Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9028 total)
44 online now:
PaulK (1 member, 43 visitors)
Newest Member: Michael MD
Post Volume: Total: 884,158 Year: 1,804/14,102 Month: 172/624 Week: 56/95 Day: 0/34 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Belief Versus The Scientific Method
anglagard
Member
Posts: 2258
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006
Member Rating: 4.0


(1)
Message 16 of 95 (885176)
03-26-2021 1:17 AM
Reply to: Message 13 by Phat
03-25-2021 10:58 PM


Re: Forcing My Hand Towards Science
Phat's old friend writes:

The only proof we have that the Battle of Waterloo
ever took place is that we have had reports to that effect. These
reports are not given us bv people who saw it happen, but are based
on other reports: reports of reports of reports, which go back ulti-
mately to the first-hand reports given by people who did see it hap-
pening.

As someone who knows a bit of history I call bullshit. Obviously any battle of that magnitude leaves a huge amount of physical evidence. In the case of Waterloo the evidence is mainly bullets, cannon shell fragments, military knickknacks like coat buttons, and if lucky, discarded weapons and so on. In addition, there is no law that prevents a given individual from reading a primary source. Since they were there and the testimony is an eyewitness account, such testimony is considered gold-standard by historians, unless such an account conflicts with others. I know this because I have read several.

Phat, your old friend is full of shit, period.

.

Edited by anglagard, : Clumsy sentence unworthy of a technical writer.

Edited by anglagard, : Screwed up the edit, time to wind down and go to bed,


The problem with knowing everything is learning nothing.

If you don't know what you're doing, find someone who does, and do what they do.

Republican = death


This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Phat, posted 03-25-2021 10:58 PM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by Phat, posted 03-26-2021 2:38 AM anglagard has not yet responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 15104
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 17 of 95 (885177)
03-26-2021 2:38 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by anglagard
03-26-2021 1:17 AM


Re: Forcing My Hand Towards Science
LIT&A writes:

All our knowledge of history, for example, comes to us
only in words.

So where did you get all your information on Waterloo? Through books. Through words. So how is Hayakawa wrong?

It puzzled me why an old liberal Librarian would chafe at a minor error that my "old friend", SI Hayakawa wrote in his book, Language In Thought & Action. Either you were a bit tired when snapping off such a comment or there was a sort of spiritual conflict behind your criticism. Then I saw it...in Hayakawas biography:
political affiliation:
Republican Party

Old hippie AZPaul3 also agreed with you. The Biography provided a clue to one of old Hayakawas flaws.

quote:
In 1968, after a period of student rioting at San Francisco State College, Hayakawa was appointed acting president and immediately took a firm stand against what he regarded as the excesses of student protesters. He acquired a national reputation as a foe of student leftism and a symbol of the conservative in action.
Old Hippies never die. They simply continue dreaming of one day overthrowing the "establishment".

Edited by Phat, : added sentence


"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 16 by anglagard, posted 03-26-2021 1:17 AM anglagard has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by AZPaul3, posted 03-26-2021 3:24 AM Phat has not yet responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 15104
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 18 of 95 (885178)
03-26-2021 3:00 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by AZPaul3
03-26-2021 12:52 AM


Re: G#MF@&!!!
Lets say we go with your belief that there is no God. Living things die in this universe. Entire planets get wiped out on a regular basis. Some of them likely have life...perhaps even advanced life such as ourselves. So I guess its easy to give "Fate" a free pass.

So now lets imagine that the God of Genesis 7 does exist. Since when is little science monkey AZ justified at being angry with the Creator? Could it be that you simply chafe at His wanton authority and power, preferring the much more likely scenario that humans will rule each other through our own minds? You DO realize that in this century we are much more likely to wipe out every living thing than God is.(Should He exist) But of course without evidence how could we even imagine a God? Oh wait...that's right...the hippies and liberals are enamored over Spinozas polite god. I almost forgot!


"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 15 by AZPaul3, posted 03-26-2021 12:52 AM AZPaul3 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by AZPaul3, posted 03-26-2021 3:57 AM Phat has responded

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 5726
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 19 of 95 (885179)
03-26-2021 3:24 AM
Reply to: Message 17 by Phat
03-26-2021 2:38 AM


Re: Forcing My Hand Towards Science
Phat, the party affiliation of the author is not the point. The quote about Waterloo is just wrong. Way wrong.

Not only is anglagard right about all the direct physical evidence at the site but there were news columns and direct reports with identified writers all contemporary with the events sent throughout the world by the dozens for months. The evidence of the event is legion.

