Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Replying to a lack of reason with reason

Page 6 of 9 [ 136 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

29 Feb 2012, 6:40 pm

fraac wrote:
Apparent to whom?


Apparent to anybody outside of an individual's mind.

fraac wrote:
Once again, an atheist casting himself as omniscient isn't a strong argument against God.


Not even close, try again

fraac wrote:
So you're saying the majority, or the most powerful faction, determine reality?


I'm want to go back to this statement because I think it is rather nonsensical; the majority of the human race believes in some supernatural thing or another, despite their lack of physical evidence. So no, the majority does not determine reality, because the majority's thoughts on the matter have never been particularly important


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do


Last edited by Vigilans on 29 Feb 2012, 6:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.

fraac
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Mar 2011
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,865

29 Feb 2012, 6:43 pm

Vigilans wrote:
fraac wrote:
Apparent to whom?


Apparent to anybody outside of an individual's mind.


So, the majority? Or what? Oh you've edited. Well if not the majority then who? Two people in a room - which one is sane?



simon_says
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jan 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,075

29 Feb 2012, 6:49 pm

fraac wrote:
You keep saying there is no evidence and I keep saying you're a dog being confused by arithmetic. Logically, you have to accept either the possibility that there is evidence that isn't currently accessible to you, or that you have a clearer view than everyone else. One of those sounds implausible to me.


Yet you didnt afford that possibility to any other gods, spirits or elves. Strange. It's almost as if you'll say anything to support whatever mythological system you were trained to believe by your culture.



Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

29 Feb 2012, 6:52 pm

fraac wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
fraac wrote:
Apparent to whom?


Apparent to anybody outside of an individual's mind.


So, the majority? Or what? Oh you've edited. Well if not the majority then who? Two people in a room - which one is sane?


This seems to be rather misdirecting. I said not all perceptions are equal, because clearly some people are compromised. If you consider all "perceptions" of reality equal, then I have to ask if you consider Pagan perceptions, or Satanic perceptions. What these "perceptions" amount to is coloration of reality based on context, this being religious in nature. Therefore I would say it is a willful delusion. While an insane person's delusions are not under their control


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do


fraac
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Mar 2011
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,865

29 Feb 2012, 7:31 pm

simon_says wrote:
Yet you didnt afford that possibility to any other gods, spirits or elves. Strange. It's almost as if you'll say anything to support whatever mythological system you were trained to believe by your culture.


When was the subject elves? It's like you'll say anything. Stop projecting.

Vigilans wrote:
I said not all perceptions are equal, because clearly some people are compromised.


Clear TO WHO? You too are failing to see that your viewpoint is subjective. Famously, journalists in an insane asylum are clearly compromised according to the psychiatrists there: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosenhan_experiment - so who decides what is rational? It can't be you because that's solipsistic and doesn't scale. We agree the majority aren't the smartest. So who?



simon_says
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jan 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,075

29 Feb 2012, 7:37 pm

fraac wrote:
When was the subject elves? It's like you'll say anything. Stop projecting.


So magically your magic is the only magic worth considering? Show your math on eliminatng the other gods. Maybe you are the dog in that scenario and the celestial evidence just floats above your head while you gnaw on your monotheistic bone.



fraac
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Mar 2011
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,865

29 Feb 2012, 7:47 pm

Vigilans, you can see simon_says is swinging his warhammer at some culturally monotheistic imaginary foe. He's scared to relate honestly with the people in the thread. Would you call him insane?



simon_says
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jan 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,075

29 Feb 2012, 7:53 pm

fraac wrote:
Vigilans, you can see simon_says is swinging his warhammer at some culturally monotheistic imaginary foe. He's scared to relate honestly with the people in the thread. Would you call him insane?


So when you repeatedly use the term "god" it actually means something else? Interesting.



Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

29 Feb 2012, 8:34 pm

fraac wrote:
Clear TO WHO? You too are failing to see that your viewpoint is subjective.


If you consider hallucinations and psychiatric delusions equal perceptions to "sober" reality - aka things that actually happen- I don't really know what else to say to you

fraac wrote:
Famously, journalists in an insane asylum are clearly compromised according to the psychiatrists there: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosenhan_experiment - so who decides what is rational? It can't be you because that's solipsistic and doesn't scale. We agree the majority aren't the smartest. So who?


The interesting thing is the majority of humans are at least a little rational, except about one particular thing, this being divinity. Having lifelong indoctrination about the supernatural tends to color the world in this manner and most people naturally want to apply meaning to things, or to believe that no matter what, there is a plan for them. Sometimes if I'm eager to accomplish something I'll still have the train of thought like "come on, please, let me get this, etc" except I don't actually believe my words are being heard by anybody on "my team". A lot of religious people's psych is like an inherent team-mentality- the team being "them and God/s"

fraac wrote:
Vigilans, you can see simon_says is swinging his warhammer at some culturally monotheistic imaginary foe. He's scared to relate honestly with the people in the thread. Would you call him insane?


