|
My Imaginary GF posted:You still don't get it, do you? You can't just say "What you're doing is stupid," and declare yourself a winner. The first time someone says "Nu-uh," you'll end up beheading them to prevent anyone else from disagreeing. You are acting like a huge idiot though. You trying to talk about something you dont know anything about and it shows.
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 21:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 03:58 |
|
Just a reminder, he unironically posted thisMy Imaginary GF posted:Belief in god originating from a basis is faith is one of the lowest forms of belief in god; in order to flourish as a species, a higher standard is required from humanity.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 21:33
|
|
|
down with slavery posted:Alright, let's start from square one. What is real? Oh no you don't. Trying to run us through the various schools of thought by getting someone to define the 'real' and then countering that the real is no more real than the things we have faith does not suddenly validate Drilldo Squirt's argument that faith makes god real. The physical is not changed by our belief in it, and therefore regardless of the attempt of metaphysics to define the real by our perception of it, Drilldo Squirt's argument that faith makes real is still wrong insofar as his demand for us to accept his premise of God's reality based on his faith in it alone. Our perception may define reality for us, but the physical exists regardless if it was interpreted by an intellect or not.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 21:35
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:Also, people don't go to church on sunday for a discussion, they go there for a harangue. The church structure is not made for serious discussion, but just as a sort of ho-hum thing. Some go to church for the discussions and debates, some go for the sense of community, others go out of family obligations and a sense of tradition, and still more attend because there's nothing else to do. Each reason for attendance is entirely individual; a properly organized religion must take this into consideration and provide appropriate outlets and channels through which the reasons for attendance may be molded into community with high rates of collective efficacy.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 21:36
|
|
|
I enjoyed reading gnostic Christian books. "Jesus was just an illusion created by the Holy Ghost because God being human is wack yo."
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 21:37
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Oh no you don't. Trying to run us through the various schools of thought by getting someone to define the 'real' and then countering that the real is no more real than the things we have faith does not suddenly validate Drilldo Squirt's argument that faith makes god real. When people use words like "Real", they use them for a reason. Sorry that you really hate philosophy or something but if you take some time to dig in, I think you'll find that the belief structures of the religious and yours have a lot in common. Reality is not just the physical world and as much as you'd love to live in a world like that, we don't. What is "real" is most certainly up for debate and I think it's telling that you avoid thinking deeply about both religion and metaphysics. Does the fact that there are things we don't understand make you nervous?
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 21:38
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:Also, people don't go to church on sunday for a discussion, they go there for a harangue. The church structure is not made for serious discussion, but just as a sort of ho-hum thing. Quakers do. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 21:39
|
|
|
down with slavery posted:When people use words like "Real", you said something about how someone should take a philosophy class, so I guess explain to us the whole materialism v dualism thing
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 21:41
|
|
|
But faith does make God (or whatever) "real", subjectively; that's the definition of "faith" that drilldo squirt has claimed to be using. It should be clear that the presence of faith in one or more people doesn't say anything about whether the objects of faith are made manifest to the perception of those without faith, however. I don't think that argument gets us very far, but whatever. Those with faith think God is real, and those without don't.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 21:42
|
|
Rodatose posted:you said something about how someone should take a philosophy class, so I guess explain to us the whole materialism v dualism thing What do you want explained? why materialism is an inadequate philosophy on its own?
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 21:43
|
|
|
down with slavery posted:When people use words like "Real", they use them for a reason. Sorry that you really hate philosophy or something but if you take some time to dig in, I think you'll find that the belief structures of the religious and yours have a lot in common. Reality is not just the physical world and as much as you'd love to live in a world like that, we don't. What is "real" is most certainly up for debate and I think it's telling that you avoid thinking deeply about both religion and metaphysics. Does the fact that there are things we don't understand make you nervous? No. No it doesn't. Because we didn't replace the unknowns with god in the gaps arguments. Please stop taking metaphysics to be a real science
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 21:45
|
|
CommieGIR posted:No. No it doesn't. Because we didn't replace the unknowns with god in the gaps arguments. Who's the we? We don't replace anything, it's an individuals choice as to how to view the unknown. Science really isn't about making arguments like "it can't be proven, ergo it's not true"
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 21:47
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:That's the issue, isn't it? Organized religion which will survive on the mezzo-level without central state authority and be able to police its affairs with other faiths, while thriving and synergizing with developed political orders during times of state development, is hard to find in this world. In fact, there are very few that I can think of which do this. Hanifism collapsed with the collapse of centralized state authority and the exertion of foreign influence; foreign influence has a tendancy to always interact with a power vacuum, and has for all of recorded history. State authority waxes and wanes; the goal of religious institutional development must be to survive the periods of waning central authority while allowing adherants access to the necessary tools to continue jurisprudence and advance human development. Ultimately, if you look at the Roman Catholic Church itself, through its history it generally acted as a state if not was outright one. The Church just never collapsed like the Ottomans did or the Byzantines (although the Ottomans in that case took over the reins themselves). If you want to call it a silent state after the early modern period thats fine, but ultimately you ultimately have to fully accept the Church and its authority isn't replaceable for a reason.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 21:48
|
|
|
Kyrie eleison posted:God is here, in this very thread, in the form of the Holy Spirit. Bullshit, where? You never explained why god cannot be bothered to make himself known to the world in an obvious and unquestionable manner. Is it really that much trouble for an omnipotent being to get booked for 10 minutes on Meet the Press or something?
