|
Who What Now posted:I did it for 20 years and didn't discover poo poo, ergo by this logic God doesn't exist. I did it and it worked so now I think we gotta arm wrestle
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 19:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 13:42 |
|
|
Commie NedFlanders posted:I did it and it worked so now I think we gotta arm wrestle Bring it, nerd. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 19:40
|
|
|
So, here is a question: We've seen two sides to the 'believe with your heart' camp, one who said they didn't feel poo poo, and another who said they came to know god. So what? Is there any sort of repercussion or reward for one side or the other? Why does it matter what someone else finds at the end of the belief tunnel?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2016 20:31
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Chesterton was a manchild who lacked basic functioning and could not get home from the train station. It's no surprise he couldn't tell the difference between faith and reason; reason never was a faculty he could engage. Look the fact you cannot read Cheterton isn't Chesterton's problem.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2016 20:34
|
|
|
J.A.B.C. posted:So, here is a question: IIRC Commie NedFlanders put it forth as a proof of supernatural divinity
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2016 20:53
|
|
|
Commie NedFlanders posted:The last several pages of this thread has seems rather absurd to me Mostly it's that we don't really have any choice but to assume what we perceive is real. Sure, it might not be, but if it isn't we can't even attempt to learn anything about the universe or ourselves. The same doesn't apply to something like faith in a god. It's entirely possible to continue learning about (what we perceive as) the universe without having to insert a god into the equation. J.A.B.C. posted:So, here is a question: I don't think anyone other than some religious people think it "matters" in any sense other than the fact that one of those two sides is correct and the other is incorrect. But if you want to be really pedantic like that, nothing really "matters". While I hate to use an "invisible unicorn" sort of analogy, the same thing applies to literally any belief (except ones that are directly related to the survival of the human race, if you assume that matters). Ytlaya fucked around with this message at 21:04 on Mar 29, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2016 21:01
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:Look the fact you cannot read Cheterton isn't Chesterton's problem. "Oh, you simply don't understand how smart he is" No, he's pretty clearly just using equivocation in the excerpt given. The "faith" that there exist consistent rules that drive our continuous experience is necessary in order for us to communicate or seek to understand anything, period, and that includes reading a book. The same cannot be said of faith in a supernatural divinity, the notion of which being received from parents and community, rather than by simply having a continuous experience. Further, he's not even criticizing reason, he's criticizing the notion of Truth via syllogistic logic, which is different, but he clearly can't tell.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2016 21:30
|
|
|
Stinky_Pete posted:Further, he's not even criticizing reason, he's criticizing the notion of Truth via syllogistic logic, which is different, but he clearly can't tell. Even then, the position is self-defeating. The most he can consistently say is 'nope' every time someone tries to establish a conclusion using logical reasoning. To generalize the point and say that every future attempted inference is susceptible to the same attack itself requires the use of modus ponens. The logical skeptic can play the Denial Game, but they cannot shift to the Denial meta-game where they say '... And by the way I can play the Denial Game forever.' Edit: See this paper for a deeper treatment of logical skepticism and the inability of the logical skeptic to infer a justificatory infinite regress. Juffo-Wup fucked around with this message at 22:51 on Mar 29, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2016 22:01
|
|
|
J.A.B.C. posted:So, here is a question: Who benefits from hope? Why even try without it?
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 12:37
|
|
|
Dinosaurmageddon posted:Who benefits from hope? Why even try without it? Who said anything about hope?
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 13:57
|
|
|
I did? The 'believe with your heart' camp espouses a degree of hope with daily living, wouldn't you agree?
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 15:29
|
|
|
Dinosaurmageddon posted:I did? The 'believe with your heart' camp espouses a degree of hope with daily living, wouldn't you agree? I believe Bertrand Russell has something to say about that. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ihaB8AFOhZo There is more than one narrative of life which leads to hope, and some of them are based in scientific reasoning. The notion of belief on insufficient evidence as a psychological means of bringing forth a desired truth, I think is better elaborated in metaphor by Miyamoto Musashi in The Book of Five Rings. Stinky_Pete fucked around with this message at 15:53 on Apr 15, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 15:43
|
|
|
If you want hope you can just... be hopeful. If you have to make something up to create hope and have the capacity to do so, it would seem easier to just create hopefulness ex nihilo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 16:28
|
|
|
Dinosaurmageddon posted:I did? The 'believe with your heart' camp espouses a degree of hope with daily living, wouldn't you agree? No more than I do. So, again, what's your point?
