Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8915 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 07-21-2019 1:29 AM
22 online now:
AZPaul3 (1 member, 21 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Upcoming Birthdays: anglagard
Post Volume:
Total: 857,228 Year: 12,264/19,786 Month: 2,045/2,641 Week: 0/554 Day: 0/113 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1234
5
Author Topic:   Do we talk up or down to fundies?
Fosdick 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3697 days)
Posts: 1793
From: Upper Slobovia
Joined: 12-11-2006


Message 61 of 73 (398164)
04-29-2007 1:46 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by Rob
04-29-2007 12:22 PM


What's "evil"?
HM:
1) nothing is naturally evil, and everything is natural;

Everything?

Even Rape, murder, slander, etc...?


If they are not natural then what are they. Aren't humans natural? In an ecological world, assigning "evil" to anything is highly arbitrary. Is the guinea worm evil? The flea? A rose bush?

—HM

OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to this message or continue in this vein.
Take comments to the Moderation Thread.
AdminPD

Edited by AdminPD, : Warning


This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by Rob, posted 04-29-2007 12:22 PM Rob has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by Rob, posted 04-29-2007 5:06 PM Fosdick has not yet responded

    
Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4046 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 62 of 73 (398188)
04-29-2007 4:54 PM
Reply to: Message 58 by Archer Opteryx
04-29-2007 11:58 AM


Re: good = evil, evil = good, and do-si-do
qs:
You know you're not one of the evil guys because you know you are one of the evil guys.

Ever here of Andrei Sakharov?

He was one of the evil guys. And then He turned. That does not mean he is pure as the wind driven snow. It only means that he is willing to submit to the truth and grow.

It is actually a simple concept Archer. A student of mathematics is always a student.

A student (or disciple) of Christ is never 'the christ', he is only a student.

That's it really...

God is good, and we are evil. That is what I believe... He is moral, we are not. But not in the extreme sense that you guys always interpret such things in.

It is in manner of relationship; student / teacher, God / man.

look at it this way...

1 John 1:8 If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us...10 If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word has no place in our lives.

Not complicated...

OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to this message or continue in this vein.
Take comments to the Moderation Thread.
AdminPD

Edited by AdminPD, : Warning


This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by Archer Opteryx, posted 04-29-2007 11:58 AM Archer Opteryx has not yet responded

    
AdminPD
Inactive Administrator


Message 63 of 73 (398189)
04-29-2007 5:06 PM


Warning - Topic

Please reread Message 1 for a refresher on the topic.

The question here:
Should we treat fundamentalists as though they've completely missed out on their education or should we treat them as though they were part way through their masters degree in bio-engineering?

Get back on track.

Please direct any comments concerning this Admin msg to the Moderation Thread.

Any response in this thread will receive a 24 hour timeout.

Thank you Purple


Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by Fosdick, posted 04-29-2007 8:27 PM AdminPD has not yet responded

  
Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4046 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 64 of 73 (398190)
04-29-2007 5:06 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by Fosdick
04-29-2007 1:46 PM


Re: What's "evil"?
HM:
Aren't humans natural?

At least partially...

But isn't it telling that we expect them not to be?

I think human beings are far more complex than mere animals. If for no other reason, we expect them not to act like animals.

Does that not give you pause?

Because if you are correct, then what exactly did Cho do at Virginia Tech which was unnatural?

And consider this... if everything is natural, then from where did the idea of that which is 'unatural' (religion) originate?

Can Richard Dawkins claim that Christians are diseased, as though it is 'unnatural' or worse yet... 'evil'?

If you really examine those questions carefully, I think you will quickly see that the moral implications are hideous. In fact, I believe Darwin made a remark to that extent (I'll try to find it).

I am not suggesting that you or anyone else is supporting the philosophy I am about to invoke (so do not take this as such), but it is clear that it led to Hitler's conclusions. And that is not to deny Stalin or the others of their proper glory in the same boat.

I am not saying that invoking this disjunction between morality and naturalism is a final answer either...

I am suggesting you think about it. Some of these things you must see for yourself. It does me no good to declare them, if no-one takes the time to 'digest the offering'.

OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to this message or continue in this vein.
Take comments to the Moderation Thread.
AdminPD

Edited by Rob, : No reason given.