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 21:54
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:Bullshit, where? You never explained why god cannot be bothered to make himself known to the world in an obvious and unquestionable manner. He already did, Jesus! quote:Is it really that much trouble for an omnipotent being to get booked for 10 minutes on Meet the Press or something? Nobody watches Meet the Press so I'm not sure it would help much.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 21:55
|
|
|
down with slavery posted:What do you want explained? why materialism is an inadequate philosophy on its own? Yes, that would help if you explained to us your personal idea of what materialism is and contrasted it with a dualistic view. Materialism doesn't posit that anything with an immaterial basis doesn't have real consequences and should be completely avoided. Abstract things can become 'real' by being manifested through material action. But once it becomes material action, you judge it based on the positive or negative material consequences it has had, not based on the original abstract intent, and adjust according to the results. Road to hell paved by good intentions and all. Materialism holds we are brains that are susceptible to environmental influences because they affect your brain chemistry or physiology or your synapses or all that other stuff. There is no fundamental 'nature' of a person; behavior can be changed by changing the material surroundings of your brain. Dualism is that there is a separate realm of being that the material cannot possibly hope to explain, with ghosts in shells, souls etc that cannot ever hope to be discovered by tools but can be connected to spiritually time to time with through tricks/concentration. There are set fundamental behavioral natures which are separate from us and we must discover them and follow their rules. Rodatose fucked around with this message at 22:03 on Nov 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 21:55
|
|
Rodatose posted:Yes, that would help if you explained to us your personal idea of what materialism is and contrasted it with a dualistic view. Honestly my issues with materialism have nothing to do with there being a seperate realm of being so I don't see the contrast as necessary, but to put it simply, my issue with materialism is that "material action" breaks down as a concept when you try to define what exactly a "material" is.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 22:00
|
|
|
down with slavery posted:Honestly my issues with materialism have nothing to do with there being a seperate realm of being so I don't see the contrast as necessary, but to put it simply, my issue with materialism is that "material action" breaks down as a concept when you try to define what exactly a "material" is. things with a testable physical basis. with material action you are changing a thing from one physical state to another. even if it's saying a mean or nice thing that triggers some chemical reaction in the brain which releases adrenaline or testosterone or dopamine or some other chemical that causes certain feelings in you
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 22:07
|
|
|
Rodatose posted:things with a testable physical basis. with material action you are changing a thing from one physical state to another. even if it's saying a mean or nice thing that triggers some chemical reaction in the brain which releases adrenaline or testosterone or dopamine or some other chemical that causes certain feelings in you Ding ding! Faith in reality does not have a noticeable effect on reality itself.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 22:08
|
|
|
Rodatose posted:things with a testable physical basis. with material action you are changing a thing from one physical state to another. even if it's saying a mean or nice thing that triggers some chemical reaction in the brain which releases adrenaline or testosterone or dopamine or some other chemical that causes certain feelings in you To somebody who doesn't believe that any sort of material or physical "evidence" has any implications about faith, or indeed that it's even "evidence" at all, no such definitions are going to matter.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 22:10
|
|
|
Why do all miracles always happen "ages ago, far away"? Why are there none now we can record things and view things from round the planet?