Your gospels weren't given any thought until a century after the supposed events then written by nobody knows who. If you want to compare efficacy of each claim then the number and conduct of stories of Waterloo leave no doubt that the battle actually occurred with the outcome that is now, this day, in our history books, while your gospels are considered historically suspect at best.


Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Phat, posted 03-26-2021 2:38 AM Phat has not yet responded

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 5726
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 4.8


(1)
Message 20 of 95 (885180)
03-26-2021 3:57 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by Phat
03-26-2021 3:00 AM


Re: G#MF@&!!!
So I guess its easy to give "Fate" a free pass.

We don't really have much choice. This universe would just as soon kill us as stare at us for 4 billion years. Fate walks her own path and ignores god just like she ignores everyone and everything else.

Since when is little science monkey AZ justified at being angry with the Creator?

Since about 10th grade. And not angry with but more of an ignoring of thing.

Could it be that you simply chafe at His wanton authority and power ...

Naw, He doesn't have any so that's not an issue.

...hippies and liberals are enamored over Spinozas polite god.

What's so enamoring about Spinoza's god is that he wasn't real. He didn't exist. In his place Brother Baruch put the majesty of the secular universe.


Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Phat, posted 03-26-2021 3:00 AM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Phat, posted 04-03-2021 3:51 PM AZPaul3 has responded

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 5671
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 8.3


(4)
Message 21 of 95 (885184)
03-26-2021 12:14 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Phat
03-25-2021 1:25 PM


I'm not at all sure what this thread is about.

When you are driving your car, you could close your eyes, pray and allow Jesus to guide you. But you don't do that. You look around to see where you are going and to avoid accidents. You depend on perception, rather than on faith.

Science works in pretty much the same way as perception, except that it is more organized and more systematic. If you reject science, you might as well reject perception.


Fundamentalism - the anti-American, anti-Christian branch of American Christianity

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Phat, posted 03-25-2021 1:25 PM Phat has not yet responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 15104
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 22 of 95 (885294)
04-03-2021 3:43 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by AZPaul3
03-25-2021 8:37 PM


Peanut Gallery dogpiles Phat
AZPaul3 writes:

Belief vs the scientific method?

As in compare and contrast for efficacy?

Isn't that like comparing a Dick and Jane reader with the Feynman lectures?

No. rather more like comparing the belief in science with the belief in God. I'll explain more fully as I develop my argument/assertion.

AZ writes:

The difference in efficacy has been established and recognized for quite some time, now. I'm afraid it's well past time to think anyone here could effectively challenge the conclusion already reached that science is the superior ontology.

We are trying to nail down your assertions that "science rules" and that we could even define anything superior to an actual living objective.

Your objective appears to be to "use" (utilize) science on a daily basis and as a lifestyle to determine reality and the best course of action.
My objective ts to know Christ(as living and active) and to know His will for my life and routine. jar would ask me how I would know. ringo would charge me with ignoring what He says to do in scripture. I challenge and deny ringos assertion unless it is taken word for word literal and I am failing simply because I refuse to give everything up. I dismiss ringos accusations due to the fact that he doesnt even believe in a character alive apart from the inked words and symbols within the book itself. He would argue that it doesnt matter whether the character of jesus is alive apart from the written word or not. He would say that i wont listen and do what Jesus says to do. I would argue that none are righteous and that no one does what Jesus said collectively to do.

So, what is the purpose of this thread?
Keep arguing. Its what we do here.

Edited by Phat, : No reason given.


"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 4 by AZPaul3, posted 03-25-2021 8:37 PM AZPaul3 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by AZPaul3, posted 04-03-2021 5:10 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply
 Message 26 by ringo, posted 04-03-2021 6:00 PM Phat has responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 15104
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 23 of 95 (885295)
04-03-2021 3:51 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by AZPaul3
03-26-2021 3:57 AM


Re: G#MF@&!!!
AZ writes:

This universe would just as soon kill us as stare at us for 4 billion years. Fate walks her own path and ignores god just like she ignores everyone and everything else.

Sounds like you are "worshiping" or acknowledging the creation (physical matter) more than you are the Creator(real or imagined)
AZ writes:

And not angry with but more of an ignoring of thing.

Oedipus Complex writ large?
Could it be that you simply chafe at His wanton authority and power ...

AZ writes:

Naw, He doesn't have any so that's not an issue.

At least not in your mind. You wanna be the Boss there!

What's so enamoring about Spinoza's god is that he wasn't real. He didn't exist. In his place Brother Baruch put the majesty of the secular universe.
The majesty of the secular universe! The majesty of Creation over a Creator. Do I see a pattern here?

