Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,864 Year: 4,121/9,624 Month: 992/974 Week: 319/286 Day: 40/40 Hour: 6/6


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Underlying Philosophy
anglagard
Member (Idle past 864 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 130 of 577 (555290)
04-13-2010 1:16 AM
Reply to: Message 121 by sac51495
04-12-2010 8:11 AM


The Great Burden of the College and Military Instructor
sac51495 writes:
RAZD,
I am going to ask a direct question which begs a direct answer.
Is atheism the presupposition of what you believe, or is atheism the conclusion of what you believe?
sac51495, I am going to ask a direct question which begs a direct answer.
Is atheism the presupposition of what you believe in RAZD's case despite his signature, or is atheism the conclusion of what you believe in RAZD's case despite his signature?
Pay attention to detail.
Why don't you do some homework before making yourself appear the fool? Like look at RAZD's signature?

The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes.
Salman Rushdie
This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It’s us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by sac51495, posted 04-12-2010 8:11 AM sac51495 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 131 by dwise1, posted 04-13-2010 2:13 AM anglagard has not replied

anglagard
Member (Idle past 864 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 206 of 577 (557456)
04-25-2010 8:42 PM
Reply to: Message 198 by sac51495
04-24-2010 1:50 AM


Idiotic Metaphor
sac51495 writes:
So here is an application: prove to me scientifically that I should not look up where you live and come and kill you. Until you can, there seems to be no good reason (that is, if we adhere to your worldview) for me to not do so.
First, you speak for yourself alone. Not everyone is stuck in a pre-moral state in Kohlberg's Stages of Moral Development.
From the source above:
quote:
STAGE 1: PUNISHMENT AND OBEDIENCE ORIENTATION
What could be called a "premoral" stage, what an agent will do is determined by calculating the immediate physical consequences that might ensue not the moral value of an action. By deferring to power, the agent's overarching goal is to avoid physical punishment. Thus, at stage one, obedience not moral sentiments or compunction characterizes decision making.
Perhaps you can answer this for me. I notice that when some self-proclaimed Christians are intellectually challenged, as you have been in this forum, they immediately resort to metaphors of violence. Why are they so defiant of the teachings of Jesus in the New Testament, haven't they read it? The Gideons give it away for free, just ask.
Also, proof is not a scientific concept, it is a concept of math and law. If you want to discuss science as if you actually knew something about the subject, either use the accurate term evidence or display your ignorance for all to see.
Edited by anglagard, : Added quote as fundamentalists are notorious for not clicking on hypertext.
Edited by anglagard, : Last two sentences of first paragraph added for emphasis
Edited by anglagard, : use term 'scientific concept' instead of 'science' for accuracy

The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes.
Salman Rushdie
This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It’s us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 198 by sac51495, posted 04-24-2010 1:50 AM sac51495 has not replied

anglagard
Member (Idle past 864 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 314 of 577 (563042)
06-02-2010 11:14 PM
Reply to: Message 313 by Coyote
06-02-2010 11:04 PM


Re: Those Who Ignore History Are Destined To Repeat It
This is a field I have studied.
Early man was early man, but what about a hundred years before that? And a thousand years before that? 100,000? 1,000,000? 5,000,000?
There are a lot of fossil critters out there that anthropology suggests that are ancestral to "early man." You don't want to call them apes.
What were they? And on what evidence do you base your opinion?
Yes, I am also curious as to where this arbitrary boundary can be drawn.
Oh well, it is difficult for some people to understand the fundamental theory of calculus, namely that a whole lot of discrete points become, to all extents and purposes, a curve. Or that a series can sum to up, to all extents and purposes, a whole number.
These limits to understanding can be overcome, but it takes time (hopefully not on the geologic scale), for some more than others.

The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes.
Salman Rushdie
This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It’s us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 313 by Coyote, posted 06-02-2010 11:04 PM Coyote has not replied

anglagard
Member (Idle past 864 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 315 of 577 (563043)
06-02-2010 11:18 PM
Reply to: Message 312 by tesla
06-02-2010 10:56 PM


Re: Those Who Ignore History Are Destined To Repeat It
tesla writes:
psychology is interesting when we find people like Edgar cayce. there isn't any explanation for his minds abilities or its apparent weakness to suggestion. the subconscious mind works with what is definite.
Is that the same Edgar Cayce who predicted California would sink into the ocean in 1969 (contrary to the principle of isostasy)? I remember the jokes on Laugh-In.

The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes.
Salman Rushdie
This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It’s us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 312 by tesla, posted 06-02-2010 10:56 PM tesla has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 317 by tesla, posted 06-03-2010 2:37 AM anglagard has not replied

anglagard
Member (Idle past 864 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 329 of 577 (563332)
06-04-2010 11:10 AM
Reply to: Message 328 by sac51495
06-04-2010 10:47 AM


Self Contradiction City
sac51495 writes:
Above all, I don't think I've got it all right. In fact, I don't believe anybody has it completely right. Only God's word has it completely right, so that is what all Christians should refer to in order to come up with their beliefs.
However, you evidently believe that your interpretation of the one out of 30,000 versions of the Bible that you consider 'the word of god' should be above any examination.
If you don't think you have it right (an admirable show of humility before God), how can you think your interpretation of your preferred version of the Bible is the absolute truth?

The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes.
Salman Rushdie
This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It’s us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 328 by sac51495, posted 06-04-2010 10:47 AM sac51495 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 369 by sac51495, posted 06-14-2010 7:00 PM anglagard 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