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 22:10
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Ding ding! Faith in reality does not have a noticeable effect on reality itself. It does have a noticeable effect through the actions it creates in people (which I think is the point being made). For instance, giving people the emotional push they need to bomb a nation into dust affects the material reality of the people of the bombed out nation in a noticeable way. However a certain concept of faith has no material existence. The thing that people's faith comes from does not have a material basis with inherent physical qualities (like, you can't look through some binoculars at a Cloud of Faith up in the sky and say "yep, god is smiling at my action" and that cloud also inspires people who have no contact with your society to adopt that faith.) It's an idea spread around and can only exist through material transmission- if not, why would religion cluster geographically according to contact instead of epiphanies of one deity or another being distributed evenly throughout all people. Rodatose fucked around with this message at 22:19 on Nov 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 22:11
|
|
|
Chupe Raho Aurat posted:Why do all miracles always happen "ages ago, far away"? Lots of faithful people profess beliefs that all sorts of things are miraculous, such as recoveries from disease. I don't know if that'd be considered a "theologically rigorous" sort of miracle, but I don't know how important that is to people of different faiths.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 22:12
|
|
Rodatose posted:things with a testable physical basis. with material action you are changing a thing from one physical state to another. even if it's saying a mean or nice thing that triggers some chemical reaction in the brain which releases adrenaline or testosterone or dopamine or some other chemical that causes certain feelings in you Yeah I agree with the idea that our brains are little more than an electrical signal and some chemistry. That's really not my issue with materialism. Maybe make a thread if you want a debate? I'd be happy to post in it. CommieGIR posted:Ding ding! Faith in reality does not have a noticeable effect on reality itself. Define "noticeable" down with slavery fucked around with this message at 22:18 on Nov 16, 2014 |
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 22:13
|
|
|
down with slavery posted:Yeah I agree with the idea that our brains are little more than an electrical signal and some chemistry. That's really not my issue with materialism. However, reality would remain perceptible regardless if man is the one making the perception. The animals lived without perception of reality, our ability to question reality is the only major difference between us and animals. However, the animals need not have faith to exist in reality regardless. Rodatose posted:It does have a noticeable effect through the actions it creates in people (which I think is the point being made). For instance, giving people the emotional push they need to bomb a nation into dust affects the material reality of the people of the bombed out nation in a noticeable way. However the thing that faith comes does not have a material basis with inherent physical qualities (like, you can't look through some binoculars at a Cloud of Faith up in the sky and say "yep, god is smiling at my action") Yes, that. Faith has implications for us PERSONALLY, and may affect our perception of real things, but the real still remains as it is regardless of our perception. down with slavery posted:Define "noticeable" Fall down, and question gravity as you fall. Reality might be shaped by our perception to us personally, but outside of that nothing noticeable. CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 22:20 on Nov 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 22:18
|
|
|
I'm sorry I haven't been responding more, but I'm occupied at the moment. In a few hours I will reply to relevant posts.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 22:19
|
|
CommieGIR posted:However, reality would remain perceptible regardless if man is the one making the perception. The animals lived without perception of reality, our ability to question reality is the only major difference between us and animals. A. animals probably do have a perception of reality B. our perception is not "reality", it is just our perception quote:Yes, that. Faith has implications for us PERSONALLY, and may affect our perception of real things, but the real still remains as it is regardless of our perception. You cannot escape perception and its relation to reality. Perception is reality, not the other way around. CommieGIR posted:Fall down, and question gravity as you fall. Reality might be shaped by our perception to us personally, but outside of that nothing noticeable.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 22:20
|
|
|
down with slavery posted:A. animals probably do have a perception of reality However, please explain at what point faith enters into that perception. down with slavery posted:"outside of that" is just you know, the entirety of existence So, if man were to disappear tomorrow, existence would disappear?
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 22:22
|
|
CommieGIR posted:However, please explain at what point faith enters into that perception. Literally all the time. Where we place the faith seems to be your bone of contention. But I assure you, faith is alive and well in our scientific communities. Have you ever espoused the views from a scientific paper without reading it thoroughly? CommieGIR posted:So, if man were to disappear tomorrow, existence would disappear? Yes
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 22:24
|
|
|
down with slavery posted:Literally all the time. Where we place the faith seems to be your bone of contention. But I assure you, faith is alive and well in our scientific communities. Have you ever espoused the views from a scientific paper without reading it thoroughly? I think we're done here. Regardless if people place faith in science, at the end of the day, science and scientific papers are still falsifiable and can be questioned and proven or disproven. Nice post hoc ergo proctor hoc.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 22:25
|
|
|
Christianity is a false religion that has abandoned God's commandments as faithfully passed down through the generations by his chosen people. Without Talmud, one cannot be close to God. How can one "keep the Sabbath and make it holy" if one ignores the proscribed manner to do so?
