Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8915 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 07-19-2019 12:49 PM
31 online now:
AZPaul3, dwise1, edge, JonF, kjsimons, PaulK, ringo, Sarah Bellum, xongsmith (9 members, 22 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Post Volume:
Total: 857,035 Year: 12,071/19,786 Month: 1,852/2,641 Week: 361/708 Day: 55/81 Hour: 4/12


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev12
3
4Next
Author Topic:   The Blasphemy Challenge
anastasia
Member (Idle past 4148 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 79 of 134 (382747)
02-05-2007 9:35 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by crashfrog
02-05-2007 9:22 PM


Crashfrog writes:

But honestly what's the difference between praying the rosary and the guy who's compelled to touch every parking meter as he walks down the street?

One is a devotion, one is an obsession.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by crashfrog, posted 02-05-2007 9:22 PM crashfrog has not yet responded

    
anastasia
Member (Idle past 4148 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 80 of 134 (382748)
02-05-2007 9:40 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by ringo
02-05-2007 9:19 PM


Ringo writes:

So you agree that god-sense is not natural? Do you also agree that it is learned?

Nope. Learning requires a teacher, and the teacher had to get the thought from somewhere. If we start out without god-sense, as a lower life form, we have nothing to teach.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by ringo, posted 02-05-2007 9:19 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by ringo, posted 02-05-2007 9:44 PM anastasia has responded

    
anastasia
Member (Idle past 4148 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 83 of 134 (382761)
02-05-2007 10:52 PM
Reply to: Message 82 by crashfrog
02-05-2007 9:47 PM


Sure, there is no secret code to seeing beauty. I only remember so vividly a time when I thought that beauty was all there was. It was so much, and so little.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by crashfrog, posted 02-05-2007 9:47 PM crashfrog has not yet responded

    
anastasia
Member (Idle past 4148 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 84 of 134 (382762)
02-05-2007 10:56 PM
Reply to: Message 81 by ringo
02-05-2007 9:44 PM


Ringo writes:

That's why people who are not taught don't have a god-sense. That's also why some are able to unlearn it.

Doesn't explain where it comes from though, does it?

Unless, of course, the teacher is God.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by ringo, posted 02-05-2007 9:44 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by ringo, posted 02-05-2007 11:02 PM anastasia has responded
 Message 97 by nator, posted 02-06-2007 8:52 AM anastasia has not yet responded

    
anastasia
Member (Idle past 4148 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 88 of 134 (382783)
02-05-2007 11:38 PM
Reply to: Message 85 by ringo
02-05-2007 11:02 PM


Ringo writes:

The teacher could be anybody.

Oh, I don't care who the teacher is, I want to know where he got his 'god-sense'.

So, now you want to say there is no god-sense, but a made-up story to fool the gullible. If this is your belief, then you do indeed have no religion, nothing beyond the natural to explain your existance, nothing but science to appease your searching mind. I can't imagine limiting my mind so much, when it has been given to me with so much capacity for something more. I can find fault in your words even if I look into myself. There is no gullibility, not even for you.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by ringo, posted 02-05-2007 11:02 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by ringo, posted 02-05-2007 11:45 PM anastasia has responded
 Message 98 by nator, posted 02-06-2007 8:57 AM anastasia has responded

    
anastasia
Member (Idle past 4148 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 89 of 134 (382784)
02-05-2007 11:43 PM
Reply to: Message 86 by Doddy
02-05-2007 11:14 PM


Doddy writes:

So, these shamans are probably the ones making the most errors, and telling the people about it (spreading the memes!). It would only take a few people to corroborate it and this shaman would be considered truly perceptive and wise, and given the position of healer and seer etc.

Yeah, by a few people. :)

There is also the possibility that patterns do exist in things which can not be tested, and that shamans are the only ones who CAN see them. Science, remember, can only test what it can understand. The important thing is that humans have the ability to recognize and miss patterns. Any correlation between religious tendencies and people who don't miss patterns, or vice versa?

