Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Three Kinds of Creationists
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


(1)
Message 362 of 432 (658482)
04-05-2012 11:42 AM
Reply to: Message 356 by jar
04-04-2012 3:49 PM


Re: Supernatural 101
I'm not talking about your beliefs. I don't really care what you believe. I want to know if some impossible-to evidence notions are more worthy of consideration than others and if so on what basis.
jar writes:
Well yes, my personal beliefs are worthy of my consideration.
Well Duh! Those who hold even the most insane notions dearly do so because they consider their own notions worthy of consideration.
That's practically tautological.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 356 by jar, posted 04-04-2012 3:49 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 363 by jar, posted 04-05-2012 11:48 AM Straggler has replied
 Message 364 by 1.61803, posted 04-05-2012 11:56 AM Straggler has replied

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


Message 365 of 432 (658487)
04-05-2012 12:18 PM
Reply to: Message 364 by 1.61803
04-05-2012 11:56 AM


Re: Supernatural 101
There are lots of lunatics with a penchant for murder.
But I am unaware of any that literally shape-shift into a wolf at full moon and who can only be killed by silver bullets etc. etc.
More to the point - Werewolves aren't impossible-to-evidence. If such things existed what would stop them being evidenced?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 364 by 1.61803, posted 04-05-2012 11:56 AM 1.61803 has not replied

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


Message 366 of 432 (658489)
04-05-2012 12:29 PM
Reply to: Message 363 by jar
04-05-2012 11:48 AM


Re: Supernatural 101
Straggler writes:
So do you agree that your own impossible-to-evidence beliefs are no more or less worthy of consideration than the impossible-to-evidence notion of which you were so disdainful that all evidence has been falsely but undetectably planted? Because I am happy to treat them with equal disdain.
jar writes:
Whatever.
Straggler writes:
I'll take that as a grudging 'Yes'.
jar writes:
Then you take it incorrectly.
Straggler writes:
Oh. So your impossible-to-evidence notions are more worthy of consideration than equally impossible-to-evidence notions held by others?
jar writes:
By me? Well yes, my personal beliefs are worthy of my consideration.
After which I made it clear we aren't talking about your specific beliefs. And then asked:
Straggler writes:
I want to know if some impossible-to evidence notions are more worthy of consideration than others and if so on what basis.
jar writes:
Well, since I have never said otherwise, why do you keep asking the same question and expect a different answer?
So once again you seem to agree that your own impossible-to-evidence beliefs are no more or less worthy of consideration (by others) than the impossible-to-evidence notion of which you were so disdainful that all evidence has been falsely but undetectably planted.
As I said - I am happy to treat them with equal disdain.
I'm glad we agree.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 363 by jar, posted 04-05-2012 11:48 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 367 by jar, posted 04-05-2012 12:41 PM Straggler has replied

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


Message 368 of 432 (658496)
04-05-2012 12:55 PM
Reply to: Message 367 by jar
04-05-2012 12:41 PM


Re: Supernatural 101
jar writes:
I note that you continue to take my quotes out of context and that you continue to use emotive terms and that's fine if it makes you happy.
Oh come now jar - You are more than happy to dish it out when it suits you.
If you feel misrepresented why not explicitly just tell us whether or not some impossible-to evidence notions are more worthy of consideration than others and if so on what basis?
It's a simple question.
jar writes:
However I wish you would point out where I ever used the term disdain.
Here at EvC you regularly treat with disdain the claims of those who put forward their own brand of impossible-to-evidence nonsense. You do it all the time.
More relevantly here - Are you suggesting that the impossible-to-evidence scenario put forward in this thread (namely that all evidence has been falsely implanted) is worthy of anything less than disdain?
Because you seemed to treat it pretty disdainfully at the time...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 367 by jar, posted 04-05-2012 12:41 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 369 by jar, posted 04-05-2012 2:05 PM Straggler has replied

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


Message 370 of 432 (658506)
04-05-2012 2:10 PM
Reply to: Message 369 by jar
04-05-2012 2:05 PM


Re: Supernatural 101
jar writes:
Your question is simply impossible to answer except within a specific and specified context and I have answered that repeatedly.
To be fair it's not so much my question as your own....
And you haven't answered it at all.
jar writes:
If it is impossible to get the evidence why should it EVER be considered?
In what context should that which is impossible-to -evidence EVER be considered?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 369 by jar, posted 04-05-2012 2:05 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 371 by jar, posted 04-05-2012 2:12 PM Straggler has replied

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


Message 372 of 432 (658510)
04-05-2012 2:16 PM
Reply to: Message 371 by jar
04-05-2012 2:12 PM


Re: Supernatural 101
So in the absence of faith there is no reason to consider any impossible-to evidence notion over any other?
Your notion of GOD is no more worthy or my faithless consideration than the equally impossible-to-evidence notion that everything I experience has been falsely and undetectably planted by unknowable beings?
Right?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 371 by jar, posted 04-05-2012 2:12 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 373 by jar, posted 04-05-2012 2:29 PM Straggler has replied

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


Message 374 of 432 (658514)
04-05-2012 2:38 PM
Reply to: Message 373 by jar
04-05-2012 2:29 PM


Re: Supernatural 101
jar writes:
Well, I have never said that any of my personal beliefs are "worthy of your consideration" that I know of.
I honestly don't care what you personally believe. Your focus on that is simply a method of evading my more generic question:
In the absence of faith is there any reason to consider any impossible-to-evidence notion over any other?
This leads to the specific question (where your personal beliefs are nothing more than an incidental example):
Is your notion of GOD more worthy or my faithless consideration than the equally impossible-to-evidence notion that everything I experience has been falsely and undetectably planted by unknowable beings?
jar writes:
In fact I have said throughout this thread that in the case of being on a jury even I should disregard my personal beliefs and address only the evidence presented, so again I am at a loss just what you need me to say?
I want you to answer simple questions honestly and explicitly without your usual recourse to "It's my belief, it's my belief, you can't tell me what to believe" (to paraphrase) whenever you are confronted with difficult questions about the relative validity of equally un-evidenced notions.
Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 373 by jar, posted 04-05-2012 2:29 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 375 by jar, posted 04-05-2012 2:47 PM Straggler has replied

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


Message 376 of 432 (658516)
04-05-2012 2:54 PM
Reply to: Message 375 by jar
04-05-2012 2:47 PM


Re: Supernatural 101
Your pedantic evasiveness has been noted. I will re-phrase the questions in order to eliminate your mis-apprehension that we are discussing my personal considerations:
In the absence of faith is there any reason to consider any given impossible-to-evidence notion over any other?
This leads to the specific question (where your personal beliefs are nothing more than an incidental example):
Is your notion of GOD more worthy of consideration (by those who are faithless) than the equally impossible-to-evidence notion that everything they experience has been falsely and undetectably planted by unknowable beings?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 375 by jar, posted 04-05-2012 2:47 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 377 by jar, posted 04-05-2012 2:59 PM Straggler 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