Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 57 (9173 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: Neptune7
Post Volume: Total: 917,585 Year: 4,842/9,624 Month: 190/427 Week: 0/103 Day: 0/8 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Peanut Gallery
Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003


(1)
Message 248 of 1725 (572982)
08-09-2010 9:51 AM
Reply to: Message 236 by Straggler
08-06-2010 3:07 PM


Re: RAZD and Bluegenes - Peanut Gallery
I see RAZD wasted no time pulling out his Cognitive Bias canard. Honestly, I think it's become the equivalent of a Godwin, as it basically consists of going "ner na ner na ner! I don't have to listen to you 'cos your brain don't work". It's really unhelpful to actually having a useful discussion.
Edited by Mr Jack, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 236 by Straggler, posted 08-06-2010 3:07 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 249 by Straggler, posted 08-09-2010 3:15 PM Dr Jack has not replied

Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003


Message 284 of 1725 (574592)
08-16-2010 7:53 PM


RAZD throws in the towel
The extraordinary tale of RAZD's spectacular inability to bring his ability to think clearly to threads about nonsense really has outdone itself this time

Replies to this message:
 Message 285 by RAZD, posted 08-16-2010 8:04 PM Dr Jack has not replied

Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003


Message 305 of 1725 (574844)
08-18-2010 4:39 AM
Reply to: Message 302 by onifre
08-17-2010 5:02 PM


Re: RAZD and Bluegenes - Peanut Gallery
No, Straggler, you miss the point. If in fact Jesus was born of a virgin, then either the claim itself is not true, or, there is a natural explanation (not yet known to us) that demonstrates how this happened.
Surely this is nothing more than a statement of faith that the world is naturalistic in all its workings? Why does there have to be a natural explanation?
If the laws of nature were suspended, there still leaves the question of how...? Saying it was supernatural doesn't explain it.
Indeed, a world that permits the supernatural is also a world in which there are things which completely lack methodological explanations. That's pretty much the definition of supernatural. However, while we live in a world in which things are explicable, there's no a priori reason to think we must.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 302 by onifre, posted 08-17-2010 5:02 PM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 306 by onifre, posted 08-18-2010 8:34 AM Dr Jack has replied

Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003


Message 307 of 1725 (574877)
08-18-2010 8:49 AM
Reply to: Message 306 by onifre
08-18-2010 8:34 AM


Re: RAZD and Bluegenes - Peanut Gallery
Because nothing else satisfies.
I would note that your satisfaction is not a requirement that reality is obliged to obey.
But if the word supernatural is just a linguistic place filler, then it means nothing more than "I don't know."
It's not a place filler; it's the word for things that don't operate according to determinable, accessible rules. If magic/miracles were real, then they'd operate in a way that means that our only methodological explanation is "it's supernatural".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 306 by onifre, posted 08-18-2010 8:34 AM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 313 by onifre, posted 08-18-2010 1:11 PM Dr Jack has replied

Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003


Message 310 of 1725 (574912)
08-18-2010 11:36 AM
Reply to: Message 308 by Blue Jay
08-18-2010 11:00 AM


Re: RAZD and Bluegenes - Peanut Gallery
So, if we saw a supernatural occurrence, and concluded that it was indeed supernatural, we cannot have any idea how well our conclusion, based on current knowledge, would serve as a surrogate for absolute knowledge.
Indeed, a world with the supernatural in it is not a world that can be understood.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 308 by Blue Jay, posted 08-18-2010 11:00 AM Blue Jay has seen this message but not replied

Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003


Message 315 of 1725 (574931)
08-18-2010 1:48 PM
Reply to: Message 313 by onifre
08-18-2010 1:11 PM


Re: RAZD and Bluegenes - Peanut Gallery
As determined by who? Is a solar eclipse something that doesn't operate according to determinable, accessible rules? Well, not today it's not, but it was once considered such. Would someone living 1000 years ago consider the universe to be working under determinable, accessible rules?
Well, that's a valid question. It pretty much echoes Hume's argument that there can never be convincing evidence for Miracles. It doesn't, however, speak to whether there actually can be supernatural things or not.
And, personally, I think it would become obvious if there was supernatural stuff going on.
A point in time where something doesn't operate with determinable, accessible rules is a point in time where not enough is understood about that something.
Only in a universe where things actually have determinable, accessible rules. Ours appears to be such a universe but it doesn't have to be.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 313 by onifre, posted 08-18-2010 1:11 PM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 318 by onifre, posted 08-18-2010 3:28 PM Dr Jack has not replied

Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003


Message 323 of 1725 (574973)
08-18-2010 4:08 PM
Reply to: Message 321 by onifre
08-18-2010 3:52 PM


Re: Impossible?
Then are you saying that anyone, from any religious belief, can change the word "supernatural" to mean whatever they conceptualize? In other words, to a Christian, Jesus is considered supernatural. But, to a tribesmen, an eclipse is considered supernatural. And both are right?
The tribesman is wrong. Because an eclipse isn't supernatural but if the eclipse was caused by an angry god covering the sun then it would be supernatural. What the tribesman, or Christian, thinks is supernatural is irrelevant.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 321 by onifre, posted 08-18-2010 3:52 PM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 325 by onifre, posted 08-18-2010 4:13 PM Dr Jack has replied

Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003


Message 328 of 1725 (574992)
08-18-2010 4:48 PM
Reply to: Message 325 by onifre
08-18-2010 4:13 PM


Re: Impossible?
It is to a tribesmen because they have no other explanation for it.
Why do you think the tribesman's ignorance makes the blindest bit of difference? It's not supernatural. You know how eclipse happen. It's perfectly natural.
What made the god supernatural but let the eclipse escape the label?
The eclipse happens according to a set of natural laws and principles. The god doesn't. I really don't see what is hard about it?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 325 by onifre, posted 08-18-2010 4:13 PM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 330 by onifre, posted 08-18-2010 5:02 PM Dr Jack has replied

Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003


Message 332 of 1725 (575000)
08-18-2010 5:12 PM
Reply to: Message 330 by onifre
08-18-2010 5:02 PM


Re: Impossible?
So your argument has absolutely nothing to do with the existence of the supernatural, and is simply an objection that we can't know?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 330 by onifre, posted 08-18-2010 5:02 PM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 334 by onifre, posted 08-18-2010 5:19 PM Dr Jack has replied

Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003


Message 335 of 1725 (575010)
08-18-2010 5:28 PM
Reply to: Message 334 by onifre
08-18-2010 5:19 PM


Re: Impossible?
Then your objection in your previous post is irrelevant.
There's a god. He doesn't follow any kind of rules or principles. It's not that we don't know them. He just doesn't.
That's supernatural. That's what it means. It's not a place holder.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 334 by onifre, posted 08-18-2010 5:19 PM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 336 by onifre, posted 08-18-2010 5:34 PM Dr Jack has replied

Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003


Message 337 of 1725 (575015)
08-18-2010 5:38 PM
Reply to: Message 336 by onifre
08-18-2010 5:34 PM


Re: Impossible?
So then my point to Straggler stands, supernatural means whatever you want it to mean. 10,000 years ago, 5000 years ago, 1000 years ago, 500 years ago... today. At any point in human history, if I asked what supernatural meant, I'd get a different answer.
That's a stupid objection; because the entire notion of natural causes has only been recently developed. The notion of supernatural as we discuss it now is the only sensible way of looking at.
By that method, you're completely wrong about the tribesman, he could call it supernatural but he'd be wrong. Now, try very, very hard and see if you can't imagine something which is actually supernatural. Note how it's a completely different concept than someone just being wrong about something natural.
Did you make that up or you know this for sure?
Are you just completely incapable of understanding the notion of a hypothetical?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 336 by onifre, posted 08-18-2010 5:34 PM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 338 by onifre, posted 08-18-2010 5:49 PM Dr Jack has replied
 Message 339 by onifre, posted 08-18-2010 5:50 PM Dr Jack has replied

Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003


Message 344 of 1725 (575210)
08-19-2010 4:16 AM
Reply to: Message 339 by onifre
08-18-2010 5:50 PM


Re: Impossible?
Whenever you're ready to move the goal posts again let me know.
Oh please!
Now using words to mean what they mean is "moving the goalposts"? Seriously?
Get off the wall, Humpty.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 339 by onifre, posted 08-18-2010 5:50 PM onifre has not replied

Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003


Message 345 of 1725 (575211)
08-19-2010 4:19 AM
Reply to: Message 338 by onifre
08-18-2010 5:49 PM


Re: Impossible?
Yes, but this would require me to know ALL the limits of reality.
No, it doesn't. Because it's HYPOTHETICAL.
What I may imagine to be supernatural may simply be my limited knowledge on any one aspect of reality expressing itself conceptually - how does that make it supernatural?
Oh, for goodness sake. How many times? IT ISN'T YOUR LIMITED UNDERSTANDING OF REALITY
In this HYPOTHETICAL example, THERE ACTUALLY IS A SUPERNATURAL.
No, I understand it just fine.
And yet you keep making objections that make no sense if you do. So either a) you're being deliberately awkward or b) you don't. Which is it? If it's a) we can give up on the conversation now.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 338 by onifre, posted 08-18-2010 5:49 PM onifre has not replied

Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003


Message 705 of 1725 (601528)
01-21-2011 5:05 AM


I'm baffled. Does RAZD actually believe that his absurd suggestion that some supernatural entities aren't made up by humans actually holds any water? Is it simply a tactic to avoid getting on to any more serious debate, or does is he actually going somewhere useful with this exercise in absurdist theatre?

Replies to this message:
 Message 706 by Panda, posted 01-21-2011 7:42 AM Dr Jack has not replied

Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003


Message 735 of 1725 (602856)
02-01-2011 11:05 AM
Reply to: Message 729 by RAZD
02-01-2011 1:02 AM


Re: Great Debate thread - who's grasping straws?
No, what I am saying is that you have not shown that it really is actually a supernatural being, and you cannot just claim that it is
You seem confused. We're the ones that hold that are no beings that are really supernatural, hence them all being figments of the imagination.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 729 by RAZD, posted 02-01-2011 1:02 AM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 740 by RAZD, posted 02-01-2011 7:14 PM Dr Jack 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