User Tag List

First 67891018 Last

Results 71 to 80 of 521

  1. #71
    Highly Hollow Wandering's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    873

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FineLine View Post
    I think the real-life aspect is at the core of the issue I'm raising.
    Meh? Real life? What's that ??

    But meantime there is a real-life component to the religion/atheism debate that is simply getting ignored: we don't spend money and start wars over wood sprites.
    I see what you mean in this example, but I'm not sure what your question is about exactly ? (IOW: I can be dumb sometimes, so can you rephrase it another way :rolli: ? )

    But your arguments seem to be a mere capitulation: Nothing's knowable, nothing has meaning.
    I would say: nothing is universally knowable, so everything has potential meaning.

  2. #72
    RDF
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wandering View Post
    [...] can you rephrase it another way :rolli: ? )


    I would say: nothing is universally knowable, so everything has potential meaning.


    Eh. Never mind. It was a casual Saturday afternoon inquiry. And where I'm at, the afternoon is gone and it's heading into evening. Time for me to depart and involve myself with "real-life" tasks and recreations.

  3. #73
    Mamma said knock you out Mempy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    2,226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FineLine View Post


    Eh. Never mind. It was a casual Saturday afternoon inquiry. And where I'm at, the afternoon is gone and it's heading into evening. Time for me to depart and involve myself with "real-life" tasks and recreations.
    I'd like to discuss what FineLine is bringing up as well, but I'm not exactly sure what he wants us to discuss.

    Are you asking, FL, what the real-life consequences and benefits are of atheism and religion? When you say "the real-life aspects," do you mean the physical, concrete, practical repurcussions of atheism and theism? Are you trying to analyze which is better in that way?

    What you're asking is not the clearest to me or to Wandering, apparently, but I would humor you if I knew I was humoring you correctly.
    They're running just like you
    For you, and I, wooo
    So people, people, need some good ol' love

  4. #74
    Lallygag Moderator Geoff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INXP
    Posts
    5,584

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    I don't think I'm communicating very clearly. I don't mean that scientists should just leap to accept any old theory- just that when the initial response to a new theory is to ridicule it, that doesn't strike me as "genuinely cautious and professional." It strikes me as entrenched. That's not really bad, it's just human. And that's why there are standards outside of any one person or community's standards, as the link posted by Sassafrassquatch (I'm having that username shortening dilemma again) said. I fully expect that if they were confronted with irrefutable evidence that they would come around.
    Don't forget that career scientists are often the "establishment". If you've made your whole career around science that shows the Moon is made of cheese, you won't be keen to accept it's really a giant garlic doughball*

    *mmm Moon sized doughballs.

  5. #75
    RDF
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mempy View Post
    I'd like to discuss what FineLine is bringing up as well, but I'm not exactly sure what he wants us to discuss.

    Are you asking, FL, what the real-life consequences and benefits are of atheism and religion? When you say "the real-life aspects," do you mean the physical, concrete, practical repurcussions of atheism and theism? Are you trying to analyze which is better in that way?

    What you're asking is not the clearest to me or to Wandering, apparently, but I would humor you if I knew I was humoring you correctly.
    Hmm. Maybe I was too quick to dismiss Wandering. I was just surprised that after all that wordage, Wandering didn't even know what I was talking about.

    Go back to my first post to Haight and read it. Then answer *the last iteration* of my question, incorporating the "real-life" aspect. (Wandering derailed my argument by answering the *first iteration* of my question where I was still building my argument.)

    And if you need further guidance on how to incorporate the "real-life" aspect:

    I've been pretty clear about my scorn toward arguments that would say, "We can't know anything absolutely, so effectively we can't take any action or prioritize." Same with "all the arguments are equally valid."

    In fact, in real life--in Western democracies--we tend to be suspicious of purely religious arguments in public debate and public policy. IOW, in Western democracies we don't, in fact, accord purely religious arguments the same weight in real life as more genuinely real-world public-policy concerns.

    So why pay a lot of lip service in this thread to the equal validity of religious and atheist views at the purely philosophical level?