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 22:26
|
|
CommieGIR posted:I think we're done here. Regardless if people place faith in science, at the end of the day, science and scientific papers are still falsifiable and can be questioned and proven disproven. Plenty of things aren't falsifiable and people have faith in them. Your parents love you comes to mind. Falsifiability is a poor basis for what is real.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 22:26
|
|
|
down with slavery posted:Plenty of things aren't falsifiable and people have faith in them. Your parents love you comes to mind. Love is an emotion, and to some degree is still testable because it can be demonstrated within the realm of the real through actions and deeds. Falsifiability is an EXCELLENT basis for what is real. Please provide some evidence of why it is not.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 22:28
|
|
|
down with slavery posted:Literally all the time. Where we place the faith seems to be your bone of contention. But I assure you, faith is alive and well in our scientific communities. Have you ever espoused the views from a scientific paper without reading it thoroughly? I think there's a pretty obvious difference between the Faith of the devoutly religious and my faith that a scientific paper isn't made up. They're similar, but if you show me another paper that refutes the first one, then I'll probably believe you. I won't burn you at the stake. We're all human, and of course people do end up with deep-rooted Faith in things that aren't really religious or supernatural. However the ideal of scientific thought is that that's the wrong way of doing things.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 22:29
|
|
|
Chupe Raho Aurat posted:Why do all miracles always happen "ages ago, far away"? Miracles happen all the time - Jesus appears on toast and the Virgin Mary appears in run-off stains on concrete walls.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 22:30
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Love is an emotion, and to some degree is still testable. I disagree that emotions like love are testable or not real. emfive posted:I think there's a pretty obvious difference between the Faith of the devoutly religious and my faith that a scientific paper isn't made up. They're similar, but if you show me another paper that refutes the first one, then I'll probably believe you. I won't burn you at the stake. Neither will all of the devoutly religious as well. quote:We're all human, and of course people do end up with deep-rooted Faith in things that aren't really religious or supernatural. However the ideal of scientific thought is that that's the wrong way of doing things. Honestly, when you look at how people treat science in this day and age, especially western liberals, it's hard not to view it as a religion.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 22:30
|
|
|
down with slavery posted:Plenty of things aren't falsifiable and people have faith in them. Your parents love you comes to mind. This is pretty falsifiable, talk to people who come from abusive homes sometime maybe?
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 22:31
|
|
|
down with slavery posted:Honestly, when you look at how people treat science in this day and age, especially western liberals, it's hard not to view it as a religion. Please. This is really poor thinking, even if we accept that many people in the West accept the findings of science on faith alone, the science itself is still testable and falsifiable in the end. This is the entire reason for peer review, so that others can demonstrate the validity or invalidity of a hypothesis. Its also why many scientists and scientific groups push for open access, so that the public CAN verify the science for themselves without the need for their own lab. Also, the alternative is Western Conservatives who weigh their personal faith in religion over established and proven scientific theory, and you MUST accept it because its 'The Truth'. There are also Liberals who push pseudoscience and woo, so that whole idea that its limited to Western Liberals is also a really bad comparison. Stop making poor comparisons. down with slavery posted:I disagree that emotions like love are testable or not real. Man, what was your childhood like? CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 22:40 on Nov 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 22:33
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:This is pretty falsifiable, talk to people who come from abusive homes sometime maybe? It's an example. Emotions, especially complex ones like love, are basically untestable(yes, I know we share some common emotions and that we can test some of these things) because they don't even have a real physical definition. That doesn't make them "not real" though. CommieGIR posted:Man, what was your childhood like? Pretty good, and as much as I tested my parent's love, couldn't really prove the existence of it one way or the other  CommieGIR posted:Please. This is really poor thinking, even if we accept that many people in the West accept the findings of science on faith alone, the science itself is still testable and falsifiable in the end. This is the entire reason for peer review, so that others can demonstrate the validity or invalidity of a hypothesis. Its also why many scientists and scientific groups push for open access, so that the public CAN verify the science for themselves without the need for their own lab. I'm not saying that the science is the problem. I'm saying that peoples faith in science is a problem, much like you're saying faith in god is a problem. Two sides of the same coin imo. down with slavery fucked around with this message at 22:46 on Nov 16, 2014 |
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 22:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 03:58 |
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Still waiting on that proof any of that actually happened. The flood that never happened, the miracles that have no cooperating evidence, the idea that god would justify slavery and misogyny in his holy book and yet still expect people to buy it wholesale. Chupe Raho Aurat posted:Why do all miracles always happen "ages ago, far away"? Similarly, the plagues in Egypt were likely the result of a massive volcanic eruption. What amuses me is that bringing this up to creationists/biblical literalists will usually make them mad or make them dismiss it, since even though it's showing that certain events in the Bible actually historically happened, there's a non-God explanation for them, which is unacceptable.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 22:42
|
|