Edited by anastasia, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by Doddy, posted 02-05-2007 11:14 PM Doddy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 93 by crashfrog, posted 02-06-2007 12:21 AM anastasia has not yet responded
 Message 94 by Doddy, posted 02-06-2007 1:30 AM anastasia has responded

    
anastasia
Member (Idle past 4148 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 91 of 134 (382788)
02-05-2007 11:54 PM
Reply to: Message 90 by ringo
02-05-2007 11:45 PM


Ringo writes:

If you weren't putting limits on your mind, you could imagine more.

Nuh, uh. God has a long white beard and He is pretty fit for His age.

Unfortunately, my imagination doesn't come with any guarantees, and most likely won't get me anywhere near to anything which mught be true about God. May as well put my apples in a basket while I go climbing in the orchard. If I come down with more apples, good. If not, at least I have what I have.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by ringo, posted 02-05-2007 11:45 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by ringo, posted 02-06-2007 12:03 AM anastasia has responded

    
anastasia
Member (Idle past 4148 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 101 of 134 (383130)
02-06-2007 11:48 PM
Reply to: Message 94 by Doddy
02-06-2007 1:30 AM


Interesting stuff, Doddy.

Now, your graph says that believers and non-believers both use the left side of the brain equally.

Believers, here, have used the right side in a different way. Would it be correct to infer that they use the right side of the brain MORE? Please correct me if not. How do we know which side is being used without the test? Is that based on which hand we prefer? And can we noramlly choose to an extent which to work with?

If so, can this be taught? And what are some other areas where the right side of the brain is utilized more often than the left? Too many questions, yes. :)


This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by Doddy, posted 02-06-2007 1:30 AM Doddy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 105 by Doddy, posted 02-07-2007 1:37 AM anastasia has responded
 Message 106 by Doddy, posted 02-07-2007 1:46 AM anastasia has not yet responded

    
anastasia
Member (Idle past 4148 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 102 of 134 (383133)
02-07-2007 12:00 AM
Reply to: Message 98 by nator
02-06-2007 8:57 AM


nator writes:

So, is what you are saying is that it is less limiting of one's mind to observe a phenomena and say "I don't understand how this could happen, therefore Godidit"?

Of course not. All of us are welcome to observe and study phenomena, whether we believe God created it or not.

And are you saying that it is more limiting to your mind to look at a phenomena and say "I don't understand how this could be, so let's try to figure hout how it works so we can understand it."?

No, it is limiting to study only those things which we can observe. Religion is not science, remember? It does not study what is observed, or proven, but what might be. It is not limiting unless the believer himself limits it.

Renaissance=Limited minds

Dark Ages=Unlimited Minds

Yes, you could say this. In the dark ages, imagination was great. :)You must remember, the enlightenment and the rennaissance were not the first instances of critical thinking in men. They were just a more wide spread acknowledgement of its value.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by nator, posted 02-06-2007 8:57 AM nator has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 109 by nator, posted 02-07-2007 6:14 PM anastasia has responded

    
anastasia
Member (Idle past 4148 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 103 of 134 (383137)
02-07-2007 12:12 AM
Reply to: Message 92 by ringo
02-06-2007 12:03 AM


Ringo writes:

Maybe if you dictated less to your imagination, it might be able to imagine the possibility of no God.

We all need to dictate less to our imagination, and we all need to dictate more if our imagination takes us beyond the scope of sanity. :) In the end, the issues of death and beyond death, are beyond our ability to do anything BUT imagine, so in that sense, one belief is as good as another. The only thing we have left is imagining other possibilities, which it seems we are very good at given the multitude of new religions which form. It is nice to study all of these ideas, but nothing to gain except finding a system which matches your own imagination.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by ringo, posted 02-06-2007 12:03 AM ringo has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 108 by crashfrog, posted 02-07-2007 12:56 PM anastasia has responded

    
anastasia
Member (Idle past 4148 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 104 of 134 (383138)
02-07-2007 12:18 AM
Reply to: Message 95 by nator
02-06-2007 8:33 AM


nator writes:

On the other hand, why must we be able to recognize something "beyond reality" to appreciate art? Art is "real", isn't it?

