Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Peanut Gallery
onifre
Member (Idle past 2951 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 91 of 1725 (514658)
07-10-2009 9:37 AM
Reply to: Message 90 by lyx2no
07-09-2009 7:27 PM


Re: What If
Yea, well you smell bad.
"I really like the Peanut Gallery. we've got to make more use of it."
- Oni

This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by lyx2no, posted 07-09-2009 7:27 PM lyx2no has not replied

Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 2698 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 92 of 1725 (514682)
07-10-2009 5:24 PM


Bluejay is a Muslim!
The way I remember it, I thought I grew up a Mormon.
Yet, lately, Traste has proposed a new hypothesis to explain my belief system: Bluejay is a Muslim who believes in Intelligent Design! (Source: Post #380 in Transition from chemistry to biology).
And, his hypothesis might actually have some merit. Look at his evidence:
He read Why is the Intelligent Designer so inept?. In Message #3 of that thread, I clearly state that I believe in a naturalistic Intelligent Designer, one that uses evolution to "design." Throughout the thread, I present my beliefs as tentative speculation.
In the same thread, the fact that I am a Mormon is mentioned several times (e.g., Messages #5, #7 and #343).
Sounds like a foolproof hypothesis to me. I think Traste should submit it for publication in the Journal of Bluejayology (impact factor: 1.3E-42): they've been looking for a new hypothesis to reinvigorate the field.
Edited by Bluejay, : Apparently, I've lost my link-to-individual-posts privileges.
Edited by Bluejay, : More individual posts linked.
Edited by Bluejay, : Indents, and important preposition added.

-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)
Darwin loves you.

Replies to this message:
 Message 93 by Percy, posted 07-11-2009 8:28 PM Blue Jay has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 93 of 1725 (514746)
07-11-2009 8:28 PM
Reply to: Message 92 by Blue Jay
07-10-2009 5:24 PM


Re: Bluejay is a Muslim!
I assume you'll now be watching Little Mosque on the Prairie?
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by Blue Jay, posted 07-10-2009 5:24 PM Blue Jay has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 94 by Bailey, posted 07-11-2009 10:14 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Bailey
Member (Idle past 4370 days)
Posts: 574
From: Earth
Joined: 08-24-2003


Message 94 of 1725 (514751)
07-11-2009 10:14 PM
Reply to: Message 93 by Percy
07-11-2009 8:28 PM


Re: Bluejay is a Muslim!
Hope things are goin' well ...
Percy writes:
Bluejay writes:
The way I remember it, I thought I grew up a Mormon.
Yet, lately, Traste has proposed a new hypothesis to explain my belief system: Bluejay is a Muslim who believes in Intelligent Design!
I assume you'll now be watching Little Mosque on the Prairie?
~ rotfl ~
First, dark chocolate Reeses peanut butter cups & now this ?!
What'll they think of next ...
One Love

This message is a reply to:
 Message 93 by Percy, posted 07-11-2009 8:28 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

onifre
Member (Idle past 2951 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 95 of 1725 (515614)
07-19-2009 8:24 PM


Straggler vs RAZD
THE DEBATE BETWEEN STRAGGLER AND RAZD HAS GOTTEN RIDICULOUS
After three threads these 2 seem further from conceding than ever!!!!!
At first I was enjoying this debate, but at this point neither is helping the other come to an agreement on what the real issues are.
One claims to be misrepresented and that lies are being told, the other can't seem to understand where the lies and misrepresentations are, and neither seems willing to bend on the matter.
I'm not calling a winner or loser, I'm calling for an end to the dead end debate.
For the love of "supernatural inherently non-empirical entities," please, I beg of you, walk away to your neutral corners fellas.
- Oni

If it's true that our species is alone in the universe, then I'd have to say that the universe aimed rather low and settled for very little.
~George Carlin

Replies to this message:
 Message 96 by CosmicChimp, posted 07-19-2009 9:23 PM onifre has not replied
 Message 98 by Straggler, posted 07-20-2009 4:56 PM onifre has replied

CosmicChimp
Member
Posts: 311
From: Muenchen Bayern Deutschland
Joined: 06-15-2007


Message 96 of 1725 (515618)
07-19-2009 9:23 PM
Reply to: Message 95 by onifre
07-19-2009 8:24 PM


Re: Straggler vs RAZD
Although I gave up hundreds of posts ago on their debate, I have read the last few posts on that never-ending saga. BORING. Seems to be a stalemate as well.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by onifre, posted 07-19-2009 8:24 PM onifre has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by Rahvin, posted 07-19-2009 11:04 PM CosmicChimp has seen this message but not replied

Rahvin
Member
Posts: 4032
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 9.2


Message 97 of 1725 (515621)
07-19-2009 11:04 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by CosmicChimp
07-19-2009 9:23 PM