Edited by AdminPD, : Warning - Get to the topic


This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Fosdick, posted 04-29-2007 1:46 PM Fosdick has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by RAZD, posted 04-29-2007 6:35 PM Rob has not yet responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19981
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 65 of 73 (398203)
04-29-2007 6:35 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by Rob
04-29-2007 5:06 PM


Re: What's "evil"?
Surprise. It's Rob, and the topic once more is morality rather than what is in the OP ...

Because if you are correct, then what exactly did Cho do at Virginia Tech which was unnatural?

So how do you explain this to "fundies" ...

Of course it was "natural" - nature is neither good nor evil. What Cho did was a result of impulses. The processing of those impulses may have been faulty (chemical or neurological imbalance due to environment, genetics or some combination), but that doesn't make it unnatural.

To think that such action is "unnatural" means that there is some non-natural cause ... ie some kind of demonic possession or something similar. This absolves one of looking for cause and effect ... and doesn't lead to any new knowledge or any possible treatment for similarly afflicted people, thus meaning that such experiences will be repeated.

And consider this... if everything is natural, then from where did the idea of that which is 'unatural' (religion) originate?

From the conceit that we individuals\humans are something special.

Enjoy.


Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by Rob, posted 04-29-2007 5:06 PM Rob has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by Archer Opteryx, posted 05-02-2007 1:48 AM RAZD has responded

  
Fosdick 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3697 days)
Posts: 1793
From: Upper Slobovia
Joined: 12-11-2006


Message 66 of 73 (398219)
04-29-2007 8:27 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by AdminPD
04-29-2007 5:06 PM


Back to fundies and how to treat them
Admin PD puts us back on topic:

The question here:

Should we treat fundamentalists as though they've completely missed out on their education or should we treat them as though they were part way through their masters degree in bio-engineering?


They should be treated as intellectually impaired by way of indoctrination—the "bicameral-grip syndrome"—and treated firmly, but gently, because their belief fundamentals are brittle and unyielding. It would break them into pieces to have to all of a sudden abandon their ancient dreams of Heaven.

—HM

Edited by Hoot Mon, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by AdminPD, posted 04-29-2007 5:06 PM AdminPD has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 68 by Rob, posted 05-02-2007 12:18 AM Fosdick has responded

    
Nighttrain
Member (Idle past 2191 days)
Posts: 1512
From: brisbane,australia
Joined: 06-08-2004


Message 67 of 73 (398271)
04-30-2007 1:07 AM
Reply to: Message 52 by Rob
04-29-2007 10:39 AM


I tried that with Percy and Nosy. Let em state their case, even agree with the correct points, and then ask the question which exposes the weak link and point of tension. But they only became confused and wished it away.

Depends whether you used Nagewaza or Katamewaza. Very subtle difference, not usually mastered by round-eyes. :-p

OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to this message or continue in this vein.
Take comments to the Moderation Thread.
AdminPD

Edited by AdminPD, : Warning


This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by Rob, posted 04-29-2007 10:39 AM Rob has not yet responded

    
Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4046 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 68 of 73 (398649)
05-02-2007 12:18 AM
Reply to: Message 66 by Fosdick
04-29-2007 8:27 PM


Re: Back to fundies and how to treat them
HM:
They should be treated as intellectually impaired by way of indoctrination—the "bicameral-grip syndrome"—and treated firmly, but gently, because their belief fundamentals are brittle and unyielding. It would break them into pieces to have to all of a sudden abandon their ancient dreams of Heaven.

Do you think ancient dreams of heaven are unnatural?

If not, why would you mess with mother nature?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by Fosdick, posted 04-29-2007 8:27 PM Fosdick has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by Fosdick, posted 05-02-2007 12:09 PM Rob has responded

    
Archer Opteryx
Member (Idle past 1795 days)
Posts: 1811
From: East Asia
Joined: 08-16-2006


Message 69 of 73 (398655)
05-02-2007 1:48 AM
Reply to: Message 65 by RAZD
04-29-2007 6:35 PM


Re: What's "evil"?
RAZD:

What Cho did was a result of impulses. The processing of those impulses may have been faulty (chemical or neurological imbalance due to environment, genetics or some combination), but that doesn't make it unnatural.

It was certainly abnormal, as your adjective 'faulty' recognizes. The word unnatural is a popular (if not very accurate) synonym for the pretty much the same idea.

'Faulty' neurological processes are those that do not function as well as we would reasonably expect them to, given the norm of efficiency as it exists in nature.

Being 'outside the norm of efficiency as it exists in nature' yields both terms: 'abnormal'(outside the norm) and 'unnatural' (as it exists in nature). A scientist is more likely to prefer 'abnormal' or one of its kindred terms --pathology or disorder--where a lay person might just refer to a phenomenon as unnatural.

It's not the most helpful word, as 'nature' means many different things to many people. But this kind of imprecision characterises much popular terminology. The desire to be more precise is why professionals in any field develop jargon.

To think that such action is "unnatural" means that there is some non-natural cause ... ie some kind of demonic possession or something similar.

This is a logical sequence of thought, but in standard usage 'unnatural' is not really a synonym for 'supernatural' as you use it here. The popular understanding isn't so literal ('outside of nature'). It's a bit sloppier ('outside the norm as it exists in nature').

______

Edited by Archer Opterix, : clarity.

Edited by Archer Opterix, : html.

Edited by Archer Opterix, : clarity


Archer

All species are transitional.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by RAZD, posted 04-29-2007 6:35 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by jar, posted 05-02-2007 11:31 AM Archer Opteryx has not yet responded
 Message 72 by RAZD, posted 05-02-2007 8:35 PM Archer Opteryx has not yet responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 31076
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.5


Message 70 of 73 (398729)
05-02-2007 11:31 AM
Reply to: Message 69 by Archer Opteryx
05-02-2007 1:48 AM


Re: What's "evil"?
Human and societal norm?


Aslan is not a Tame Lion
This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Archer Opteryx, posted 05-02-2007 1:48 AM Archer Opteryx has not yet responded

  
Fosdick 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3697 days)
Posts: 1793
From: Upper Slobovia
Joined: 12-11-2006


Message 71 of 73 (398736)
05-02-2007 12:09 PM
Reply to: Message 68 by Rob
05-02-2007 12:18 AM


Not only fundies have ancient heavenly dreams
rob asks:

Do you think ancient dreams of heaven are unnatural?

My dog has dreams—not sure just what of, but they're very animated. Sometimes I think he's chasing squirrels, which is like heaven to him. So, yes, I have empiracle evidence that ancient heavenly dreams are natural.

—HM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by Rob, posted 05-02-2007 12:18 AM Rob has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 73 by Rob, posted 05-03-2007 12:28 AM Fosdick has not yet responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19981
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 72 of 73 (398830)
05-02-2007 8:35 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by Archer Opteryx
05-02-2007 1:48 AM


Re: What's "evil"?
It was certainly abnormal, as your adjective 'faulty' recognizes.

I intentionally modified 'faulty' with "(chemical or neurological imbalance due to environment, genetics or some combination)" and note that it isn't necessarily {abnormal\un-normal\unusual} but perfectly natural: it happens frequently.

'Faulty' neurological processes are those that do not function as well as we would reasonably expect them to,...

Or that function at heightened levels of response that sometimes swamp the ability to process information (ADD, ADHD), OR that just do not function in the same ways every time (chemical inhibition\excitation).

The other side of "may have been faulty" is that they may have been functioning properly -- I can't say I know, can you? And if they were functioning properly then that too is natural.

This is a logical sequence of thought, but in standard usage 'unnatural' is not really a synonym for 'supernatural' as you use it here.

su·per·nat·u·ral –adjective1. of, pertaining to, or being above or beyond what is natural; unexplainable by natural law or phenomena; abnormal.

versus

un·nat·u·ral –adjective1. contrary to the laws or course of nature.

Synonyms: ... abnormal, ... supernatural, ... unaccountable, ... (of ~50 given)

Antonyms: natural, real

OF course this gets us back to perceptions of reality ... including Cho's ... and the question of what is "normal" ...

Enjoy.


Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Archer Opteryx, posted 05-02-2007 1:48 AM Archer Opteryx has not yet responded

  
Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4046 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 73 of 73 (398876)
05-03-2007 12:28 AM
Reply to: Message 71 by Fosdick
05-02-2007 12:09 PM


Re: Not only fundies have ancient heavenly dreams
Not one to be cornered are you?

At least your consistent!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by Fosdick, posted 05-02-2007 12:09 PM Fosdick has not yet responded

    
Prev1234
5
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019