User Tag List

123 Last

Results 1 to 10 of 56

Thread: LOL

  1. #1
    Member ferunandesu's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INxP
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Socionics
    ENTp
    Posts
    96

    Default LOL



    Ahem. Click the smiley.

  2. #2
    Senior Member niffer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ENfP
    Enneagram
    8w9 sx/sp
    Posts
    1,219

    Default



    btw, your avatar is extremely appealing to me.
    sparkly sparkly rainbow excretions

    Quote Originally Posted by ThatGirl View Post
    holy shit am I a feeler?
    if you like my avatar, it's because i took it myself! : D

  3. #3
    Member Beyonder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    intp
    Posts
    66

    Default

    *Yawn*. His only solid argument is that children can see through religion as 'evidenced' by them asking questions about it. Those other things can't be possibly proven to be related. Cum hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy in the best case, a non sequitur in the worst. If Monty Python kinds of arguments convince some people, I pity their frontal lobes.
    And on to his actual argument. Because religion isn't about constructing logically coherent systems, but actually tries to talk about reality, those systems can't actually be judged on their coherency (wich is what children are asking for). It's also illogical (inefficient) for a bee to die because it used it's stinger. And yeah, I do know how that works, so don't bother explaining it. What I'm talking about is that bees evolved from wasps, and wasps don't have barbs on their stingers; this causes them to not die when they use it... So why do bees have (suicidal) barbs on their stinger? Maybe because reality isn't logically coherent?
    "I determined nothing."
    -Sceptical expression

  4. #4
    Senior Member HilbertSpace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    143

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beyonder View Post
    What I'm talking about is that bees evolved from wasps, and wasps don't have barbs on their stingers; this causes them to not die when they use it...So why do bees have (suicidal) barbs on their stinger? Maybe because reality isn't logically coherent?
    Or maybe it's because those types of bees are eusocial organisms and wasps are not. A bee colony is itself a superorganism because of shared genetic information, and so the survival of individual non-breeding members is non-essential. In addition, many of the wasps use their stingers to hunt, whereas bees are pollen-feeders who sting defensively.
    JBS Haldane's Four Stages of Scientific Theories:

    1. This is worthless nonsense.
    2. This is an interesting, but perverse, point of view.
    3. This is true, but quite unimportant.
    4. I always said so.

  5. #5
    Member ferunandesu's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INxP
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Socionics
    ENTp
    Posts
    96

    Default

    That clip wasn't an argument. It was an Fe outburst. Sometimes people just have to call it like they see it.

    Saying that reality isn't logically coherent neither follows from whatever the hell you said about bees and wasps nor does it make it probable nor is it a good analogy. However, of course reality isn't always logically coherent. Logic is an axiomatic system, like mathematics and geometry, and like those two it can never perfectly model reality - Nothing can! Before there can be a deduction there must be an induction, and a perfect induction has never been shown to be possible. The merit of an induction is whether or not a useful, observable prediction about reality can be derived and shown to be damn true. BTW, this a tangent.

  6. #6
    Senior Member niffer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ENfP
    Enneagram
    8w9 sx/sp
    Posts
    1,219

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ferunandesu View Post
    That clip wasn't an argument. It was an Fe outburst. Sometimes people just have to call it like they see it.

    Saying that reality isn't logically coherent neither follows from whatever the hell you said about bees and wasps nor does it make it probable nor is it a good analogy. However, of course reality isn't always logically coherent. Logic is an axiomatic system, like mathematics and geometry, and like those two it can never perfectly model reality - Nothing can! Before there can be a deduction there must be an induction, and a perfect induction has never been shown to be possible. The merit of an induction is whether or not a useful, observable prediction about reality can be derived and shown to be damn true. It's called reason. BTW, this a tangent.
    Exactly. And it's fun to watch angry old men question religion and conclude their experiences on the human race.
    sparkly sparkly rainbow excretions

    Quote Originally Posted by ThatGirl View Post
    holy shit am I a feeler?
    if you like my avatar, it's because i took it myself! : D

  7. #7
    Member ferunandesu's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INxP
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Socionics
    ENTp
    Posts
    96

    Default

    Also, if you want to read an argument for belief in God stemming from anatomy, then google Ramachandran and God.

  8. #8
    Member Beyonder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    intp
    Posts
    66

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ferunandesu View Post
    That clip wasn't an argument. It was an Fe outburst. Sometimes people just have to call it like they see it.
    Oh. I don't care.
    Saying that reality isn't logically coherent neither follows from whatever the hell you said about bees and wasps nor does it make it probable nor is it a good analogy.
    And why is that so? I think it was, since it doesn't follow that bees should evolve such a mechanism. Or where you just calling it like you see it?

    However, of course reality isn't always logically coherent.
    ...
    Logic is an axiomatic system, like mathematics and geometry, and like those two it can never perfectly model reality - Nothing can!
    That's formal logic, there. Informal logic is rhetorical, while it was experientially figured out by the ancients...

    Before there can be a deduction there must be an induction
    Already known since Aristotle.

    and a perfect induction has never been shown to be possible. The merit of an induction is whether or not a useful, observable prediction about reality can be derived and shown to be damn true.
    ... to be likely. Truth is a different topic, wich is more about verificationalism (see critique of Poppers falsificationalism by actual scientists, on this one) than just syllogistic logic. You really don't need to explain such stuff to me.

    Also, if you want to read an argument for belief in God stemming from anatomy, then google Ramachandran and God.
    I think I'll pass on this one. I really don't need to go out and look for stuff I want to argue against. That stuff usually just presents itself to me.
    "I determined nothing."
    -Sceptical expression

  9. #9
    Member Beyonder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    intp
    Posts
    66

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HilbertSpace View Post
    Or maybe it's because those types of bees are eusocial organisms and wasps are not. A bee colony is itself a superorganism because of shared genetic information, and so the survival of individual non-breeding members is non-essential. In addition, many of the wasps use their stingers to hunt, whereas bees are pollen-feeders who sting defensively.
    ... Wich doesn't say anything about cause>effect, on this topic. Argueing ad hoc there, buddy.

    And the eusocial status of bees doesn't say anything 'bout them having a suicidal attack; other eusocial animals also self-sacrifice (like the second ant in a harvesting leafcutter-ant duo), but they don't necessarily use suicidal attacks. Besides, some wasps also are eusocial.
    The only reason for bees to have such a mechanism is to increase the 'firepower', so to speak, of their kamikaze attack; nature could have equipped them otherwise. There is no reason for them to have such a mechanism, wich is exactly what I was trying to point out.
    "I determined nothing."
    -Sceptical expression

  10. #10
    Senior Member HilbertSpace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    143

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beyonder View Post
    ... Wich doesn't say anything about cause>effect. Argueing ad hoc there, buddy.
    You said it was irrational that bees should have a barbed stinger, I gave a rationale. I remain confused by your assertion that it is illogical that bee stingers should be barbed and that stings result in death. I pointed out why it is of advantage to a wasp to sting repeatedly (from utility and from genetic survival), and why a bee has no such advantage. I did not think it necessary to point out the evolutionary advantages of a barbed stinger, but again, it is a matter of utility. A wasp must maintain contact with its target in order to inject the venom. This is reasonable because, again, wasp stingers are intended for hunting, primarily insects. Defensive stings have an advantage in being barbed, though, because the bee does not have to remain in contact with the target in order to inject venom. Bee stingers continue to pump after the bee has been pulled away, or has been killed - bees only require fleeting contact, and swatting the bee will not help. Fly and die works better when genetic non-contributors are defending a nest against a relatively large mammal. Sting and sting again is required for hunting.

    There are even stingless bees, which bite instead of having a suicidal sting, but they generally produce little honey, and so are less concerned with nest defense (and many of which, in any case, have a painful bite like that of ants).

    So, the survival of individual guard bees has no genetic significance to the bee colony, since they're not genetic individuals the way wasps are. In addition, the barbed sting has a selective advantage when the context of use is considered.

    This is the crux of the argument against a particular approach to religion - ignorance, or a God of the Gaps, is not a sufficient excuse to indulge in arbitrary mysticism.
    JBS Haldane's Four Stages of Scientific Theories:

    1. This is worthless nonsense.
    2. This is an interesting, but perverse, point of view.
    3. This is true, but quite unimportant.
    4. I always said so.

Similar Threads

  1. LOL.
    By rainfall in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 03-22-2008, 09:55 PM
  2. Now you can "lol" anything with lolcat builder!
    By Tigerlily in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 56
    Last Post: 02-05-2008, 02:05 PM
  3. I'm a total n00b lol
    By machintruc in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 02-02-2008, 02:01 PM
  4. Monkeys sexually harassing women? (no, not dating lol)
    By Sahara in forum Home, Garden and Nature
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 11-08-2007, 12:19 PM
  5. Ninja Warrior! It's Like A Real Live Ninja Camp,lol.
    By ladypinkington in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-27-2007, 01:31 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