Re: Straggler vs RAZD
It's a perpetual stalemate. The debate has gone on for so long (and at this point it's gotten so downright nasty) that it's difficult to point to what some positions actually state at this point.
All I know is that I agreed with Straggler at the beginning, and none of the posts I've seen from RAZD have been at all convincing that Straggler's position is fallacious.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by CosmicChimp, posted 07-19-2009 9:23 PM CosmicChimp has seen this message but not replied

Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 98 of 1725 (515710)
07-20-2009 4:56 PM
Reply to: Message 95 by onifre
07-19-2009 8:24 PM


Re: Straggler vs RAZD
OK OK. I will stop.
Well.... If he will stop I will stop too. Promise.
Obviously I am biased but I think Percy's wisdom in spotting this outcome months in advance is the most obvious winner in all of this.
Message 114

This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by onifre, posted 07-19-2009 8:24 PM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 99 by onifre, posted 07-21-2009 1:17 PM Straggler has replied

onifre
Member (Idle past 2951 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 99 of 1725 (515812)
07-21-2009 1:17 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by Straggler
07-20-2009 4:56 PM


Re: Straggler vs RAZD
OK OK. I will stop.
Well.... If he will stop I will stop too. Promise.
I think this may need to be settled in a cage match.
Obviously I am biased but I think Percy's wisdom in spotting this outcome months in advance is the most obvious winner in all of this.
I'd forgotten about Percy's prediction. Shit, he nailed it on the head. I guess the EvC guru has lots of experience in these debates to know what direction they'll take.
- Oni

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by Straggler, posted 07-20-2009 4:56 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 100 by Rahvin, posted 07-21-2009 2:22 PM onifre has replied
 Message 103 by Straggler, posted 07-22-2009 9:13 AM onifre has replied

Rahvin
Member
Posts: 4032
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 9.2


Message 100 of 1725 (515819)
07-21-2009 2:22 PM
Reply to: Message 99 by onifre
07-21-2009 1:17 PM


Re: Straggler vs RAZD
I'd forgotten about Percy's prediction. Shit, he nailed it on the head. I guess the EvC guru has lots of experience in these debates to know what direction they'll take.
Perhaps the prediction came to him as a non-empirical "experience" while he was awake and conscious. This shows that non-empirical "experiences" of an undefined nature can have predictive qualities, and can be used to draw conclusions about objective reality! They don't count as a sixth sense, though. Definitely not that.
Or, maybe Percy just made an incredibly accurate assessment of where the debate would wind up.
Who can say? In the absence of evidence, I suppose I'm forced to be agnostic on the matter

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by onifre, posted 07-21-2009 1:17 PM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 101 by onifre, posted 07-21-2009 4:15 PM Rahvin has not replied
 Message 102 by Richard Townsend, posted 07-21-2009 5:18 PM Rahvin has not replied

onifre
Member (Idle past 2951 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 101 of 1725 (515837)
07-21-2009 4:15 PM
Reply to: Message 100 by Rahvin
07-21-2009 2:22 PM


Re: Straggler vs RAZD
Perhaps the prediction came to him as a non-empirical "experience" while he was awake and conscious. This shows that non-empirical "experiences" of an undefined nature can have predictive qualities, and can be used to draw conclusions about objective reality!
Nice!!!
Who can say? In the absence of evidence, I suppose I'm forced to be agnostic on the matter
If it wasn't in the Peanut Gallery this would deserve a Post of the Month nomination.
- Oni

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by Rahvin, posted 07-21-2009 2:22 PM Rahvin has not replied

Richard Townsend
Member (Idle past 4732 days)
Posts: 103
From: London, England
Joined: 07-16-2008


Message 102 of 1725 (515843)
07-21-2009 5:18 PM
Reply to: Message 100 by Rahvin
07-21-2009 2:22 PM


Re: Straggler vs RAZD
Perhaps the prediction came to him as a non-empirical "experience" while he was awake and conscious. This shows that non-empirical "experiences" of an undefined nature can have predictive qualities, and can be used to draw conclusions about objective reality! They don't count as a sixth sense, though. Definitely not that.
Or, maybe Percy just made an incredibly accurate assessment of where the debate would wind up.
Who can say? In the absence of evidence, I suppose I'm forced to be agnostic on the matter
.
Don't, please!!!!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by Rahvin, posted 07-21-2009 2:22 PM Rahvin has not replied

Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 103 of 1725 (515908)
07-22-2009 9:13 AM
Reply to: Message 99 by onifre
07-21-2009 1:17 PM