"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 20 by AZPaul3, posted 03-26-2021 3:57 AM AZPaul3 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by AZPaul3, posted 04-03-2021 5:34 PM Phat has not yet responded

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 5726
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 24 of 95 (885296)
04-03-2021 5:10 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by Phat
04-03-2021 3:43 PM


Re: Peanut Gallery dogpiles Phat
We are trying to nail down your assertions that "science rules" and that we could even define anything superior to an actual living objective.

Science rules when there are options, splits in the path, where one path is determined by science and the other(s) contrary to science. The science path is, de facto, the only path actually realistically open. Science rules.

Your objective appears to be to "use" (utilize) science on a daily basis and as a lifestyle to determine reality and the best course of action.

I am an acolyte, not a priest. My duties do not require I submit all emotion and action to deep scientific analysis.

I still order in pizza when I want. When my brain gets that urge.

Actually it's more of me following the executive decision to order in pizza emanating from my subconscious mind which went through a complex interplay of neuronic stimulation methodologies before issuing the decision to the consciousness for specific action.

But just because I know this doesn't diminish my enjoyment (another set of complex neuronic stimulations) of eating the pizza and sipping a nice cabernet.

Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.


Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Phat, posted 04-03-2021 3:43 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 5726
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 25 of 95 (885297)
04-03-2021 5:34 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by Phat
04-03-2021 3:51 PM


Re: G#MF@&!!!
Sounds like you are "worshiping" or acknowledging the creation (physical matter) more than you are the Creator(real or imagined)

On that level you might consider it's kinda hard not to believe in something that is physically, demonstrably, real. You may call it worship, I'll call it sanity.

Your creator, on the other hand, not so much. Again, sanity.

Oedipus Complex writ large?

Cute, but, no. Can't be angry at a god that isn't there and I was quite happy, as I recall I was ecstatic, that this whole god thing was fake and I could ignore it all.

AZ writes:
Naw, He doesn't have any so that's not an issue.

At least not in your mind. You wanna be the Boss there!

Ooo, if only it were real. It'd be a freakin disaster but still if there could be gods and I could be boss! Hallelujah!

The majesty of the secular universe! The majesty of Creation over a Creator. Do I see a pattern here?

I sure hope so.

Care to join us?

Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.


Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Phat, posted 04-03-2021 3:51 PM Phat has not yet responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 18930
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 4.0


Message 26 of 95 (885298)
04-03-2021 6:00 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by Phat
04-03-2021 3:43 PM


Re: Peanut Gallery dogpiles Phat
Phat writes:

ringo would charge me with ignoring what He says to do in scripture.


Not only do you refuse to do what He said but you dismiss the Bible as a "dusty old book".

Phat writes:

I challenge and deny ringos assertion unless it is taken word for word literal...


I wouldn't use the word "literal" but I do insist that it says what it says. You assert that it doesn't mean what it says but you can't back up that assertion.

Phat writes:

...and I am failing simply because I refuse to give everything up.


You refuse to give ANYTHING up. You worship every word that cometh out of the mouths of the apologists even though you don't understand them.

Phat writes:

I dismiss ringos accusations due to the fact that he doesnt even believe in a character alive apart from the inked words and symbols within the book itself.


How many times do we have to go through this? I don't have to believe Frodo existed to know what he said. Why don't you address that point instead of just repeating the same old foolish accusation? If I claimed that Frodo was communing with me and telling me that the "dusty old book" was wrong, you'd think I was stark, staring mad. So why is your claim any different?

Phat writes:

He would argue that it doesnt matter whether the character of jesus is alive apart from the written word or not.


And that's another argument that you never address.

Phat writes:

He would say that i wont listen and do what Jesus says to do. I would argue that none are righteous...


None are righteous BECAUSE they don't do what Jesus said. It's not an excuse (see the case of sheep v goats).

Phat writes:

...and that no one does what Jesus said collectively to do.


That's blatantly false. As I have pointed out many times, the early church did it (see Ananias and Sapphira). And throughout history, many religious communities have done it, Christian and otherwise.

Stop repeating the same old same old falsehoods and address the responses.


"I've been to Moose Jaw, now I can die." -- John Wing

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Phat, posted 04-03-2021 3:43 PM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by Phat, posted 04-04-2021 12:07 PM ringo has responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 15104
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 27 of 95 (885307)
04-04-2021 12:07 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by ringo
04-03-2021 6:00 PM


Re: Peanut Gallery dogpiles Phat
ringo writes:

I don't have to believe Frodo existed to know what he said. Why don't you address that point instead of just repeating the same old foolish accusation?

