News:

Welcome to our site!

Main Menu

Quest for Truth

Started by Absolute_Agent, June 16, 2019, 09:02:36 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Unbeliever

Quote from: Mike Cl on July 28, 2019, 09:28:00 AM
and you know this----how????  Never mind; you are like a puff of wind--no substance and no knowledge.  You are just not worth the effort, for you don't put forth any effort.  Like
Airk, you are just hot air.

No wonder the planet's getting so much hotter, what with all this hot air blowing around! :-P
God Not Found
"There is a sucker born-again every minute." - C. Spellman

Absolute_Agent

Quote from: Unbeliever on July 28, 2019, 06:27:27 PM
No wonder the planet's getting so much hotter, what with all this hot air blowing around! :-P
Don't underestimate hot air--it powers air balloons and other things. [emoji28]

Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk


Cavebear

Quote from: Absolute_Agent on July 27, 2019, 01:38:23 PM
Death can be merciful at times, especially if it is the death of an oppressor.

Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk

Death can indeed be merciful.  If you are being tortured to the point where death is the only escape.  And theists (and horrific secular dictators) do that so well and often.  But it takes the really theistic to accept that and sleep at night.  "Kill them all and let God sort them out"

Oppressors (when they are, and not just someone people don't like) deserve death.  But painlessly, just to rid the world of them.  The deliberate application of pain is never justified.

Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!

Absolute_Agent

#213
Quote from: Cavebear on August 01, 2019, 07:12:35 AM
Death can indeed be merciful.  If you are being tortured to the point where death is the only escape.  And theists (and horrific secular dictators) do that so well and often.  But it takes the really theistic to accept that and sleep at night.  "Kill them all and let God sort them out"

Oppressors (when they are, and not just someone people don't like) deserve death.  But painlessly, just to rid the world of them.  The deliberate application of pain is never justified.

I agree with you except that theism or the lack of it is not an indicator of capacity for remorse.  Take Stalin for example and Hitler--do you see any signs of remorse in their lives?

Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk

Cavebear

Quote from: Absolute_Agent on August 01, 2019, 08:24:56 AM
I agree with you except that theism or the lack of it is not an indicator of capacity for remorse.  Take Stalin for example and Hitler--do you see any signs of remorse in their lives?

Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk

Well, I meant that secular dictators like Stalin and Mao could do it ideologically without being worried much about it.  But it takes fervent theists to actually enjoy it.  Stalin may have enjoyed putting enemies to death (not approving in any way), but theists have historically been positively gleeful and reverent about it.  And after severe torture, of course.
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!

Absolute_Agent

Quote from: Cavebear on August 01, 2019, 08:36:48 AM
Well, I meant that secular dictators like Stalin and Mao could do it ideologically without being worried much about it.  But it takes fervent theists to actually enjoy it.  Stalin may have enjoyed putting enemies to death (not approving in any way), but theists have historically been positively gleeful and reverent about it.  And after severe torture, of course.
There is a danger in having theistic beliefs of developing false feelings of superiority.  But this is present in any "ism", you choose, whether it's racism or scientism. It's not so much the nature of what is believed, as the dynamic that develops when a group identifies itself as separate and distinct from common people.  Healthy groups have permeable boundaries.

Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk

Cavebear

Quote from: Absolute_Agent on August 01, 2019, 09:09:22 AM
There is a danger in having theistic beliefs of developing false feelings of superiority.  But this is present in any "ism", you choose, whether it's racism or scientism. It's not so much the nature of what is believed, as the dynamic that develops when a group identifies itself as separate and distinct from common people.  Healthy groups have permeable boundaries.

Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk

Oh I love it when theists refer to "scientism" as if it was a belief structure like their's.  Look, I allow a certain degree of personal validity to the concept of "faith".  I accept that some people allow a "trust" in an idea to guide their lives.  I think they are completely irrational for doing so, but I understand it. 

But don't try to make science a "belief system".  That just cracks me up...
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!

Absolute_Agent

#217
Quote from: Cavebear on August 01, 2019, 09:27:25 AM
Oh I love it when theists refer to "scientism" as if it was a belief structure like their's.  Look, I allow a certain degree of personal validity to the concept of "faith".  I accept that some people allow a "trust" in an idea to guide their lives.  I think they are completely irrational for doing so, but I understand it. 

But don't try to make science a "belief system".  That just cracks me up...
Laugh all you like, but scientism IS a belief structure.  The only difference your substitute for God is the human brain and sense organs.

Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk

Cavebear

Quote from: Absolute_Agent on August 01, 2019, 10:00:27 AM
Laugh all you like, but scientism IS a belief structure.  The only difference your substitute for God is the human brain and sense organs. [emoji28]

Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk

AND...  Here we go. 

OK, science is based on peer-reviewed and checkable facts.  Found any verifiable and checkable evidence of god lately? 

Science is based on accumulated observations and is adjusted to new information as it is discovered.  Seen many changes in your bible lately?  I won't bother to point out errors in religious texts.  That gets nowhere.

I'll leave you with a quote I found on forbes.com.  "The fundamental question is neither what the object of humanity's faith will be nor how far it will extend, but rather how far you're willing-and-able to test your most deeply held beliefs, and whether you'll have the courage to change your conclusions to follow where the evidence guides. That is what separates science from anything faith-based, and why any faith-based belief system will never be considered scientific".

Back to you...
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!

