Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 78 (8896 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 03-22-2019 9:54 AM
51 online now:
CosmicChimp, Diomedes, PaulK, Percy (Admin), Phat (AdminPhat), PurpleYouko (6 members, 45 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 848,542 Year: 3,579/19,786 Month: 574/1,087 Week: 164/212 Day: 6/25 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
1617
18
192021Next
Author Topic:   Perceptions of Reality
Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3925 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 256 of 305 (396785)
04-22-2007 1:36 AM
Reply to: Message 254 by Archer Opteryx
04-21-2007 9:59 PM


Re: Reality
Archer:
On the contrary: to establish 'the moral law'--or stinky tofu or anything else--as an absolute you must first establish it as a reality.

Man... you're totally misunderstanding me...

Morality is part of reality. And reality is absolute.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 254 by Archer Opteryx, posted 04-21-2007 9:59 PM Archer Opteryx has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 261 by Archer Opteryx, posted 04-22-2007 3:29 AM Rob has not yet responded

  
Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3925 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 257 of 305 (396786)
04-22-2007 1:42 AM
Reply to: Message 253 by Archer Opteryx
04-21-2007 9:34 PM


Re: Reality
Uh.. I have no idea what your talking about.

And I only used the example you tore apart with some interesting math... so as to demsonstrate it's failure myself. I guess that means we agree that it doesn't hold water..., but I dunno...

I presented the counterperspective as a more livable alternative to the weakness of the naturalist implications.

Archer, we're just not on the same page, or map.

Sorry...

Edited by Rob, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 253 by Archer Opteryx, posted 04-21-2007 9:34 PM Archer Opteryx has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 264 by Archer Opteryx, posted 04-22-2007 10:37 AM Rob has responded

  
Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3925 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 258 of 305 (396788)
04-22-2007 1:46 AM
Reply to: Message 249 by jar
04-21-2007 4:02 PM


Re: Still stupid irrelevancies.
Rob:
Would I be doing anything that is 'actually' wrong if I didn't?

jar;

Yes, you will be continuing to not follow the rules and guidelines of this forum.

So the rules governing any given system are absolute and determined by the creator/creators of said system? And any violation of them is an 'actual' offense of an objective essential to the system and demands justice?

Edited by Rob, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 249 by jar, posted 04-21-2007 4:02 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 263 by jar, posted 04-22-2007 9:21 AM Rob has not yet responded

  
Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3925 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 259 of 305 (396790)
04-22-2007 1:56 AM
Reply to: Message 254 by Archer Opteryx
04-21-2007 9:59 PM


Re: Reality
Maybe this will help in explaining why I believe morality to be absolute...

Archer:

Oh. So you DO think reality is absolute

Yes... and that is why 'wrong' things like what happened at V. Tech are wrong.

That is why lying about facts is wrong. I'm not talking about ignorance. I am talking about a intentional falsehood. It is absolutely wrong.

And telling the truth, even at the expense of our own political expediency is absolutely good.

Can you question those examples logically?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 254 by Archer Opteryx, posted 04-21-2007 9:59 PM Archer Opteryx has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 260 by ringo, posted 04-22-2007 3:14 AM Rob has not yet responded
 Message 262 by Archer Opteryx, posted 04-22-2007 4:34 AM Rob has not yet responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 16227
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 260 of 305 (396793)
04-22-2007 3:14 AM
Reply to: Message 259 by Rob
04-22-2007 1:56 AM


Realivity
Rob writes:

And telling the truth, even at the expense of our own political expediency is absolutely good.

That only works if "The Truth" is absolute - and you're still unable to demonstrate that it is.

Since your perception (remember that?) of the truth is relative, telling your version of the truth can only be relatively good or bad.


Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
This message is a reply to:
 Message 259 by Rob, posted 04-22-2007 1:56 AM Rob has not yet responded

Archer Opteryx
Member (Idle past 1674 days)
Posts: 1811
From: East Asia
Joined: 08-16-2006


Message 261 of 305 (396795)
04-22-2007 3:29 AM
Reply to: Message 256 by Rob
04-22-2007 1:36 AM


Re: Reality
Morality is part of reality. And reality is absolute.