I am not going to discuss this any further. The whole issue of 'art' is something personal in the road to my own understanding of God. It is beyond the topic or the scope of this thread, and I regret even bringing it here to be de-moralized. :)

By the way, are you ever going to tell me where the "godsense" part of the body is that evolved just like the "emotions" part of the body evolved?

No, I am not. It was a late-night semi-serious discussion between Ringo and myself that I do not expect to have any meaning outside of that which is already posted. I use no such word as 'god-sense' in normal vocabulary.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by nator, posted 02-06-2007 8:33 AM nator has not yet responded

    
anastasia
Member (Idle past 4148 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 107 of 134 (383168)
02-07-2007 9:38 AM
Reply to: Message 105 by Doddy
02-07-2007 1:37 AM


Doddy writes:

Probably not. I think it is more of a 'calibration' thing than a dominance thing - as far as I know there is no correlation between hemisphere dominance and religious belief. They are more likely to see patterns, and that includes patterns which may not actually be there, but seem like it when you look at it.

So all participants utilized both parts of the brain equally? Yet there is a difference in 'how' they used them? I do not quite understand the 'calibration' thing. Without a question of dominance, how do you account for the different results?

I'm fairly positive that it can't be taught.

Left brain does math, language , logic etc.

Right brain does abstract pattern perception, intuition, creativity etc

I understand this. I guess I am curious if there are other types of people who seem to have the same results in detecting abstract patterns as do relgious people. Actually I can research it a bit myself, it is one of those things where I want to know more about it and it is hard to narrow down my questions.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by Doddy, posted 02-07-2007 1:37 AM Doddy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 110 by Doddy, posted 02-07-2007 6:35 PM anastasia has responded

    
anastasia
Member (Idle past 4148 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 111 of 134 (383339)
02-07-2007 6:44 PM
Reply to: Message 108 by crashfrog
02-07-2007 12:56 PM


Crashfrog writes:

People like to assert that there's no harm done when make-believe is substituted for truth, and it seems that you just did that. But the history of human religious conflict makes it very clear indeed how harmful that behavior can be.

Nah, you have forgotten already this; we need to dictate more if our imagination takes us beyond the scope of sanity. It is not belief in religion alone that can drive men to insanity; there is lust, money, ambition, and power, to name a few.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by crashfrog, posted 02-07-2007 12:56 PM crashfrog has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 113 by nator, posted 02-07-2007 6:52 PM anastasia has not yet responded

    
anastasia
Member (Idle past 4148 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 112 of 134 (383343)
02-07-2007 6:47 PM
Reply to: Message 110 by Doddy
02-07-2007 6:35 PM


Doddy writes:

Enhanced Right Hemisphere participation though, which I'd say is the case here, is that believers take more notice of what the RH is telling them.

And non-believers are lacking this 'enhancement'? :)


This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by Doddy, posted 02-07-2007 6:35 PM Doddy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by Doddy, posted 02-07-2007 6:54 PM anastasia has responded

    
anastasia
Member (Idle past 4148 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 115 of 134 (383352)
02-07-2007 7:03 PM
Reply to: Message 109 by nator
02-07-2007 6:14 PM


nator writes:

Supernatural explanations are investigative dead ends that freeze inquiry in it's tracks.

The reason I bring this up is that it has been shown through many centuries that the best way to learn anything reliable about anything natural is to study it using methodological naturalism i.e. the scientific method.

Why do you keep making science and relgion competitors? It is so unneccesary when you could just accept the fact that they deal with different areas.

But you seem to be saying in your first post quoted above that one is limiting their mind by sticking to naturalistic explanations of natural phenomena instead of also including supernatural explanations of natural phenomena.

You seem to be having difficulty understanding. I said;

nasti writes:

Of course not. All of us are welcome to observe and study phenomena, whether we believe God created it or not.

It is limiting to dictate your imagination so much that it can not concieve of anything beyond the natural, not 'instead of' the natural.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by nator, posted 02-07-2007 6:14 PM nator has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 118 by nator, posted 02-07-2007 7:43 PM anastasia has responded

    
Prev12
3
4Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019