Re: Straggler vs RAZD
Look I know everyone is sick of this but I have actually been called a liar Message 34. I have been accused of repeated intentional misinterpretation and downright dishonesty with regard to RAZD's position on non-empirical evidence. But.......
RAZD responds writes:
Thanks again Percy,
Percy writes to Straggler writes:
To me the point you made with the aware but otherwise insensate intellect seems obvious. You established this as a baseline for the type of experiences that cannot constitute valid empirical evidence, and RAZD agreed with it.
Eventually, but by gosh what a wrangle to get there from where he started. I find it humorous that he had to go to the point where perception of any external experience was impossible before he could get to a point where subjective perception was not possible evidence. All intermediate positions had some level of credibility that evidence so provided could be true
Message 150 My emphasis.
RAZD specifically agrees that an "aware but otherwise insensate intellect" is in a situation where "perception of any external experience was impossible". How can this possibly be construed as anything other than an absolute statement that empirical evidence is the only means of experiencing reality external to ones own mind?
Nobody has to answer this. I am not asking for people to take sides. I just felt that being called a dishonest liar demanded at least an explanation as to why I repeatedly described RAZD's position as I did.
Anyway the important thing is that we have now unequivocally established RAZD's true position which is that non-empirical evidence is indeed valid and that it is by means of this non-empirical evidence that we can distinguish between those non-empirical concepts that are evidenced and those that are not. Unless of course I have got it wrong yet again..?
Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by onifre, posted 07-21-2009 1:17 PM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 104 by onifre, posted 07-22-2009 2:04 PM Straggler has not replied

onifre
Member (Idle past 2951 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 104 of 1725 (515993)
07-22-2009 2:04 PM
Reply to: Message 103 by Straggler
07-22-2009 9:13 AM


Re: Straggler vs RAZD
Hi Straggler,
Look I know everyone is sick of this but I have actually been called a liar Message 34. I have been accused of repeated intentional misinterpretation and downright dishonesty with regard to RAZD's position on non-empirical evidence.
My only point was that in not helping further the debate to a point of concession, on both your parts, the debate became ridiculous. But I for one am not sick of the overall points you are making.
How can this possibly be construed as anything other than an absolute statement that empirical evidence is the only means of experiencing reality external to ones own mind?
In my opinon, this gets confussed in 2 ways.
Philosophically speaking, there is no reality experienced external to ones own mind, therefore "empirical" seems illogical as a pre-qualifier for evidence.
However, scientifically speaking, we have established a set of ground rules for what we call empirical evidence that has a set of pre-existing conditions for it.
And because of these 2 positions, the argument, especially in a forum, is almost impossible to bring to a point of concession.
I just felt that being called a dishonest liar demanded at least an explanation as to why I repeatedly described RAZD's position as I did.
I personally felt that RAZD was not justified in calling you a liar, that, in my opinion, especially for someone like yourself that has been a great poster in this forum, was unwarrented.
I felt there was misunderstanding one both of your parts, because I feel that the argument has an inherent quality that will lead to people to misunderstand each other.
Unless of course I have got it wrong yet again..?
I'm sure you are probably wrong again in RAZD's opinion, maybe not, but it seems unlikely that you'll fully comprehend each other given the nature of the subject being debated.
I have a good idea for a thread that I will likely propose later today...stay tuned.
- Oni

If it's true that our species is alone in the universe, then I'd have to say that the universe aimed rather low and settled for very little.
~George Carlin

This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by Straggler, posted 07-22-2009 9:13 AM Straggler has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 105 by Rahvin, posted 07-22-2009 3:25 PM onifre has not replied
 Message 111 by RAZD, posted 07-22-2009 10:55 PM onifre has replied

Rahvin
Member
Posts: 4032
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 9.2


Message 105 of 1725 (516006)
07-22-2009 3:25 PM
Reply to: Message 104 by onifre
07-22-2009 2:04 PM


Re: Straggler vs RAZD
Philosophically speaking, there is no reality experienced external to ones own mind, therefore "empirical" seems illogical as a pre-qualifier for evidence.
However, scientifically speaking, we have established a set of ground rules for what we call empirical evidence that has a set of pre-existing conditions for it.
And because of these 2 positions, the argument, especially in a forum, is almost impossible to bring to a point of concession.
The other problem being RAZD's ambiguity. As Straggler has pointed out, RAZD has never told us what "non-empirical evidence" is. He's only said what it isn't (dreams don't count, for instance, and he agreed that a conscious and aware but totally insensate individual would be able to gain no actual information about the world).
I've seen Straggler's conception of what RAZD has been saying as justified, but the ambiguity of RAZD's position (by not specifically and directly stating what he is talking about, rather than pointing out what he is not) means that misunderstandings are virtually inevitable.
It also doesn't help that half of their posts could each fill a small novel.
I'd love to see the debate continue, with emotions running less high. Neither Straggler or RAZD strike me as immobile zealots for their respective causes - both are among the best posters we have on this board. I don't see a stubborn refusal to concede after being refuted. I don't see dishonesty. I see aggravation, frustration, and some partially-defined concepts that are causing miscommunication.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by onifre, posted 07-22-2009 2:04 PM onifre has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 106 by Granny Magda, posted 07-22-2009 3:39 PM Rahvin has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024