Very good. You say we're not on the same map, Rob, but I think we're doing fine.

Here are some more for you.


Stinky tofu is part of reality. And reality is absolute.

Life is part of reality. And reality is absolute.

Death is part of reality. And reality is absolute.

Science is part of reality. And reality is absolute.

Art is part of reality. And reality is absolute.

Action is part of reality. And reality is absolute.

Inaction is part of reality. And reality is absolute.

Beauty is part of reality. And reality is absolute.

Ugliness is part of reality. And reality is absolute.

Elvis is part of reality. And reality is absolute.

Elvis impersonators are part of reality. And reality is absolute.


Archer

All species are transitional.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 256 by Rob, posted 04-22-2007 1:36 AM Rob has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 268 by RAZD, posted 04-22-2007 12:48 PM Archer Opteryx has responded

Archer Opteryx
Member (Idle past 1674 days)
Posts: 1811
From: East Asia
Joined: 08-16-2006


Message 262 of 305 (396802)
04-22-2007 4:34 AM
Reply to: Message 259 by Rob
04-22-2007 1:56 AM


Re: Reality
Archer: Oh. So you DO think reality is absolute

Rob:

Yes... and that is why 'wrong' things like what happened at V. Tech are wrong.

That is why lying about facts is wrong. I'm not talking about ignorance. I am talking about a intentional falsehood. It is absolutely wrong.

And telling the truth, even at the expense of our own political expediency is absolutely good.

Can you question those examples logically?

Logically, yes. Your entire statement depends on equivocation. This is a fallacy.

'Wrong' can mean factually wrong (false, unreal, untrue) and morally wrong (cruel, dishonest, immoral).

You use the word both ways and take this equivocation as 'proving' somehow that reality and morality are synonymous terms.

I know you conflate the two meanings on purpose. Logically, though, you can't do this.

One reason why you can't is because it's begging the question to assume the conclusion in one's argument.

Another reason why you can't is because you recognize a distinction between these two meanings in the argument. This makes the argument self-contradictory.

You do this when you make an exception for ignorance. Falsehoods arising from ignorance, you allow, are not necessarily 'wrong' in moral terms.

This acknowledges a difference between factual wrong and moral wrong. The two are not the same.

_____

Edited by Archer Opterix, : html.

Edited by Archer Opterix, : typo repair.

Edited by Archer Opterix, : concision.


Archer

All species are transitional.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 259 by Rob, posted 04-22-2007 1:56 AM Rob has not yet responded

jar
Member
Posts: 30934
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 263 of 305 (396817)
04-22-2007 9:21 AM
Reply to: Message 258 by Rob
04-22-2007 1:46 AM


Re: Still stupid irrelevancies.
So the rules governing any given system are absolute and determined by the creator/creators of said system?

No, the rules are relative and created by the users of the system. They are not the product of the creator of the system.

And any violation of them is an 'actual' offense of an objective essential to the system and demands justice?

That is simply more of your jabberwocky. Justice has nothing to do with the issue. Your behavior is a violation of the terms and conditions that you accepted.

Frankly Rob, I have no problem with your continued failure to actually address points, it allows the readers to see how absolutely bankrupt your theology really is. The readers can see that there is a pattern and the pattern is that for every issue, Rob simply tries to move the goal posts, post irrelevant material from some imagined "Authority" or toss out yet another irrelevant issue like justice as though justice was some absolute.


Aslan is not a Tame Lion
This message is a reply to:
 Message 258 by Rob, posted 04-22-2007 1:46 AM Rob has not yet responded

Archer Opteryx
Member (Idle past 1674 days)
Posts: 1811
From: East Asia
Joined: 08-16-2006


Message 264 of 305 (396821)
04-22-2007 10:37 AM
Reply to: Message 257 by Rob
04-22-2007 1:42 AM


Re: Reality
Rob:

I presented the counterperspective as a more livable alternative to the weakness of the naturalist implications.

