Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 59 (9025 total)
43 online now:
kjsimons (1 member, 42 visitors)
Newest Member: JustTheFacts
Post Volume: Total: 883,362 Year: 1,008/14,102 Month: 411/597 Week: 21/168 Day: 21/23 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Anti-theist
jar
Member
Posts: 33178
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 4.5


(1)
Message 76 of 169 (884046)
01-21-2021 3:41 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by anglagard
01-21-2021 2:30 PM


Re: Guilt By Association
Phat is very fond of telling others what I think, believe, feel and say.

However, others can actually read what I say and understand they have no way to tell what I feel, think or believe OTHER than through what I say.

To assert that I despise Biblical Christians is patently absurd. Frankly, Biblical Christians hardly rise to the significance that might engender such feelings. What the say though and what they advocate and the total complete dishonestly that is the hallmark of what they market is despicable and the fact that such insipid simpering silliness is taken seriously by a large segment of the population astounding and frightening.

I pity them & fear them; I am amazed continually by their demonstrable inability to think, to reason, to observe, to contemplate or even to attempt to learn the very basics of the subjects they claim to profess.

As to labeling a belief as impossible, the fact is that so far NO ONE claiming to hold those beliefs has been able to attempt to reason or explain how they might be possible.

How does 1 + 1 + 1 == 1?

How can any religious system claiming that there are three entities that are each separate from each other and are each God but that there is only one God?

Until those questions are answered it is reasonable to claim such beliefs are factually impossible.

That of course does not preclude anyone believing such things are possible just as the fact that there is no evidence of the existence of fairies and trolls does not preclude someone from believing in them.

After all sphere visiting Flatland is but a circle.


My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios     My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by anglagard, posted 01-21-2021 2:30 PM anglagard has not yet responded

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 5582
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.1


(1)
Message 77 of 169 (884100)
01-22-2021 2:08 PM


This one is a bit long, but, it is point on.

Religion is poison to the human intellect.

quote:
...It would be more consistent that we call [the Bible] the work of a demon than the word of God. It is a history of wickedness that has served to corrupt and brutalize mankind.
--Thomas Paine

Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4034
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004
Member Rating: 4.0


Message 78 of 169 (884194)
01-26-2021 11:31 AM
Reply to: Message 74 by AZPaul3
01-21-2021 12:31 PM


Re: Guilt By Association
AZPaul3 writes:

Your "belief-in-our-love" is the result of the physical evidence of the depth of your emotional experience with her.

It certainly can be - for some people.
But it doesn't have to be - and isn't for me.

Belief-in-our-love can also be based on belief, and I find that more helpful in this area.

If you can scientifically prove that love-based-on-evidence is better than love-based-on-belief - well, I'm very interested in hearing your ideas.
However, I do think you're confusing "can be" with "is for everyone."

All the little presents, kindnesses, whispered sweet nothings build the emotional state we monkeys call love.

Absolutely.
And if the ideas for those little presents, kindnesses, whispered sweet nothings come from my belief-in-our-love as opposed to our historical-track-record-of-evidence... then that's the way it is for me.

The physical evidence of your relationship and its attendant emotional effect on your monkey brain is the cold hard physical reality of your belief in your love.

Absolutely.
But, again, if the ideas for the parts where I produce the physical evidence come from my belief-in-our-love as opposed to an evidence-based-approach... then that's what it's all dependent upon.

It's still cute. And endearing.

For me and her, it works - yes.
Others will want methods that work best for their own relationships.
Hence is the way of relationships.

But it is, as is everything, evidence-based.

Well, obviously not - if it's belief-in-our-love based.
Or, at least, you have not yet shown this to be true.

You seem to be taking a similar stance of the crowd that defends "there is no such thing as a good action!"
-because they can always identify a possible motivation that is selfish that would result in the same action.
-what they're missing, is that a "possible motivation" does not make it "THE motivation" that was actually used.
-and, if a "good motivation" was actually used - then it was, indeed, a good action.

Your argument seems to be saying that what I do can be measured by physical reality.
-and I agree

What I'm saying is that I am not basing my decision to do the things I do for my wife on an evidential basis.
I'm saying I am basing my decisions to do the things I do for my wife on a belief-in-our-love basis.