I don't see anything wrong with what simon_says is saying. He actually has a very good point about your respect for "other magical systems" that I recommend you at least acknowledge instead of avoiding


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do


fraac
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Mar 2011
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,865

29 Feb 2012, 9:24 pm

Vigilans wrote:
If you consider hallucinations and psychiatric delusions equal perceptions to "sober" reality - aka things that actually happen- I don't really know what else to say to you


I'm saying that every experiment conducted considers them equal. This is where theism and Buddhism diverge. I keep talking about the real world so it looks like I'm a theist but I know I have animal motives for everything I say so it's still undecided.

Quote:
I don't see anything wrong with what simon_says is saying. He actually has a very good point about your respect for "other magical systems" that I recommend you at least acknowledge instead of avoiding


His "point" is that I don't respect them, not that I do. He wants to argue with people who aren't in this thread.



simon_says
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jan 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,075

29 Feb 2012, 10:20 pm

Quote:
His "point" is that I don't respect them, not that I do. He wants to argue with people who aren't in this thread.


You seem to be having that problem with many people in this thread. Others have tried to get you to be more specific but anyway...

A child who believes in Santa because he experiences presents on christmas morning is one thing. But when he's 35 and still attributing his presents to Santa, people suspect he's being irrational. He's an adult. He is supposed to have some experience with deception, myths, the manufacturing realities of plastic and paper and some sense of the nature of reindeer.

Saying something like "our perceptions and minds are constrained by certain factors, therefore anything might be true", isnt your opening position when crossing a busy street so I'll just have to doubt how much you really live by it. Plus, it's an old trick Ive seen christians use. You arent specifically defending christianity but it's commonly used that way. Anyway, unmooring from reality leads to more possibilities than either of us can imagine. I don't see how that's helpful in navigating the world as it exists or how you would even begin to sort the imaginary possibilities.



NarcissusSavage
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Sep 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 675

01 Mar 2012, 2:36 am

fraac wrote:
You keep saying there is no evidence and I keep saying you're a dog being confused by arithmetic. Logically, you have to accept either the possibility that there is evidence that isn't currently accessible to you, or that you have a clearer view than everyone else. One of those sounds implausible to me.


There is no evidence. If there is, please at this current juncture provide it, a link to it, or other reference. If you cannot do so at this time, please concede that there is no evidence.

I will look at your "arithmetic", if only you will be kind enough to show it to me.


_________________
I am Ignostic.
Go ahead and define god, with universal acceptance of said definition.
I'll wait.


fraac
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Mar 2011
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,865

01 Mar 2012, 9:51 am

simon: acknowledging that our perceptions are subjective isn't 'unmooring from reality'. It's letting go of the storyline. It's the best we can do.

Narcissus: I can't show you it, you're a dog! All you understand is doggy concerns: links, references, proofs written down. But in fact all one can possibly write down are stories - and stories are never real. When every genuinely religious person says the evidence is available but you have to get there yourself, maybe you should stop thinking you're smarter than them.



Oodain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,022
Location: in my own little tamarillo jungle,

01 Mar 2012, 10:01 am

fraac wrote:
simon: acknowledging that our perceptions are subjective isn't 'unmooring from reality'. It's letting go of the storyline. It's the best we can do.

Narcissus: I can't show you it, you're a dog! All you understand is doggy concerns: links, references, proofs written down. But in fact all one can possibly write down are stories - and stories are never real. When every genuinely religious person says the evidence is available but you have to get there yourself, maybe you should stop thinking you're smarter than them.


this is just aboutn the worst post i have read on wp to date.

in many ways.


_________________
//through chaos comes complexity//

the scent of the tamarillo is pungent and powerfull,
woe be to the nose who nears it.


simon_says
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jan 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,075

01 Mar 2012, 11:54 am

fraac wrote:
simon: acknowledging that our perceptions are subjective isn't 'unmooring from reality'. It's letting go of the storyline. It's the best we can do.

Narcissus: I can't show you it, you're a dog! All you understand is doggy concerns: links, references, proofs written down. But in fact all one can possibly write down are stories - and stories are never real. When every genuinely religious person says the evidence is available but you have to get there yourself, maybe you should stop thinking you're smarter than them.


It's quite a leap from saying that the universe is a mystery (it is), to suggesting that human priests have been given the secret or are involved with it in any way. Even in your "matrix" view, the priests would be dogs too. There is no reason to listen to a note of their howling in that case. And history shows us that we have a knack for manufacturing and believing religions.



fraac
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Mar 2011
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,865

01 Mar 2012, 11:56 am

Who mentioned priests? Simon, you keep wanting to argue with clueless Christians and I don't see any here.