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 16:44
|
|
|
I tend to be skeptical of things without firm empirical evidence but idk how to explain this without invoking something about spirit https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDMZ2PXzE_E
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 18:12
|
|
|
Keep Autism Wired posted:I tend to be skeptical of things without firm empirical evidence but idk how to explain this without invoking something about spirit This too https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4zw99VsoMA
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 18:16
|
|
|
Keep Autism Wired posted:I tend to be skeptical of things without firm empirical evidence but idk how to explain this without invoking something about spirit That's because techniques of the mind are hard to explain and study in general. You can watch that guy do his stuff and figure that the discipline he's been studying full-time for at least a decade, is what enabled him to do it, but you can't put him in an fMRI machine while he's pulling a car. 'Spirit' is an acceptable shortcut for the process by which this man has strengthened the connection between his brain and every little nerve and muscle in his body so that it can apply some kind of oobleck-like effect to e.g. the drill, after having given his body countless beatings leading up to then. A more common version of the body's adaptation to physical stresses would be the fact that I still have bruises from grappling and/or sparring that I did several days ago, whereas my kung fu instructor stopped getting bruises (or they disappear overnight) from regular sparring/grappling years ago. If you're using the word 'spirit' in this context to describe a force which is not applied via the practiced mind-body alignment, then I'll start wondering what prompted you to do so.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 18:29
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:No more than I do. So, again, what's your point? Hope requires a faith in something greater than the self. That's the whole point - everything and nothing distilled into a third, somehow greater thing. Hope is the measure of our faith in existence. Peace be with you, who- what- now-ever you are.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 18:54
|
|
|
Stinky_Pete posted:That's because techniques of the mind are hard to explain and study in general. You can watch that guy do his stuff and figure that the discipline he's been studying full-time for at least a decade, is what enabled him to do it, but you can't put him in an fMRI machine while he's pulling a car. 'Spirit' is an acceptable shortcut for the process by which this man has strengthened the connection between his brain and every little nerve and muscle in his body so that it can apply some kind of oobleck-like effect to e.g. the drill, after having given his body countless beatings leading up to then. A more common version of the body's adaptation to physical stresses would be the fact that I still have bruises from grappling and/or sparring that I did several days ago, whereas my kung fu instructor stopped getting bruises (or they disappear overnight) from regular sparring/grappling years ago. I've been starting to wonder if there's something about this thing we call mind or spirit which is easy for scientists to write off as "we just don't know it's very complex" , but like maybe these guys who've been practicing spiritual practices or meditation were onto something before the science guys started looking. I'm not sure what to believe anymore, recently even these forums have caused me to question my firmly held skepticism. If neuroscience is barely taking baby steps into this frontier, what about religious studies or philosophy? Do these offer any ideas regarding the nature of mind or spirit? I need some help because I'm handicapped by my STEM brain
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 18:57
|
|
|
Dinosaurmageddon posted:Hope requires a faith in something greater than the self. That's the whole point - everything and nothing distilled into a third, somehow greater thing. You mean like a community or nation or team? Yeah, part of the relative success of humanity so far is predicated on the fact that our brains are biased toward cooperating with others, especially members of our in-group. Hierarchical religion as we know it began partly as an early means of cohering many groups of people who can't all know each other, into one mega-in-group, which is why you see polytheism in early conquer-oriented empires, and syncretism later on with the Catholic church's pantheon of Saints and La Virgen de Guadalupe. Keep Autism Wired posted:I've been starting to wonder if there's something about this thing we call mind or spirit which is easy for scientists to write off as "we just don't know it's very complex" , but like maybe these guys who've been practicing spiritual practices or meditation were onto something before the science guys started looking. Yes, where before I used to be more elitist about the best quantified fields, but my firsthand experience with the noisiness of e.g. brains scans has helped me understand that there are serious practical limits to the scientific method when applied to the brain and body. That's not to say our knowledge has not improved in the last 60 years, but it improves very slowly. In the meantime, we have philosophies of life that can be studied and assessed anecdotally. Zen, in particular, is looking good to me, and has its own ways of describing a state that psychologists call "flow." That state where you're not thinking about what you're doing because you don't need any unnecessary meta processes going on, you just have a direct neural pathway, which minimizes noise, between intention and action. I've been reading books on it and practicing skills (kung fu, chosen because the school is near me) that involve expanding the "void" between stimulus and response, and I feel like my personal health and direction has benefited from it. Which, duh, exercise in general is healthy, but my sense of inner peace and goal-oriented behavior has also improved. Western styles of exercise tend to have an isolationist bent, where you "work on cardio" or "work on strength," which do bring the results they promise, but the desired results themselves are a product of the isolationist view—long distance runners with bad joints/flexibility, for example. Athletic training geared toward certain sports tends to be better for you, I think, but e.g. strength training simply to "get huge" seems like a goal driven by technique, rather than the other way around. Stinky_Pete fucked around with this message at 19:53 on Apr 15, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 19:43
|
|
|
Dinosaurmageddon posted:Hope requires a faith in something greater than the self. Nope.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 20:24
|
|
|
Keep Autism Wired posted:I tend to be skeptical of things without firm empirical evidence but idk how to explain this without invoking something about spirit I haven't ever seen something like that which couldn't be explained with simple physics or realistic, easily understandable changes to the human body (for example developing scar tissue or something).