Unless you want to argue that all actions are necessarily always fully evidence-based, logical and scientific... then you have to allow for this possibility.

Emotional belief-based perception exists but only as a result of intellectual impairment.

Evidence for this, please.

Evidence for the contrary:
-I know I have fun playing video game A
-I know I don't like playing video game B
-Yet, sometimes, I play video game B anyway, because a part of me wants to like it, and believes I can have fun with it. But I don't, and always go back to game A.
-I do this multiple times a year, always with the same result, always knowing the result will be the same, and it always it.
-yet, the belief remains, and I continue to make the choice because of the belief

There is no intellectual impairment here.
I consider the situation, I know what the result will be, I understand everything logic, science and evidence shows.
And, yet, I do it anyway - because I choose to follow my belief in game B.

This is not "an intellectual impairment in following evidence" - I know what the evidence-based-answer-and-result will be.
I, specifically, choose to follow my belief in game B.

To believe in an unevidenced entity, be it some god, crystal power or the cosmic consciousness, will only result when an impaired brain sees such fantasies as real, viable as against demonstrable reality.

Your very example isn't even true.

It is quite possible to believe in an unevidenced entity, knowing it likely isn't real, but believing in it to gain comfort and a feeling of personal security.
Do you not know how people work?

Parents do it all the time when their military children go on a mission.
Some of those parents are deluded - others are not, and simply find comfort in the known-to-be-unevidenced-and-likely-untrue belief.

You're taking something that "can be a case" and applying it to all cases - with no evidence that this is warranted, and against the evidence that shows it's a silly thing to do.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by AZPaul3, posted 01-21-2021 12:31 PM AZPaul3 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by AZPaul3, posted 01-26-2021 1:51 PM Stile has responded

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 5582
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.1


(1)
Message 79 of 169 (884196)
01-26-2021 1:51 PM
Reply to: Message 78 by Stile
01-26-2021 11:31 AM


Re: Guilt By Association
IMO, you are confusing evidence-based emotion with unevidenced belief-based perception.

You know very well your feelings and you know very well the reasons you have those feelings. The basis for those emotions is strongly evident in the real relationship you have and seek to maintain with this other. It is real, not born of un-evidenced belief-based wishful thinking.

For me in this discussion "belief" is the insistence in the reality of something that isn't real. Where you seem to be defining belief as the psychological confirmation of your emotions without regard for the reasons you are having those emotions.

Those emotions didn't just appear from nothing. There are reasons they arise within you. And, no, it's not because you believe real hard. It's because you and your lady have real actual reality-based interactions, physical, emotional, psychological - all real, all actual, all demonstrable, all love. Evidence.

As for the mental defect of belief, to insist on the reality of something that isn't there is a failure in so many cognitive processes, like a child not fully mentally developed. In an adult such deficiencies are impairments to discerning reality.

It is quite possible to believe in an unevidenced entity, knowing it likely isn't real ...

I would not call that belief. That is speculation with a quite inappropriate dose of hope.

Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.


Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by Stile, posted 01-26-2021 11:31 AM Stile has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by Stile, posted 01-27-2021 11:21 AM AZPaul3 has not yet responded

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4034
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004
Member Rating: 4.0


(1)
Message 80 of 169 (884200)
01-27-2021 11:21 AM
Reply to: Message 79 by AZPaul3
01-26-2021 1:51 PM


Re: Guilt By Association
AZPaul3 writes:

You know very well your feelings and you know very well the reasons you have those feelings. The basis for those emotions is strongly evident in the real relationship you have and seek to maintain with this other. It is real, not born of un-evidenced belief-based wishful thinking.

I absolutely agree with everything in the quote above.

And it has no issue with the point I'm making.

The point I'm making is this:

1. I can identify at least 2 different ways to do things.
2.a. One way is evidence-based - that is, to look at reality, measure it, analyze it, make a prediction on what to do based on that, and do it.
2.b. Another way is "belief-based" - that is, to have a feeling that something should be done, and do it.