Of course. You were talking about pictures of reality.

You wanted to show everyone your picture of reality. You wanted to let them see how much prettier it is than some other picture. How much more 'liveable' it is (for you) than some other picture is (for you).

This is like showing everyone a crisp, shiny new postcard of Los Angeles and a frayed, battered old postcard of San Franscisco and on that basis declaring that living in Los Angeles is better than living in San Francisco.

No one can argue with a statement from Rob about where Rob would prefer to live. Rob is the expert on what Rob likes.

But it's another thing to start saying 'Because I, Rob, prefer living in Los Angeles to living in San Francisco, Los Angeles is the one right answer for everybody.' Now you treat Rob, and Rob's ideas, as the absolute. You mistake your picture of reality for reality itself.

It's well and good to share ideas about models of reality and state why you find one or the other more 'liveable.' None of this says anything about absolutes.

Reality is absolute. Pictures of it vary.

A picture of reality you can carry around inside your head is not the ultimate reality.


Archer

All species are transitional.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 257 by Rob, posted 04-22-2007 1:42 AM Rob has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 265 by Rob, posted 04-22-2007 10:46 AM Archer Opteryx has responded

Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3925 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 265 of 305 (396823)
04-22-2007 10:46 AM
Reply to: Message 264 by Archer Opteryx
04-22-2007 10:37 AM


Re: Reality
Archer:
How much more 'liveable' it is (for you) than some other picture is (for you).

:laugh:

I never said anything about it being livable. In fact, as the story goes, only one person ever lived it. So He is the leader.

It's the hardest thing in the world. As C.S. Lewis said, 'we could never have guessed it.'

Not the kind of thing that humans think of. No... we think of things which put us on the top.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 264 by Archer Opteryx, posted 04-22-2007 10:37 AM Archer Opteryx has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 266 by Archer Opteryx, posted 04-22-2007 10:52 AM Rob has responded

  
Archer Opteryx
Member (Idle past 1674 days)
Posts: 1811
From: East Asia
Joined: 08-16-2006


Message 266 of 305 (396824)
04-22-2007 10:52 AM
Reply to: Message 265 by Rob
04-22-2007 10:46 AM


Re: Reality
Rob in Message 257:

I presented the counterperspective as a more livable alternative

Rob in Message 265:

I never said anything about it being livable


Archer

All species are transitional.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 265 by Rob, posted 04-22-2007 10:46 AM Rob has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 267 by Rob, posted 04-22-2007 11:04 AM Archer Opteryx has responded

Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3925 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 267 of 305 (396826)
04-22-2007 11:04 AM
Reply to: Message 266 by Archer Opteryx
04-22-2007 10:52 AM


Re: Reality
You got me there...

What I should have said in message 257 (had I been more patient and not caught in this drama) is that the counterperpective takes into consideration, the other needs of the human soul, like the desire to live.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 266 by Archer Opteryx, posted 04-22-2007 10:52 AM Archer Opteryx has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 269 by Archer Opteryx, posted 04-22-2007 12:55 PM Rob has not yet responded
 Message 275 by Archer Opteryx, posted 04-27-2007 10:49 AM Rob has responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19756
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 268 of 305 (396834)
04-22-2007 12:48 PM
Reply to: Message 261 by Archer Opteryx
04-22-2007 3:29 AM


Re: Reality
Morality is part of reality. And reality is absolute.

Beauty is part of reality. And reality is absolute.
Ugliness is part of reality. And reality is absolute.

Not sure I agree with you here. These are subjective items and are different for different people. Isn't that just a perception of reality?

There are things that people perceive to be beautiful, ugly, moral, etc. and we can discuss these concepts and write books about them, but does that make the perception real? Doesn't that also make every myth, science fiction novel and dream real?


Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 261 by Archer Opteryx, posted 04-22-2007 3:29 AM Archer Opteryx has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 270 by Archer Opteryx, posted 04-23-2007 3:13 AM RAZD has responded
 Message 271 by ikabod, posted 04-24-2007 8:34 AM RAZD has responded

Archer Opteryx
Member (Idle past 1674 days)
Posts: 1811
From: East Asia
Joined: 08-16-2006


Message 269 of 305 (396835)
04-22-2007 12:55 PM
Reply to: Message 267 by Rob
04-22-2007 11:04 AM


Re: Reality
Rob:

the counterperpective takes into consideration, the other needs of the human soul, like the desire to live.

You assume the human desire to live is not considered in other perspectives. This is false.

A fair-minded hearing of other views besides yours will show this to be so.

I am not saying you will find other pictures to your liking. You will like what you will like and you will believe what you will believe. These may well turn out to be different things. I am only saying that the human desire to live is considered in other pictures besides your own. You do them a disservice when you say otherwise.

It's true that it is easier to sell a product when you can hold it next to a single Brand X and make that Brand X look as unappealing as possible. Evangelists know this. Evangelism has always been about making sales. But if you would be a person of integrity, leave salesmanship behind. Become a person interested in truth. Follow the truth wherever it leads. Let the product endorsements fall where they may.

You discredit yourself when you repeatedly step into the strawman fallacy--misrepresenting another view and treating that as Brand X. The exercise is anti-intellectual and anti-truth. Rejecting corrections to the picture from the people in the best position to know only highlights the unreality of it. It does nothing to help you make your case.

You have set two pictures against each other: (your idea of) faith against (your idea of) science.

Pictures that are blurry and distorted offer a poor basis for making comparisons. How good are yours? Not very. If we grant that Los Angeles is full of human souls filled with a desire to live, it does not follow that San Francisco isn't. Yet this is what you ask us to believe. Your comparison begins with a fallacy.

I submit that the world--reality--is big enough to accommodate both science and faith, just as it is big enough to accommodate multiple cities and many ways of living.

Postcards cannot do the same. A postcard is two-dimensional and flat. The view it offers is severely restricted. A postcard is not a city. It is not the world.

When your pictures of science and faith look incompatible, it's time not to jump to conclusions, but to ask what has been left out of the shot by the people who framed your pictures. It may be time to put the postcards in a drawer and do some travel. See real places. Meet the natives. Make better, more complete pictures for yourself out of your own richest experiences of the real thing.

Pictures show us things, hide things, bracket things. Some give us details, some panoramas. We can find them beautiful or ugly or boring or inspiring. We can prefer one to the other. We will gain a better perspective from a gallery than a single image. But in the final analysis pictures are limited. There is always that frame.

Reality is everything. Always.

_____

Edited by Archer Opterix, : brev.

Edited by Archer Opterix, : typo repair.


Archer

All species are transitional.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 267 by Rob, posted 04-22-2007 11:04 AM Rob has not yet responded

Archer Opteryx
Member (Idle past 1674 days)
Posts: 1811
From: East Asia
Joined: 08-16-2006


Message 270 of 305 (396883)
04-23-2007 3:13 AM
Reply to: Message 268 by RAZD
04-22-2007 12:48 PM


Re: Reality
RAZD:

Not sure I agree with you here. These are subjective items and are different for different people. Isn't that just a perception of reality?

Sure. The subjective is also part of reality. ;)

There are things that people perceive to be beautiful, ugly, moral, etc. and we can discuss these concepts and write books about them, but does that make the perception real? Doesn't that also make every myth, science fiction novel and dream real?

You're taking this into some advanced areas for some of our readers... but yes, novels and dreams are real.

The content is not factual. But Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is a real novel and your dreams are real dreams. I can show you a copy of the novel and your dreaming can be monitored on instruments.

Novels and dreams are phenomena of our experience, as are earthquakes and Elvis impersonators. Yes?

___


Archer

All species are transitional.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 268 by RAZD, posted 04-22-2007 12:48 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 277 by RAZD, posted 04-27-2007 9:46 PM Archer Opteryx has not yet responded

RewPrev1
...
1617
18
192021Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019