OK. Using your analogy...

If I claim that I have a "personal relationship" with Frodo, you may well respond that Frodo is simply a character in a book. That would be expected. But what you are essentially doing is acknowledging that I believe that Frodo exists and then attempting to hold me to the Frodo in the book...which you claim is the only Frodo who exists. And If I then claim that Frodo transcends the book and that a bit of Frodo exists in ALL of us, you will declare it all to be fantasy and then go back to Tolkien's "Bible" and insist that Frodo (of the book) clearly says to do A, B, and C and that I simply make up my Frodo and don't do the A,B, and C that Tolkien wrote HIS Frodo to do.

Why accuse me? I channel my inner Frodo. All that you attempt to claim is that the dusty old book says what it says, period. Never mind that most Christians would not agree with you. And never mind that there are more Frodos out there than simply the one in the Lord of the Rings. (or the Hobbit)


"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 26 by ringo, posted 04-03-2021 6:00 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by Coragyps, posted 04-04-2021 12:39 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply
 Message 29 by nwr, posted 04-04-2021 12:53 PM Phat has not yet responded
 Message 30 by ringo, posted 04-04-2021 1:33 PM Phat has responded

  
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5550
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


(1)
Message 28 of 95 (885308)
04-04-2021 12:39 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by Phat
04-04-2021 12:07 PM


Re: Peanut Gallery dogpiles Phat
And never you mind, Phat, that there are many thousands more Jesuses out there than the one you have in mind. Republican ones, blond Caucasian ones, misogynistic ones, very nice and pleasant ones...... Lots of ‘em.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Phat, posted 04-04-2021 12:07 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 5671
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 8.3


Message 29 of 95 (885309)
04-04-2021 12:53 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by Phat
04-04-2021 12:07 PM


Re: Peanut Gallery dogpiles Phat
If I claim that I have a "personal relationship" with Frodo, you may well respond that Frodo is simply a character in a book. That would be expected. But what you are essentially doing is acknowledging that I believe that Frodo exists and then attempting to hold me to the Frodo in the book...which you claim is the only Frodo who exists. And If I then claim that Frodo transcends the book and that a bit of Frodo exists in ALL of us, you will declare it all to be fantasy and then go back to Tolkien's "Bible" and insist that Frodo (of the book) clearly says to do A, B, and C and that I simply make up my Frodo and don't do the A,B, and C that Tolkien wrote HIS Frodo to do.

It seems to me that you have done a pretty good job of debunking your own view.

I channel my inner Frodo.

We all channel our internal values. But why personify them?

What's important is to recognize that we might be mistaken, and that we might need adjust our values accordingly.

The willingness to admit that you could be mistaken -- I've always taken that to be part of Christian humility. But I don't see much of that humility when I look at American conservative Christianity.


Fundamentalism - the anti-American, anti-Christian branch of American Christianity

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Phat, posted 04-04-2021 12:07 PM Phat has not yet responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 18930
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 4.0


Message 30 of 95 (885310)
04-04-2021 1:33 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by Phat
04-04-2021 12:07 PM


Re: Peanut Gallery dogpiles Phat
Phat writes:

But what you are essentially doing is acknowledging that I believe that Frodo exists and then attempting to hold me to the Frodo in the book...


It has nothing to do with me acknowledging your belief. It's about YOU rejecting my argument BECAUSE I don't believe. The whole point of bringing up Frodo is to try to get you to understand that my lack of belief in the character has nothing to do with my understanding of the character.

Phat writes:

And If I then claim that Frodo transcends the book and that a bit of Frodo exists in ALL of us...


Then you need to present something more than just a belief that Frodo is whispering in your ear (and telling you that Tolkien got it all wrong).

Phat writes:

Why accuse me? I channel my inner Frodo. All that you attempt to claim is that the dusty old book says what it says, period.


I'm not accusing you of anything. I'm pointing out that your inner Frodo IS just an inner Frodo with no basis in reality, not even any basis in the fantasy it's based on. Why do you call it Frodo at all? Why not call it Holden?

And do you see how silly your position looks when we substitute "Frodo" for "Jesus"?

Phat writes:

And never mind that there are more Frodos out there than simply the one in the Lord of the Rings. (or the Hobbit)


There really aren't.

"I've been to Moose Jaw, now I can die." -- John Wing

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Phat, posted 04-04-2021 12:07 PM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by Phat, posted 04-04-2021 3:43 PM ringo has responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2021