You are saying (and I agree with this)
-both 2a and 2b above are "evidence based" in the fact that they are facets of reality and exist and we know this because we have physical brains, with physical properties, and we know how such properties work (enough) to say that we understand how these concepts form and why we have them. That is - we have evidence showing how these methods exist.

I am saying (and I think you still don't see this point)
-2a and 2b, although both proven-to-exist in a physical world based on evidence, are two different ways to "do things"
2a relies on an evidence-based-method to decide "what to do"
2b relies on feelings to decide "what to do" (what else is "belief" other than "feelings-that-something-is-true?")

For me in this discussion "belief" is the insistence in the reality of something that isn't real.

I agree.

Where you seem to be defining belief as the psychological confirmation of your emotions without regard for the reasons you are having those emotions.

Nope.
I'm not attempting to make the point about "how belief exists in reality."
I agree with you that "belief exists in reality because it is a property of our physical brain and we understand this quite well due to our scientific understandings of the brain."

I'm attempting to make a point that "doing something while following the scientific method" (evidence-based-reasoning) is different from "doing something while following a belief" (or "the feelings humans get that something is true.")

Those emotions didn't just appear from nothing. There are reasons they arise within you. And, no, it's not because you believe real hard. It's because you and your lady have real actual reality-based interactions, physical, emotional, psychological - all real, all actual, all demonstrable, all love. Evidence.

Again - I agree completely and this has no bearing whatsoever on the point I'm making.

This is true and valid, and remains true and valid while looking at the next point - that it's different to do something while following an evidence-based-approach or to do something while following a belief-(or "feelings")-based-approach.

Even though both approaches are real, and we know they are real based upon evidence - the two approaches themselves, are different when going through the actions on doing them.

One involves examining information and making a logical prediction, the other involves simply doing whatever "feels right to you at the moment."

Once the approach is completed, and the action is done, the results can also be seen to exist in reality through an evidence-based-approach to see if they were successful or not (if one is so inclined to do so.) However, just because the "results" can be seen to manifest physically - does not mean that the "decision to do the action" was not based on a belief or feelings that one should do it.

That is, I can kiss my wife because I know from historical evidence that she usually likes it when I kiss her.
Or, I can kiss my wife because I believe she'll like it this time.

This particular time she may appreciate it or she may not (depends on many, many factors of the particular situation.)
-whether she appreciates it and our love grows is (and I agree) a very physical thing that we understand very well from our scientific and evidence-based studies.
-but this has no bearing on if I decided to kiss her based on an analysis of past experiences (evidence-based) or because I felt like kissing her (belief-based.)

I'm saying that in my relationship with my wife... when I decide to take actions-of-love towards her, I get better results when I do what I feel rather than when I study our past and do what the evidence says she will prefer.

As for the mental defect of belief, to insist on the reality of something that isn't there is a failure in so many cognitive processes, like a child not fully mentally developed. In an adult such deficiencies are impairments to discerning reality.

Again, this depends on the goal.

If the goal is to "identify the truth about reality" - then you're absolutely right.
However, if the goal is to "feel better" - then you're absolutely wrong.

I recommend you do some research on mental health.
For example, some victims of PTSD can have abnormal anxiety attacks that cause them to be unable to function normally in society to the point where they are frightened every day, all day, and cannot leave their house.

However, some of these victims can feel better "believing that a higher power is protecting them" regardless of whether or not they actually know that the higher power likely doesn't exist. (The "higher power" doesn't necessarily have to be the Christian God... or even any god at all... but as the Christian God is highly popular - this is generally the chosen entity for such things.)

If believing in a higher power - that doesn't exist - allows a person to take a walk around their neighbourhood... go to the store and buy groceries... talk to friends... hold down a job... all without collapsing into the fetal position like a frightened child... this "mental defect of belief" is absolutely a good thing for them to do, and I find anyone who says otherwise to be a disgusting human being.

Which is back to my original point - identify your goal, and pick the best method for reaching that goal.

I would not call that belief. That is speculation with a quite inappropriate dose of hope.

