensional relativistic reality, forging and annihilating the stars, flying above and beyond the constellations, the Higher Balance of Heaven, unleashing the Divine Arcanum of the Cosmic Creator, the Ultimate Destiny.

  3. #83
    Junior Member Unperson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    16

    Default

    Anyone who's read "The God Delusion" will have seen the 7-point scale of belief. Nobody can be a 1 or a 7 (completely sure either way), and everyone is resigned to being 2-6, including Dawkins himself, as no one can know everything. He's always been open about his agnostic atheism, but agnostic atheism is not to be taken as a weak atheism or what have you. Our atheism (both of ours) would be a 6, and as high as human beings can have, in terms of disbelief.

    This article (and the others like it) are pretty much just signs that the authors in question have not read The God Delusion, heard Richard talk, or just want to create controversy and get views. Ridiculous.

  4. #84
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,134

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Unperson View Post
    Nobody can be a 1 or a 7 (completely sure either way)
    Why, because people are rational?

  5. #85
    Junior Member Unperson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicodemus View Post
    Why, because people are rational?
    It's been a while since I've read the book, a couple of years at least, but the way Dawkins explained it was, we, as humans, do not know everything, and further, cannot know everything. For anyone to claim either a 1 or a 7 requires them to claim absolute knowledge. As absolute knowledge, by anything short of a god, is impossible, the claim is either exaggerated or just flat-out false.

    2 is a strong theist, 6 is a strong atheist. Everyone is an agnostic something, on the Dawkins scale. You have to be an agnostic atheist or an agnostic theist, because you must admit, if not to others, at least to yourself, that you could very well be wrong about your ideas, values, and beliefs.

    In terms of the question of god, someone has to be right, of course, but no one can ever know that. You can say god speaks to you, but so will others in other religions. You can say god speaks to no one, and everyone who thinks god does is a mental case. Everyone is entitled to these ideas, but there is no assurance that they are right, just a personal supposition one way or the other.

  6. #86
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,134

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Unperson View Post
    It's been a while since I've read the book, a couple of years at least, but the way Dawkins explained it was, we, as humans, do not know everything, and further, cannot know everything. For anyone to claim either a 1 or a 7 requires them to claim absolute knowledge. As absolute knowledge, by anything short of a god, is impossible, the claim is either exaggerated or just flat-out false.
    Epistemologically speaking, we cannot know anything with absolute certainty. However, that does not mean that people do not believe to know things with absolute certainty. Knowledge, after all, is nothing but justified belief; and what counts as justification is up to the individual. So one can also be a 1 or a 7.

  7. #87
    Junior Member Unperson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicodemus View Post
    Epistemologically speaking, we cannot know anything with absolute certainty. However, that does not mean that people do not believe to know things with absolute certainty. Knowledge, after all, is nothing but justified belief; and what counts as justification is up to the individual. So one can also be a 1 or a 7.
    I don't recall him arguing from the point of what the individual thinks is true, because yes, anyone who holds a position, especially a "strong" position, will believe themselves to be correct. Why otherwise would they hold it?

    They can still be wrong. In the end it's probably a toss-up to who's right on this issue anyways, so while we have our opinions, our opinions are not a measure of reality, they are a mesure of our own realities.

    I think I'm right, my friend thinks she's right, we have no way of finding out who's right, but we would both be wrong, and we'll both readily admit such. What's wrong with that? Dawkins is taking the humble point of view, as in The God Delusion: we're not all-knowing and never will be.

  8. #88
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,134

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Unperson View Post
    I don't recall him arguing from the point of what the individual thinks is true, because yes, anyone who holds a position, especially a "strong" position, will believe themselves to be correct.
    If he is not arguing from that point of view, the whole scale makes no sense, because if it not about degrees of belief in what is true, it is about degrees of truth, of which there are but two: 0 and 100. You said it yourself:

    Quote Originally Posted by Unperson View Post
    Anyone who's read "The God Delusion" will have seen the 7-point scale of belief.

  9. #89
    Junior Member Unperson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicodemus View Post
    If he is not arguing from that point of view, the whole scale makes no sense, because if it not about degrees of belief in what is true, it is about degrees of truth, of which there are but two: 0 and 100. You said it yourself:
    Fair enough, but it's not my scale, it's the scale Richard Dawkins put forward.

    I'll grant you your points and say in response that mine wasn't to back up his scale, necessarily, merely to explain that the position Richard Dawkins held hasn't changed over the years.

    p.s. if you were expecting a debate, sorry I'm not very good at it lol.

  10. #90
    Senior Member Beargryllz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    2,739

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Unperson View Post
    It's been a while since I've read the book, a couple of years at least, but the way Dawkins explained it was, we, as humans, do not know everything, and further, cannot know everything. For anyone to claim either a 1 or a 7 requires them to claim absolute knowledge. As absolute knowledge, by anything short of a god, is impossible, the claim is either exaggerated or just flat-out false.

    2 is a strong theist, 6 is a strong atheist. Everyone is an agnostic something, on the Dawkins scale. You have to be an agnostic atheist or an agnostic theist, because you must admit, if not to others, at least to yourself, that you could very well be wrong about your ideas, values, and beliefs.

    In terms of the question of god, someone has to be right, of course, but no one can ever know that. You can say god speaks to you, but so will others in other religions. You can say god speaks to no one, and everyone who thinks god does is a mental case. Everyone is entitled to these ideas, but there is no assurance that they are right, just a personal supposition one way or the other.
    As an agnostic atheist, I would say that Dawkins is deluded or fails at making meaningful numerical scales

    If no one can be totally sure, why even have 1-7

    Why not just make it a scale of 2-6?

    But that is stupid, because you can absolutely be sure of yourself

    Why can't a perfectly average human being believe something with great certainty? Certainty great enough to make doubt an unnecessary expenditure of our valuable time in this beautiful world

Similar Threads

  1. Which Philosopher Do You Dislike the Most?
    By logan235711 in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 113
    Last Post: 08-02-2017, 11:14 PM
  2. "Root of All Evil?" doco by Richard Dawkins
    By darlets in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 06-29-2015, 08:39 AM
  3. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 02-15-2012, 02:06 AM
  4. What is the most paranoid type?
    By Kiddo in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 10-12-2007, 07:22 PM
  5. The Enemies of Reason by Richard Dawkins
    By Sahara in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 08-20-2007, 12:26 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO