User Tag List

First 16242526272836 Last

Results 251 to 260 of 444

  1. #251
    A window to the soul
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jwn86 View Post
    Rational thought is an illusion. Everyone has faith, it's just a matter of what they have faith in. Atheists have faith that there is no such thing as faith, for instance. It takes faith to breathe air, as you have to believe there is air to breathe. You can say, well I know there will be air because there was air before, so it's rational thought and not faith. This is an illusion, however, and would only be possible in a vacuum where time doesn't pass and things don't change. Therefore, due to the changing circumstances of life, the fact that there is no time but the present, and no guarantee that the present will mimic the past or the future, the present, faith is required to do anything. The question is, what do you place your faith in. Ultimately, it is wisest to place your faith in God because God is the creator of anything else one could put faith in.

    From http://www.typologycentral.com/forum...=1#post1610369

    Faith is actually not some mystical voodoo spiritual feeling. One's faith is the nature of that person's agreement with God. "Faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. (Hebrews 11:1)" This verse is often misunderstood... with knowledge of God's promise through Jesus Christ, one has an ability to be assured of the hope sought for which produces evidence despite that thing having yet to happen. Let's say you have faith that the Amtrak will arrive on time at 7:05... your faith produces a confidence in that event, and that confidence produces evidence because knowing it will be on time means you'll be sure to be there by 7:05, and sure enough your faith is the reason you'll be riding the train at 7:10. Unlike fallible things we're accustomed to, God is infallible. In fact, God is infallible unto Himself, i.e. we "swear to God", but God swears by Himself, He cannot lie and there is no deception or darkness in Him. This is why Jesus would tell people "your faith has made you well"... He was not saying their mystical voodoo feeling is what cured them, no, God cured them... however, He was informing them that as far as their participation in the matter is concerned, it was their agreement to God's ability which allowed the healing to occur.

    God made the heart for worship by faith... you can deny this but inevitably all anyone can and will do is worship something or someone by faith and attempt to have life through that relation.


    Roger that!

  2. #252
    Senior Member Lex Talionis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    382

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jwn86 View Post
    Rational thought is an illusion. Everyone has faith, it's just a matter of what they have faith in. Atheists have faith that there is no such thing as faith, for instance. It takes faith to breathe air, as you have to believe there is air to breathe. You can say, well I know there will be air because there was air before, so it's rational thought and not faith. This is an illusion, however, and would only be possible in a vacuum where time doesn't pass and things don't change. Therefore, due to the changing circumstances of life, the fact that there is no time but the present, and no guarantee that the present will mimic the past or the future, the present, faith is required to do anything. The question is, what do you place your faith in. Ultimately, it is wisest to place your faith in God because God is the creator of anything else one could put faith in.

    From http://www.typologycentral.com/forum...=1#post1610369

    Faith is actually not some mystical voodoo spiritual feeling. One's faith is the nature of that person's agreement with God. "Faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. (Hebrews 11:1)" This verse is often misunderstood... with knowledge of God's promise through Jesus Christ, one has an ability to be assured of the hope sought for which produces evidence despite that thing having yet to happen. Let's say you have faith that the Amtrak will arrive on time at 7:05... your faith produces a confidence in that event, and that confidence produces evidence because knowing it will be on time means you'll be sure to be there by 7:05, and sure enough your faith is the reason you'll be riding the train at 7:10. Unlike fallible things we're accustomed to, God is infallible. In fact, God is infallible unto Himself, i.e. we "swear to God", but God swears by Himself, He cannot lie and there is no deception or darkness in Him. This is why Jesus would tell people "your faith has made you well"... He was not saying their mystical voodoo feeling is what cured them, no, God cured them... however, He was informing them that as far as their participation in the matter is concerned, it was their agreement to God's ability which allowed the healing to occur.


    God made the heart for worship by faith... you can deny this but inevitably all anyone can and will do is worship something or someone by faith and attempt to have life through that relation.
    Existence is ultimately irrational, but it does not follow from this that rational thought is an "illusion." Rationality is a fundamental human characteristic without which we would be incapable of reconciling our position in the universe. Reason demands justification, explanation, and logical consistency; it is therefore the only valid form of inference and the closest approximation to "truth."

    Some of us are far more proficient at employing reason when drawing judgments or conclusions, but reason (and its systematic form, logic), like science, does not draw its validity from subjective interpretation, but from objectively defined standards. Once again, all of our perceptions are ultimately subjective and our positions irrational, but they develop an objective and crucial basis once individual interpretation is brought into the context of human interaction. Then, we require the employment of reason in order to bring our own aims in line with those of others. Of course, the masses are historically prone to consuming various opiates which cloud them in self-delusion (and their leaders far too eager to provide them with such), but this does not discredit reason, for one may yet demand a rational basis for such beliefs. The closer this basis is to our own knowledge and understanding of the universe and the greater its logical integrity, the closer it draws to "truth" (at least, the further it withdraws from delusion).

    Your personal belief in the existence of God does no more bring God into my existence than the deification of nature by the ancients compels me to believe that the Sun is in fact Apollo, that lighting is the product of Zeus' anger, and that at the end of every rainbow there awaits a leprechaun with a pot of gold.

    To conclude, reason exists, at least insofar as it can exist objectively in the form of logical criteria, and it is possible to demonstrate, relatively and by comparison if not fully, the superiority of one reasoned argument against another. That many of our reasons are ultimately irrational does not bear upon the efficacy of reason to derive truth.
    "Death is nothing, but to live defeated and inglorious is to die daily."
    —Bonaparte

  3. #253
    Ginkgo
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nerd Girl View Post
    Not exactly. I'm defending every nerd's right to participate in this thread without being personally attacked for their high IQ. Lex's posts are slowly crossing the line from constructive to feeling threatened by high IQ's and resorting to tearing people down to build himself up. Calling posts/posters "Dull" is far from constructive. It's his emotionally-based opinion that has no point with regards to this topic. He needs to chill out.
    Maybe he just wants friends!




    ...Nah.

  4. #254
    Energizer Bunny Resonance's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    MBTI
    INfj
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Posts
    740

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lex Talionis View Post
    Existence is ultimately irrational, but it does not follow from this that rational thought is an "illusion." Rationality is a fundamental human characteristic without which we would be incapable of reconciling our position in the universe. Reason demands justification, explanation, and logical consistency; it is therefore the only valid form of inference and the closest approximation to "truth."

    Some of us are far more proficient at employing reason when drawing judgments or conclusions, but reason (and its systematic form, logic), like science, does not draw its validity from subjective interpretation, but from objectively defined standards. Once again, all of our perceptions are ultimately subjective and our positions irrational, but they develop an objective and crucial basis once individual interpretation is brought into the context of human interaction. Then, we require the employment of reason in order to bring our own aims in line with those of others. Of course, the masses are historically prone to consuming various opiates which cloud them in self-delusion (and their leaders far too eager to provide them with such), but this does not discredit reason, for one may yet demand a rational basis for such beliefs. The closer this basis is to our own knowledge and understanding of the universe and the greater its logical integrity, the closer it draws to "truth" (at least, the further it withdraws from delusion).

    Your personal belief in the existence of God does no more bring God into my existence than the deification of nature by the ancients compels me to believe that the Sun is in fact Apollo, that lighting is the product of Zeus' anger, and that at the end of every rainbow there awaits a leprechaun with a pot of gold.

    To conclude, reason exists, at least insofar as it can exist objectively in the form of logical criteria, and it is possible to demonstrate, relatively and by comparison if not fully, the superiority of one reasoned argument against another. That many of our reasons are ultimately irrational does not bear upon the efficacy of reason to derive truth.
    Still circular.

    I'm not saying reason/logic/etc. isn't great - it is, and it's fun to boot. But why can't you see how reasoning that reasoning is objective is a logic knot?
    The beauty of a living thing is not the atoms that go into it, but the way those atoms are put together. ~ rCoxI ~ INfj ~ 5w6 so/sp

  5. #255
    The Eighth Colour Octarine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    MBTI
    Aeon
    Enneagram
    10w so
    Socionics
    LOL
    Posts
    1,366

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jwn86 View Post
    Everyone has faith, it's just a matter of what they have faith in. Atheists have faith that there is no such thing as faith, for instance. It takes faith to breathe air, as you have to believe there is air to breathe
    Other creatures do not need faith to breath and neither do we. Neither faith nor reason are necessary.

    Quote Originally Posted by jwn86 View Post
    Ultimately, it is wisest to place your faith in God because God is the creator of anything else one could put faith in.
    Why is it then that religions make you choose between an infinite variety of gods?

    Faith and pure reason are the surest ways to become a hypocrite. (deficiency in judgement)

  6. #256
    Superwoman Red Herring's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sp/sx
    Posts
    5,646

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Resonance View Post
    Still circular.

    I'm not saying reason/logic/etc. isn't great - it is, and it's fun to boot. But why can't you see how reasoning that reasoning is objective is a logic knot?
    "A logic knot" implies that you want to apply logic to the exclusion of logic. Maybe it's the limitations of my mind, but I would say that we are reaching a meta-meta-point here where our brains are hardwired to hit a brick wall.



    Let's just say that humans are both steered by emotions and desires that don't always seem to make rational sense (including, to varying degrees, spirituality) and a search for patterns, rules and causal relationships that form a coherent image of the world around us? I have no absolute certainty that this wall over there will still exist when I hit it or that I will feel pain when I do (and why do I avoid pain anyway - pure biology!)...but chances are it will and I will accept this 99,999999999999....% chance as my working hypothesis for day to day survival. The alternative seems to be either paralysis and schizophrenia or a very short life time expectancy.

    Just my 0.02 $
    The good life is one inspired by love and guided by knowledge. Neither love without knowledge, nor knowledge without love can produce a good life. - Bertrand Russell
    A herring's blog
    Johari / Nohari

  7. #257
    pathwise dependent FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Socionics
    ENTj
    Posts
    5,908

    Default

    Lex Talionis your arguments are pretty shitty for such a supposedly smart person, MEH. Take a course on logic, or something.
    ENTj 7-3-8 sx/sp

  8. #258
    null Jonny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    FREE
    Posts
    2,486

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Red Herring View Post
    "A logic knot" implies that you want to apply logic to the exclusion of logic. Maybe it's the limitations of my mind, but I would say that we are reaching a meta-meta-point here where our brains are hardwired to hit a brick wall.
    Resonance was just implying that using reason to objectively prove that reasoning is objective is circular since one must make that assumption that reasoning is objective in order for it to be a sufficient means of objectively proving itself. However, since 100% objectivity and certainty are a theoretical impossibility for the human mind, it isn't necessary to take such a rigorous stance. We might not be able to prove beyond any doubt that something is or is not, but for practical purposes when we profess certainty we are really professing near certainty. Furthermore, since the logical steps to 'proving' that rationality is objective are 0 (it is in the definition) it isn't necessary to even apply rationality to the proof. A mental process is rational, by definition, if it is done entirely without the influence of subjective notions, e.g. if it is purely objective.

    Thinking/discussing the nature of rationality is one of those activities which requires rigorous effort, since it is one where definitions (if left ambiguous) can cause arguments to become murky and difficult to navigate.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  9. #259
    Superwoman Red Herring's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sp/sx
    Posts
    5,646

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonnyboy View Post
    Resonance was just implying that using reason to objectively prove that reasoning is objective is circular since one must make that assumption that reasoning is objective in order for it to be a sufficient means of objectively proving itself. However, since 100% objectivity and certainty are a theoretical impossibility for the human mind, it isn't necessary to take such a rigorous stance. We might not be able to prove beyond any doubt that something is or is not, but for practical purposes when we profess certainty we are really professing near certainty. Furthermore, since the logical steps to 'proving' that rationality is objective are 0 (it is in the definition) it isn't necessary to even apply rationality to the proof. A mental process is rational, by definition, if it is done entirely without the influence of subjective notions, e.g. if it is purely objective.

    Thinking/discussing the nature of rationality is one of those activities which requires rigorous effort, since it is one where definitions (if left ambiguous) can cause arguments to become murky and difficult to navigate.
    You just paraphrased exactly what I said (or at least meant to say). Was this meant as an addition, an agreement or a disagreement to my post? I'm confused.
    The good life is one inspired by love and guided by knowledge. Neither love without knowledge, nor knowledge without love can produce a good life. - Bertrand Russell
    A herring's blog
    Johari / Nohari

  10. #260
    null Jonny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    FREE
    Posts
    2,486

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Red Herring View Post
    You just paraphrased exactly what I said (or at least meant to say). Was this meant as an addition, an agreement or a disagreement to my post? I'm confused.
    I was using your post as a springboard to respond to Resonance; one could call my post a supplement to your post.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

Similar Threads

  1. To which level of hell are you going?
    By Virtual ghost in forum Online Personality Tests
    Replies: 145
    Last Post: 07-09-2017, 10:13 AM
  2. Is having a tendency to give someone the benefit of the doubt associated with F?
    By /DG/ in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 11-04-2015, 10:23 PM
  3. Do you need to sympathize with characters to enjoy them?
    By Ivy in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 03-07-2008, 03:28 AM
  4. [ENFJ] NT with Announcement to Share about ENFJ Friend :)
    By Usehername in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 11-24-2007, 03:07 AM

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