Sounds like an irrelevant semantic argument.
And the idea of being "inappropriate" or not, as per my above discussion on mental health, depends on the goal.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by AZPaul3, posted 01-26-2021 1:51 PM AZPaul3 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by PaulK, posted 01-27-2021 11:26 AM Stile has responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 16733
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 81 of 169 (884201)
01-27-2021 11:26 AM
Reply to: Message 80 by Stile
01-27-2021 11:21 AM


Re: Guilt By Association
Consider the phenomenon of stalking. Stalkers are often convinced that their targets love them, even though there is no real evidence of it. They let their feelings take control and warp their perceptions to the point where they believe that there is evidence.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by Stile, posted 01-27-2021 11:21 AM Stile has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by Stile, posted 01-27-2021 11:57 AM PaulK has responded

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4034
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004
Member Rating: 4.0


Message 82 of 169 (884202)
01-27-2021 11:57 AM
Reply to: Message 81 by PaulK
01-27-2021 11:26 AM


Re: Guilt By Association
Consider the phenomenon of stalking. Stalkers are often convinced that their targets love them, even though there is no real evidence of it. They let their feelings take control and warp their perceptions to the point where they believe that there is evidence.

I would agree that this is a terrible usage of belief-based methods.

This doesn't seem to alter the fact that I get the best results from a belief-based method in loving my wife.

"Consider the goal" doesn't mean "always use belief-based methods when love is involved in any way."

Everything below is added by edit
--------

In general, I'm not promoting belief-based methods in some sort of 50-50 fairness level.
I really have no idea if there is some sort of comparison like that of the two different methods.
I am, however, fighting against the idea that "evidence-based methods are best, and should always be used, and nothing else has any use whatsoever."

I am perfectly happy if, say, belief-based-methods are only "better" in 0.002% of all possible situations.
I just think that, in those situations - belief-based-methods should be used. Why would we do anything else?

Belief based methods can even be helpful to initiate scientific progress.

Consider someone content with eating, sleeping and living in a small cell.
-there is a door, they just never open it
-a scientific study of their needs are being met - they are content

According to the information they have... all their needs are met, and there is no reason for them to open the door and explore.
-as much possibility as something good might be out there, there's also the equal possibility that something bad might be out there

However there are many belief-based ideas that could motivate them to open the door and explore.
-curiosity
-a hope that something "better" might be out there
-because they hate the door and want to kick it and that moves it and they see what's behind it at this point

In this belief/feeling/desire for exploration... scientific study can move ahead faster than "waiting for an evidence-based reason" to go and explore.

Feelings/belief-based-approaches have their place.
And they're very useful and powerful when used correctly.

They can also be extremely dangerous and harmful.
Viking exploration across the seas wasn't exactly a... health-conscious decision for the first few years (decades?) of attempts.

I think that their usefulness and power can be identified for certain situations to outweigh the possible dangers and harms.
-this decision is, actually, evidence-based (based on all the wonderful things the human race has discovered due to dangerous exploration.)

But, the action of making the decision for the first time... or in certain other situations when it's based on the feelings and not on the evidence...
Those are belief-based situations.
And using them when they are appropriate is extremely helpful.

Edited by Stile, : More to ramble about.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by PaulK, posted 01-27-2021 11:26 AM PaulK has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by PaulK, posted 01-27-2021 12:02 PM Stile has responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 16733
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 83 of 169 (884203)
01-27-2021 12:02 PM
Reply to: Message 82 by Stile
01-27-2021 11:57 AM


Re: Guilt By Association
I suggest that you do, in fact, use evidence to at least a degree. Your wife, for instance, agreed to marry you rather than taking out a restraining order.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by Stile, posted 01-27-2021 11:57 AM Stile has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by Stile, posted 01-27-2021 12:15 PM PaulK has not yet responded
 Message 86 by Phat, posted 01-27-2021 12:44 PM PaulK has responded

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4034
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004
Member Rating: 4.0


Message 84 of 169 (884204)
01-27-2021 12:15 PM
Reply to: Message 83 by PaulK
01-27-2021 12:02 PM


Re: Guilt By Association
I suggest that you do, in fact, use evidence to at least a degree. Your wife, for instance, agreed to marry you rather than taking out a restraining order.

That, I would not disagree with at all.

In fact, I mentioned in my post that you originally replied to - that measuring the outcome of the action, regardless of whether the motivation was belief-or-evidenced... the outcome is always measured using evidence.