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 20:53
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:I haven't ever seen something like that which couldn't be explained with simple physics or realistic, easily understandable changes to the human body (for example developing scar tissue or something). Yeah, the other thing to note is that when he's doing the sword on the neck, it wouldn't cut most of us if we did the same thing as him anyway, we just wouldn't be able to also move the truck without choking ourselves. If you cut him the way he cut the lettuce, with a swift arc that would slide along the skin, he'd still bleed. I wouldn't recommend trying though, lol
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 21:13
|
|
|
I also kind of have to question how skeptical someone really is they throw up their hands and say "WHO KNOWS PROBABLY SOMETHING TO DO WITH SPIRITS!" the second they see something they don't know how to explain. Like, for fucks sake, at least do some cursory research regarding how, for example, monks do this sort of stuff. The answers are usually only a quick google search away! And even if you can't quickly find an explanation, the proper reaction is to just think "I don't understand the physical mechanisms by which this phenomenon occurs." I mean, I could understand if someone were literally creating balls of explosive energy like in DBZ or something, but most of this stuff obviously has some sort of interesting trick behind why it works. It's still cool, but I can't fathom anyone who considers themselves a remotely skeptical person thinking that there's any need to introduce anything supernatural (spirits, chi, whatever) into the equation.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 23:37
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:
Though if someone was doing DBZ energy balls, would you assume it's something supernatural or would you assume it's a yet-undiscovered natural process? (This is why it's impossible to define a supernatural process, because it's one that's not definable under the universe's processes)
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 23:45
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Though if someone was doing DBZ energy balls, would you assume it's something supernatural or would you assume it's a yet-undiscovered natural process? The latter, but I could at least sympathize with people thinking it's related to spirits or the supernatural.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2016 01:31
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:I can't fathom anyone who considers themselves a remotely skeptical person thinking that there's any need to introduce anything supernatural (spirits, chi, whatever) into the equation. There is just as much need for us to discern the world rationally through skepticism as there is for us to engage with the abstract, surreal and supernatural realms of thought that exist within our minds. Sometimes you apply the right kinds of disciplines, such as meditation, self-hypnosis, neoshamanism and meta-programming, and with enough love, effort, and dedication you really can start to see some interesting effects.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2016 03:11
|
|
|
Stinky_Pete posted:Zen, in particular, is looking good to me, and has its own ways of describing a state that psychologists call "flow." Which zen masters talk about flow?
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2016 03:49
|
|
|
IAMKOREA posted:Which zen masters talk about flow? Dunno, I've just been reading Zen and the Art of Archery, which I heard about while reading Zen in the Martial Arts, and they both refer to the state of mind that is achieved when fully in tune with one's art. Dinosaurmageddon posted:There is just as much need for us to discern the world rationally through skepticism as there is for us to engage with the abstract, surreal and supernatural realms of thought that exist within our minds. I think the word you're looking for is superliminal. The mind is a part of nature.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2016 02:56
|
|
|
Stinky_Pete posted:Dunno, I've just been reading Zen and the Art of Archery, which I heard about while reading Zen in the Martial Arts, and they both refer to the state of mind that is achieved when fully in tune with one's art. Thank you - superliminal is a good word. The mind is part of nature, yes; however whatever we consider "natural" is a concept shaped entirely by the human mind. Little fun zen archery fact: The Mongols (wielding bows astride their nimble steppe-horses) would time to release their shots right at the moment(s) when their horses' hooves were all clear of the ground. Discovering that the descent in their steeds was predicable for that fraction of a second of mid-air achieved during a gallop gave the Mongols a momentary window to fire a stable shot with their bows and arrows- timed to their horses' biorhythms. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2016 03:22
|
|
|
Yes, OP
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2016 03:59
|
|
|
Keep Autism Wired posted:I tend to be skeptical of things without firm empirical evidence but idk how to explain this without invoking something about spirit All the sharp stuff is applying constant pressure, and he's not drawing the blades across himself so as to actually cut. You can put a lot of weight on a blade as long as you don't draw it across, or apply it suddenly. Applied slowly the skin and flesh will mould around it rather than splitting, same with the spears which visibly aren't very sharp. It probably hurts like gently caress but it won't necessarily cut easily, and a hammer drill is not designed to cut something pliable like human flesh, again extremely painful no doubt but not entirely unsurprising that it wouldn't cause injury. IAMKOREA posted:Which zen masters talk about flow? I think that's generally the English translation for mushin. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 19:35 on Apr 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2016 19:33
|
|
|
Dinosaurmageddon posted:There is just as much need for us to discern the world rationally through skepticism as there is for us to engage with the abstract, surreal and supernatural realms of thought that exist within our minds. What you're talking about is called psychotherapy, and there's no need to invoke any spirits or other bullshit, because we have methods that work without woo baggage. Also, don't see what that has to do with 'discerning the world'. Sounds like you have trouble telling apart things that happen inside your head, from those that happen outside.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2016 12:27
|
|
|
grate deceiver posted:What you're talking about is called psychotherapy, and there's no need to invoke any spirits or other bullshit, because we have methods that work without woo baggage. Also, don't see what that has to do with 'discerning the world'. Sounds like you have trouble telling apart things that happen inside your head, from those that happen outside.  Or, if not psychotherapy, it is pretty much anything under the "literary" or "arts" category.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2016 16:20
|
|
|
Money's value exists primarily in people's heads.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2016 16:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 13:42 |
|
|
McDowell posted:Money's value exists primarily in people's heads. And the fact that it's hard to fake
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2016 16:37
|
|