    I'm looking for the point where the rubber of philosophy meets the road of real life. If we go on about the equally valid arguments of atheism and religion or about what we can or can't know absolutely, then we're not talking about where the rubber meets the road. We're just paying lip service to purely philosophical concepts.

    I know the importance of having an abstract starting point like "all ideas are equal." But all by itself that's not much of a justification for all the real-life effort and time we put into religion. Let's try to move the debate a little bit past that purely abstract starting point. At that purely abstract level, a god is no better than a wood sprite or the Easter Bunny. At that level, anything can be justified.

    I'm just trying to hot-house the debate in this thread and get it past the dead-end, purely philosophical stage. The debate has other aspects too: Like how religion gets applied in public policy, how we apply it in our daily lives, whether it's an appropriate justification for wars, etc.

    That's my last attempt to convey my concerns. Like I say, the inquiry was casual. I'm not heavily invested in it. I already know how the answer works itself out in real life. [shrugs shoulders]

  6. #76
    `~~Philosoflying~~` SillySapienne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    9,849

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Haight View Post
    Just for fun. . . why don't you go ahead and explain why your atheistic conclusions are reasonable and logical while those of theists are unreasonable and illogical.
    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainChick View Post
    I know it is impossible to prove, or disprove the existence of god.

    But I am not concerned with absolute proof, rather, I am concerned with discerning the most probable truth.


    Those who claim to have the answers scare the bejeesus (sp?) out of me, whereas those who admittedly/openly define what they think they know, and why, along with what they know they don't know, and why, I happen to find reassuring and comforting.

    I have always been a fan of logic, and am also a fan of the scientific method as being means to discern reality and probabilistic truths.
    Quote Originally Posted by Haight View Post
    Yeah, I'm sure that's going to happen.

    Besides, that would only be answering half of my question.
    Quote Originally Posted by Haight View Post
    Dude! I know you can answer the question. I was asking her.

    Now she's just going to write what you stated in her own words.



    Way to blow it. *shakes head*
    What are you getting at here???
    `
    'Cause you can't handle me...

    "A lie is a lie even if everyone believes it. The truth is the truth even if nobody believes it." - David Stevens

    "That that is, is. That that is not, is not. Is that it? It is."

    Veritatem dies aperit

    Ride si sapis

    Intelligentle sparkles

  7. #77
    Doesn't Read Your Posts Haight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTj
    Posts
    6,243

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainChick View Post
    What are you getting at here???
    Use your N, and go back and read through the posts.

    I'm sure you'll figure it out.
    "The only time I'm wrong is when I'm questioning myself."
    Haight

  8. #78
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Seanan View Post
    I see only a slight similarity... this one is about not derailing the thread. It is not designed to prohibit others from defending against insulting negative comments about them as it pertains to their beliefs/opinions or how they arrived at them. I know when I see prejudice, its pretty repulsive. Its pretty negative. ... whereas Jennifer was asking for "positives" .. certainly not an attack on anyone.
    To clarify: Yes, that's exactly what I meant.

    It was a request to avoid the expected derailings of what was supposed to be more an "information thread" rather than a "debate thread." (Another way to view it: I wanted to have a Perceiving thread, not a Judging thread... and when Judging comes into a Perceiving thread, it inadvertently takes over and kills Perceiving contributions.)

    Arguments were perfectly acceptable to me but needed to be handled elsewhere, to avoid a derail.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  9. #79
    Highly Hollow Wandering's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    873

    Default

    Aha! I think I get it now, FineLine So you see, it was worth trying one more time

    I'm way past any reasonable bedtime, though, so my participation will have to wait until tomorrow

  10. #80
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    961

    Default

    Is there really any point in discussing this anymore? Believers and unbelievers obviously don't accept the same method for determining whether something exists or not. How much more bandwidth are we going to waste rehashing the same tired arguments?

Similar Threads

  1. I am INTJ, welcome to my presence....
    By BridgeCable in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 06-20-2008, 09:35 PM
  2. Welcome to My Nightmare
    By ByMySword in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 02-11-2008, 03:39 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