This just doesn't change that the motivation can (sometimes) rightfully be done using belief.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by PaulK, posted 01-27-2021 12:02 PM PaulK has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by Phat, posted 01-27-2021 12:38 PM Stile has acknowledged this reply

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 14955
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 85 of 169 (884206)
01-27-2021 12:38 PM
Reply to: Message 84 by Stile
01-27-2021 12:15 PM


Re: Guilt By Association
I am unable to present a reasoned argument concerning a strong feeling that is shared by many believers. I want you to also watch the video of a Sid Roth show where he has David Diga Hernandez on as a guest.

For what my character is worth, I consider David as honest in what he is "marketing" or presenting to the audience regarding the Holy Spirit. He is articulate and describes this unevidenced feeling with candor. Give it a watch, Stile. I always like talking with you. We can disagree and remain cordial to each other.

Message 164


"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
***
“…far from science having buried God, not only do the results of science point towards his existence, but the scientific enterprise itself is validated by his existence.”- Dr.John Lennox

“The whole war between the atheist and the theist comes down to this: the atheist believes a 'what' created the universe; the theist believes a 'who' created the universe.”
- Criss Jami, Killo

“The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” — Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You
(1894).


This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by Stile, posted 01-27-2021 12:15 PM Stile has acknowledged this reply

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 14955
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 86 of 169 (884207)
01-27-2021 12:44 PM
Reply to: Message 83 by PaulK
01-27-2021 12:02 PM


Re: Guilt By Association
PaulK, to Stile writes:

I suggest that you do, in fact, use evidence to at least a degree. Your wife, for instance, agreed to marry you rather than taking out a restraining order.


Hi Paul. Yes, it always seems to me that there are a few (but only a few) sticking points that prevents agreement or consensus between us.
They are:
1) Evidence
2) Relativism versus Christian Trinitarian Monotheism
3) Critical Thinking as a way of life and the sole approach towards examining belief systems...as opposed to necessary suppression of such a skill. (If you don't stand for something you may fall for anything)

Do you see (or are able to define) any additional sticking points in my arguments versus atheists/critical thinkers/skeptics? Or are my 3 the main issues?


"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
***
“…far from science having buried God, not only do the results of science point towards his existence, but the scientific enterprise itself is validated by his existence.”- Dr.John Lennox

“The whole war between the atheist and the theist comes down to this: the atheist believes a 'what' created the universe; the theist believes a 'who' created the universe.”
- Criss Jami, Killo

“The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” — Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You
(1894).


This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by PaulK, posted 01-27-2021 12:02 PM PaulK has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 87 by PaulK, posted 01-27-2021 1:05 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 16733
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.0


(1)
Message 87 of 169 (884208)
01-27-2021 1:05 PM
Reply to: Message 86 by Phat
01-27-2021 12:44 PM


Re: Guilt By Association
quote:
Hi Paul. Yes, it always seems to me that there are a few (but only a few) sticking points that prevents agreement or consensus between us.

quote:
1) Evidence

It shouldn’t be.

quote:
2) Relativism versus Christian Trinitarian Monotheism

I don’t think that either are a factor here.

quote:
3) Critical Thinking as a way of life and the sole approach towards examining belief systems...as opposed to necessary suppression of such a skill. (If you don't stand for something you may fall for anything)

Critical thinking is not nihilism. Critical thinking - done properly - is a concern for the truth and a determination to try to avoid error. It is critical thinking that stops us “falling for anything”. Refusing to be gullible does not make us gullible - choosing to be gullible will. That should be obvious.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by Phat, posted 01-27-2021 12:44 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 88 by Stile, posted 01-27-2021 2:14 PM PaulK has not yet responded

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4034
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004
Member Rating: 4.0


Message 88 of 169 (884210)
01-27-2021 2:14 PM
Reply to: Message 87 by PaulK
01-27-2021 1:05 PM


Re: Guilt By Association
In support of PaulK's comments in regards to my recent explanations:

PaulK writes:

Critical thinking is not nihilism. Critical thinking - done properly - is a concern for the truth and a determination to try to avoid error.