Absolute_Agent

#219
Quote from: Cavebear on August 01, 2019, 10:13:53 AM
AND...  Here we go. 

OK, science is based on peer-reviewed and checkable facts.  Found any verifiable and checkable evidence of god lately? 

Science is based on accumulated observations and is adjusted to new information as it is discovered.  Seen many changes in your bible lately?  I won't bother to point out errors in religious texts.  That gets nowhere.

I'll leave you with a quote I found on forbes.com.  "The fundamental question is neither what the object of humanity's faith will be nor how far it will extend, but rather how far you're willing-and-able to test your most deeply held beliefs, and whether you'll have the courage to change your conclusions to follow where the evidence guides. That is what separates science from anything faith-based, and why any faith-based belief system will never be considered scientific".

Back to you...
Religion is also a kind of science.  Theology has developed organically over time.  The difference is we are concerned not with the material world but the world internal to the self. There is much evidence for God, but it is most importantly internal to the self.  Our methodology for developing knowledge is different as well.  In science, you first observe, then form ideas and hypotheses about those observations.  Over time those hypotheses grow into theories and laws that accumulate into knowledge.  In religion the process is reversed.  We first receive revelatory transcendant knowledge from within; then we believe it; then we develop applications and interpretations of that knowledge for our current time-space continuum.  Over time, that faith bears fruit as observations manifest in the external material world confirming our beliefs. I consider both methods as valid.  There is a peer review process in religion as well, but it is quite naturally, mostly intuitive.

Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk

Cavebear

Quote from: Absolute_Agent on August 01, 2019, 10:59:48 AM
There is much evidence for God,

Over time those hypotheses grow into theories and laws that accumulate into knowledge.  In religion the process is reversed. 

Deleted some portion of original post for brevity...

1.  Please list the evidence for a deity of any kind.
2,  I am impressed that you know the difference between hypothesis and theory and laws; most people don't.  But saying that religion reverses the process suggests a logical failure.

Consider this...  No one is born with religious beliefs.  Like racism, "it has to be carefully taught" (apologies to 'South Pacific').  It is therefore human-made.
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!

Baruch

Quote from: Cavebear on August 01, 2019, 11:23:07 AM
Deleted some portion of original post for brevity...

1.  Please list the evidence for a deity of any kind.
2,  I am impressed that you know the difference between hypothesis and theory and laws; most people don't.  But saying that religion reverses the process suggests a logical failure.

Consider this...  No one is born with religious beliefs.  Like racism, "it has to be carefully taught" (apologies to 'South Pacific').  It is therefore human-made.

That is partially an ascetic conceit.  A scientist may think he is discovering something that is "already there".  Michelangelo felt the same way about sculpture.  He was freeing the statue that was already in the stone.  And no person is born with scientific beliefs either.  Otherwise the ancient Egyptians would have built nuclear reactors.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Cavebear

Quote from: Baruch on August 01, 2019, 11:29:25 AM
That is partially an ascetic conceit.  A scientist may think he is discovering something that is "already there".  Michelangelo felt the same way about sculpture.  He was freeing the statue that was already in the stone.  And no person is born with scientific beliefs either.  Otherwise the ancient Egyptians would have built nuclear reactors.

You are in error, of course.  Children seek knowledge automatically.  They taste, touch, feel everything.  They reach for that mobile above the crib.  They collect information (turkey good; broccoli bad - or vice versa).  We spend our childhoods learning verifiable facts.  We discuss them with each other. 

But it takes adults to teach religion.  And it isn't easily accepted.  Deities are like a parent that is unmanageable.  We fight the idea.  Then they take you to Sunday school where the nice lady talks softly (this is not from personal experience) and tells you about the best Daddy-In-The-Sky.  And Mommy nods her head in church and Daddy nods his head.  And if they nod their heads, you should too, because it MUST be true if they say so.

Science comes naturally to children.  Religion does not and has to be carefully taught.

Heil!
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!

Baruch

Quote from: Cavebear on August 01, 2019, 11:46:09 AM
You are in error, of course.  Children seek knowledge automatically.  They taste, touch, feel everything.  They reach for that mobile above the crib.  They collect information (turkey good; broccoli bad - or vice versa).  We spend our childhoods learning verifiable facts.  We discuss them with each other. 

But it takes adults to teach religion.  And it isn't easily accepted.  Deities are like a parent that is unmanageable.  We fight the idea.  Then they take you to Sunday school where the nice lady talks softly (this is not from personal experience) and tells you about the best Daddy-In-The-Sky.  And Mommy nods her head in church and Daddy nods his head.  And if they nod their heads, you should too, because it MUST be true if they say so.

Science comes naturally to children.  Religion does not and has to be carefully taught.

Heil!

I respectfully disagree with your child psychology.  Child development is very complicated and poorly understood.  You are making claims based on ideology, not experience.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Absolute_Agent

Quote from: Cavebear on August 01, 2019, 11:23:07 AM
Deleted some portion of original post for brevity...

1.  Please list the evidence for a deity of any kind.
2,  I am impressed that you know the difference between hypothesis and theory and laws; most people don't.  But saying that religion reverses the process suggests a logical failure.

Consider this...  No one is born with religious beliefs.  Like racism, "it has to be carefully taught" (apologies to 'South Pacific').  It is therefore human-made.
It would suggest a logical failure if you accept the underlying assumption of material causality.  I do not.

Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk