Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9161 total)
0 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,585 Year: 2,842/9,624 Month: 687/1,588 Week: 93/229 Day: 4/61 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Inductive Atheism
bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2467 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 47 of 536 (604737)
02-14-2011 3:56 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by xongsmith
02-14-2011 2:16 PM


Sleep paralysis, temporal epilepsy and schizophrenia.
xongsmith writes:
Straggler writes:
People can testify to having experiences certainly. But what are these experiences evidence of exactly?
I think the main point is that all of these sorts of evidences are only coming into play when the desired objective scientific evidence is simply not available.
There's plenty of scientific research on supernatural experiences. Where shall we start? During sleep paralysis is as good a time as any for people to have their mystical magical experiences, but it's certainly not the only time.
Sensed presences
Sleep paralysis - Wikipedia
Prophets like Moses receive commands. This can sometimes lead them to violence, as when Moses orders his followers to stone a man to death for collecting firewood on the Sabbath; the special day of the Commander.
Command hallucinations in relation to violence in Asian schizophrenics.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by xongsmith, posted 02-14-2011 2:16 PM xongsmith has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by Taq, posted 02-14-2011 5:12 PM bluegenes has seen this message but not replied

bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2467 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 57 of 536 (604862)
02-15-2011 4:06 PM
Reply to: Message 55 by xongsmith
02-15-2011 2:59 PM


Cartoon characters and Christ
xongsmith writes:
In my thinking, there is no way any person familiar with Casper The Ghost would ever believe there was anything actualized outside of the confines of the story line of the comic strip/cartoon that anyone would describe as truly "supernatural".
The concept of a ghost or ghosts believed to have been experienced in the world by a person or persons would tentatively fit my definition, until investigation showed it was only imagined after all. Then it would no longer fit my definition.
As people are discussing cartoon characters and "subjective experiences", I may as well point out that cartoon characters are often experienced in hallucinations, and this can be combined with the delusion, either temporary or lasting, that they actually exist.
I once listened to a recovered schizophrenic explaining why he had jumped out of a dangerously high window and broken his legs. It was assumed to be an impractical suicide attempt by his doctors, but actually his decision was rational in terms of the information he was getting. He was being chased by a cartoon monster which was trying to kill him, so he took the best option available to him.
A number of conditions can produce such "subjective experiences". Here, the author describes her hallucinations following viral encephalitis. Unfortunately, it's behind a pay wall, but I can quote:
quote:
I have categorized my hallucinations as follows:
(1) form constants, (2) intermediate images of form constants and body parts, (3) complex scenes,
eg visualization of myself, Christ figures, cartoon characters and symbolic scenes. ...
Cartoon characters and Christ
Christ, demons, angels, djinns, gods, fairies etc. are traditional "subjective experiences", but in modern times we can add cartoon characters and aliens from space which are experienced by people in cultures where a lot of cartoons are watched and where there's a lot of science fiction.
I expect that Harry Potter and Gandalf have been "experienced" as real by some people somewhere by now.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by xongsmith, posted 02-15-2011 2:59 PM xongsmith has seen this message but not replied

bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2467 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 64 of 536 (604933)
02-16-2011 9:20 AM
Reply to: Message 63 by Straggler
02-16-2011 8:24 AM


Common ground.
Straggler to xongsmith writes:
I have no idea what you are talking about.
I think the two of you have that in common.
To me, the most interesting thing about fictional cartoon characters and other fictional beings is that people can actually have subjective experiences of them, and believe them to be real.
What the implications of this fact are for the reliability of subjective experiences and beliefs as evidence we can leave to the Thomson brothers to discover in their own sweet way.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by Straggler, posted 02-16-2011 8:24 AM Straggler has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by xongsmith, posted 02-16-2011 3:17 PM bluegenes has replied

bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2467 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 70 of 536 (605062)
02-16-2011 6:38 PM
Reply to: Message 67 by xongsmith
02-16-2011 3:17 PM


Re: Common ground.
xongsmith writes:
Can you imagine something so obviously a buffoonery as the numerous internet anecdotes of the supreme superpowers of Chuck Norris actually becoming a religion? LOL!
Sure. Just as I can imagine something obviously a science fiction becoming a religion. Scientology, for example.
Take a Chuck Norris anecdote like "he can get coffee out of teabags". Well, Norris himself is a firm believer in an anecdote about a guy who could get wine out of water.
Some people believe that Obama is the anti-Christ, and people in the past could believe that Pharaohs were gods.
There are people who'll believe in pretty much anything, and people can have subjective experiences of pretty much anything.
Beliefs and "subjective experiences" do not weaken scientific theories for very good reasons, don't you agree?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by xongsmith, posted 02-16-2011 3:17 PM xongsmith has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by Straggler, posted 02-18-2011 6:47 AM bluegenes has replied

bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2467 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


(1)
Message 76 of 536 (605286)
02-18-2011 11:24 AM
Reply to: Message 75 by Straggler
02-18-2011 6:47 AM


Re: I Believe My Beliefs Are Evidence Of That Which I Believe to be Evidenced
Straggler writes:
So apparently if people believe that they have evidence that gods exist this constitutes some sort of evidence that gods do indeed exist.
"Bluegenes, you pseudoskeptic, you don't have a strong theory because lots of people have religious beliefs that contradict it, and I typed this in color."
"Darwin, you pseudoskeptic, you don't have a strong theory because lots of people have religious beliefs that contradict it and I typed this in color."
Kids will be happy to know that there's evidence that their favourite cartoon characters really exist because people have subjective experiences of their presence and actually believe they're there. And we finally have evidence for the real existence of those evil spirits that cause disease, still widely believed in, and even for a real Harry Potter.
Good evidence for a geocentric universe too, as 20% of Americans believe in it. How could 60 million people all be wrong?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Straggler, posted 02-18-2011 6:47 AM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by Straggler, posted 02-18-2011 11:34 AM bluegenes has replied

bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2467 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 78 of 536 (605296)
02-18-2011 11:59 AM
Reply to: Message 77 by Straggler
02-18-2011 11:34 AM


Re: I Believe My Beliefs Are Evidence Of That Which I Believe to be Evidenced
Straggler writes:
No no no Bluegenes. You are still not getting it.
It's not just believing. It's documenting those beliefs. Because once documented the documented beliefs become "objective empirical evidence".
I swear, I'm well up on the theory of documentation. Note my link to a (peer reviewed) document in a post further up the thread, in which a woman describes her subjective experiences of both cartoon characters and Christ. And venerable documentation (the best sort) is hardly a problem for a geocentric universe, is it? As for Harry Potter, millions have read of his adventures.
O. E. evidence for one and all.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by Straggler, posted 02-18-2011 11:34 AM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by Straggler, posted 02-18-2011 12:21 PM bluegenes has replied

bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2467 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 79 of 536 (605299)
02-18-2011 12:10 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by Straggler
02-18-2011 11:34 AM


Documented evidence of SB communication belief.
Does this post count as documentation of belief and communication with a supernatural being? Message 1
ojustmab99 (David Mabus/Markuze etc.) writes:
Dear PZ... I spoke with God yesterday.... Do you want to know what he told me?
CLOBBERING TIME
Message 1

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by Straggler, posted 02-18-2011 11:34 AM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by Straggler, posted 02-18-2011 12:27 PM bluegenes has replied
 Message 87 by xongsmith, posted 02-18-2011 4:30 PM bluegenes has not replied

bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2467 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 82 of 536 (605306)
02-18-2011 12:43 PM
Reply to: Message 80 by Straggler
02-18-2011 12:21 PM


Re: I Believe My Beliefs Are Evidence Of That Which I Believe to be Evidenced
Straggler writes:
Where does that put our confidence in the the actual existence of these cartoon characters (and less significantly Jesus Chris) if we apply the latest of RAZD's numerous confidence scales?
Ask RAZD. As he would discount a theory that all cartoon characters are figments of the human imagination with unsupported unfalsifiable claims like "real ones might be communicating with the artists", I guess he'd consider the documented subjective experiences of them would make their existence just as likely as that of his deity.
Edited by bluegenes, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by Straggler, posted 02-18-2011 12:21 PM Straggler has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by xongsmith, posted 02-18-2011 4:25 PM bluegenes has not replied

bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2467 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 83 of 536 (605308)
02-18-2011 12:49 PM
Reply to: Message 81 by Straggler
02-18-2011 12:27 PM


Re: Documented evidence of SB communication belief.
Straggler writes:
What about George Bush and his hotline to God?
Good OE evidence. And we can discount the point that Osama Bin Laden was getting messages from a mutually exclusive different one true creator of the universe with the ever useful "Hindu hypothesis".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by Straggler, posted 02-18-2011 12:27 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by Straggler, posted 02-18-2011 1:53 PM bluegenes has not replied

bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2467 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 94 of 536 (605478)
02-20-2011 7:27 AM
Reply to: Message 93 by Straggler
02-20-2011 5:43 AM


Re: Supernatural CONCEPTS
Straggler writes:
CONCEPTS
Please try to avoid shouting on Sunday mornings.
Thanks.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 93 by Straggler, posted 02-20-2011 5:43 AM Straggler has not replied

bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2467 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 98 of 536 (605505)
02-20-2011 12:58 PM
Reply to: Message 95 by xongsmith
02-20-2011 12:00 PM


Re: Supernatural CONCEPTS
xongsmith writes:
Excuse me, I thought it was about supernatural BEINGS,
It would only be about real extant SBs that have an existence outside our minds if such a thing could be shown to exist, in which case the theory would be falsified and non-existence.
Short of falsification, there's no known difference between SBs and SB concepts.
If you understood, from the phrasing of the theory, that I meant that we humans have both invented supernatural beings and then manufactured real ones, I think you could have thought a little harder about it.
In English, we would say "Harry Potter is a book about a wizard", not "Harry Potter is a book about a wizard-concept." Or "fantasy novels often concern supernatural beings", etc.
When we say that the creation mythologies contain many different supernatural beings, we are not making a declaration about the existential state of those beings.
Zeus is described as a supernatural being, whether he exists or not.
If you're trying to make a semantic argument against the theory, it won't work for mine or any other scientific theory. Theories can always be rephrased for clarification. Mine could certainly be better phrased, but most readers will understand what's meant with the current phrasing, so it's not worth bothering with it at this point.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by xongsmith, posted 02-20-2011 12:00 PM xongsmith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 100 by xongsmith, posted 02-20-2011 3:29 PM bluegenes has not replied

bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2467 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


(1)
Message 117 of 536 (605751)
02-21-2011 11:24 PM
Reply to: Message 116 by Jon
02-21-2011 9:46 PM


Re: Impressive
Jon writes:
Several pages in and still the mental masturbation continues.
It's rare for you to make comments that relate to your one area of expertise. Well done.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by Jon, posted 02-21-2011 9:46 PM Jon has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 118 by xongsmith, posted 02-22-2011 1:34 AM bluegenes has not replied

bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2467 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 134 of 536 (607530)
03-04-2011 12:18 PM
Reply to: Message 133 by Straggler
03-04-2011 11:53 AM


Re: Catholic Scientist Writes:
Catholic Scientist writes:
Okay, so the original theory, that the beings themselves have been shown to be imagined has been abandoned.
No. The theory is, essentially, that at present we cannot distinguish between supernatural beings and supernatural being-concepts. So I use them interchangeably. We need to establish the existence of just one SB that exists for real outside our minds to change this.
With horses, for example, which have an observable existence outside our minds, we can distinguish, and we can also see that the real external horses are the origin of our horse concepts.
CS writes:
So you agree that all scientific concepts are figments of the human imaginations, right?
Figment
Figments are things that exist only in our minds. A scientific theory is a construct of the mind, but relates to external reality, although it's not an externally real thing.
CS writes:
That a tree can be demonstrated and a god cannot, and the problems that arrise from that, doesn't really have anything to do with the concepts of those things necesssarily being imagined, does it?
"Necessarily" is maybe not the best word to use when we're talking about theories. There's no known reason why SBs shouldn't be demonstrated to exist. "Supernatural" does not mean "indetectable" at all. Indeed, they're reputed to do very noticeable things that you'd hardly forget if you witnessed them.
If you do see a man transform into a wolf or a bat, let us know, and try to photograph the event. The same if you see a woman wave a wand at someone and transform that person into a frog.
We can all keep our eyes open.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 133 by Straggler, posted 03-04-2011 11:53 AM Straggler has not replied

bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2467 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 146 of 536 (607571)
03-04-2011 4:40 PM
Reply to: Message 142 by Perdition
03-04-2011 2:43 PM


Consilience
Perdition writes:
If you strip away all the specifics of the various religions, you'll come to this undefined/undefinable supernatual being (or beings) which RAZD seems to be defending ad mauseum.
Good summary, but I have to make a point about this. It ignores the non-theistic religions, and even amongst the theistic religions, the gods are not necessarily universe creators. They can be created by the universe, or self-created within the universe.
Because Jewish mythology gives us one of the "mind before matter" ex nihilo creator concepts (of which there are quite a lot) and the members of this board come from traditionally Christian cultures, there's a tendency to ignore the other types of gods, and religions without gods.
If we really wanted to look for something in common in all traditions, it would actually be the human soul or spirit (often attributed to other animals, and even plants and non-living things in some traditions). "Me and my body" as separate entities is something we easily perceive. It wouldn't actually be gods, although they're common, let alone an ex nihilo creator.
RAZD writes:
I can sort of see his point about consillience, and this consillience does imply a singular cause. As it stands, I'm aware of only two potential causes being bandied about.
The weirdest and most striking example of consilience I've found so far is two completely separate cultures on different continents (India and North America) which both have a world supporting turtle. Apart from world supporting elephants (India also) I can't think off hand of other world supporting animals, so it seems odd that the two should make the same choice out of so many animals available. The turtle's shell is the only source of inspiration I can think of.
Of course, I'm teasing RAZD with this, because it's something that clearly doesn't exist. So much for consilience. I see nothing in the myths that isn't easily explicable by, as you put it, "the commonality of the human brain, mind and psyche".
Good summary, anyway.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 142 by Perdition, posted 03-04-2011 2:43 PM Perdition has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 148 by Perdition, posted 03-04-2011 4:50 PM bluegenes has replied

bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2467 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 149 of 536 (607574)
03-04-2011 5:00 PM
Reply to: Message 148 by Perdition
03-04-2011 4:50 PM


Re: Consilience
Perdition writes:
Maybe spomeone took copies of Terry Pratchett's DIscworld books back in time.
Nothing's impossible with magic. Although that reminds me of the theory of our descendents mastering time travel, then going back in time and creating the first life forms, because Pratchett got his version from an early European misconception of the Indian myths that put the turtle and elephants together, when they were actually separate myths.
I love the Discworld - my favourite fantasy world.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 148 by Perdition, posted 03-04-2011 4:50 PM Perdition has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 150 by Perdition, posted 03-04-2011 5:03 PM bluegenes 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