My recent explanations have been promoting my use of a "belief-based-approach" for when I love my wife.

I'd like to make it clear this this is "a" situation where belief-based-approach works better than evidence-based-approach.
That is... I'm not saying that belief-based-approaches are better than evidence-based-approaches in matters of love, not even in "mutually beneficial matters of love."

My point is that "mutually beneficial matters of love" are highly dependent on the particular beings involved in that love.

That is, it is quite possible for two people to be in love, and pursue/express that love using an evidence-based-approach on all sides, and this works better for them than the inclusion of any belief-based-approach at all.

My example is only valid for my wife and I in our particular-and-specific relationship togethers.

Others may also see similar results... but this is not due to "belief-based-approaches being better for love." It is due to those-particular-love-relationships-benefitting-better-by-using-belief-based-approaches.

A subtle, but extremely important (to me) distinction.

Love is one of those subjective feelings that can only be described. Not perscribed.
It can be different for everyone - which is why "belief-based-approaches" will work the best for some, and not others.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by PaulK, posted 01-27-2021 1:05 PM PaulK has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by Phat, posted 01-31-2021 3:11 PM Stile has acknowledged this reply

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 5582
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 89 of 169 (884234)
01-31-2021 9:56 AM


Sunday morning and time for our weekly religious indoctrination ritual. Put on your best Sunday-go-to-meeting clothes, wash behind your ears and let's all gather together in a super-spreader celebration of exceptionally violent religious stupidity.

It's time for this weeks sermon.

Unfortunately, today's sermon was lost to the violent squabbling of adherents and apologists and all I have left is this video.


Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by Phat, posted 01-31-2021 3:04 PM AZPaul3 has responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 14955
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 90 of 169 (884236)
01-31-2021 3:04 PM
Reply to: Message 89 by AZPaul3
01-31-2021 9:56 AM


Freedom of Speech vs Harmful Speech
Ahh yes. Our esteemed Mister. J.Noble Dagget is my name for him.
We shall ezamine his argument:
transcript writes:

I will brutally mock and satirize you for the silly things you pretend to know
I'll break down the walls you've built to keep yourselves from having to
rationally justify the mere superstition you cling to and ask others to respect I
will do everything within my power to take from you every advantage you now
feel so entitled to after the centuries and millennia of privilege you once
secured by threats of violence and murder I will fight to keep your
nonsensical beliefs out of our children's classrooms and textbooks and
I will do everything I can to inform and educate your young believers whom you my
religious friends have been indoctrinating since their very first breaths...

I cant argue against his claim in the sense that its false...for there is truth in his claim and likely some evidence in history of it being the case. He is wrong about several things, however.
1) My belief is no mere superstition. I have seen repeated evidencee of a spiritual conflict within humanity. Granted I have also seen that a majority of such claims is faked or exaggerated. This is to be expected in a spiritual conflict/war for obvious reasons. One of the goals of the enemy is to discredit and obfuscate what is real. As CS Lewis once said, Satans neatest trick is convincing people that he does not exist.
2) I fail to see why atheists have their panties in such a wad over teaching about religions in school. Not only that, but why the fear of having them indoctrinated with other beliefs than the critically thinking evidence based crap you push on them which reinforces the idea of never believing? If I catch your "kid" in a dark alley I shall freely and boldly share my faith and you and an army of liberal activists wont stop me. First, I will convince them that they need not shut me down. I certainly wouldn't force my beliefs...I would get their permission first.

As for J.Noble Dagget, he can spout his nonsense freely on You Tube until the cows come home. And you can freely present it here. Where I shall challenge it.


"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
***
“…far from science having buried God, not only do the results of science point towards his existence, but the scientific enterprise itself is validated by his existence.”- Dr.John Lennox

“The whole war between the atheist and the theist comes down to this: the atheist believes a 'what' created the universe; the theist believes a 'who' created the universe.”
- Criss Jami, Killo

“The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” — Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You
(1894).


This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by AZPaul3, posted 01-31-2021 9:56 AM AZPaul3 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by AZPaul3, posted 01-31-2021 10:17 PM Phat has responded
 Message 93 by Tangle, posted 02-01-2021 1:54 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2021