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

Re-Incarnation

Page 6 of 8 [ 118 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,959
Location:      

19 Sep 2008, 2:02 pm

slowmutant wrote:
I dunno. Maybe we should all give up and think exactly what you think.

Is "Faith" itself necessary, or is it just a pleasant option?


_________________
The mere fact that science may not yet adequately explain an object, event, or experience does not mean the immediate explanation should automatically default to a conspiratorial, extraterrestrial, paranormal, or supernatural cause.


CanyonWind
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Sep 2006
Age: 74
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,656
Location: West of the Great Divide

19 Sep 2008, 2:30 pm

Wondering why this topic went five pages before Fnord noticed it.

Usually he's funnier than hell, but topics like this always turn him grumpier than a geriatric orangutan.

Personally, I wouldn't say I necessarily believe in it, but I think it's interesting to think about. I also think it's valuable to look at the events and circumstances of my life and my own nature in terms of "what is there to be learned?"

I also think there are questions that lie outside the realm of physical evidence and clunky linear logic.


_________________
They murdered boys in Mississippi. They shot Medgar in the back.
Did you say that wasn't proper? Did you march out on the track?
You were quiet, just like mice. And now you say that we're not nice.
Well thank you buddy for your advice...
-Malvina


LePetitPrince
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,464

19 Sep 2008, 3:05 pm

Fnord wrote:
slowmutant wrote:
Quote:
That reincarnation is a fallacy.

Evidence, please.

a. There is no evidence for the existance of reincarnation.
b. Many people believe in it anyway.

:: Belief in reincarnation is based on a lack of evidence that would contradict the belief. This is the Fallacy of Appeal to Ignorance, which is an argument for a proposition on the sole basis of a lack of evidence against it. If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence at all.

Thus, the belief in reincarnation is fallacious.


That can be applied on God too, just replace the world 'reincarnation' with 'God'.



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,959
Location:      

19 Sep 2008, 3:29 pm

CanyonWind wrote:
Wondering why this topic went five pages before Fnord noticed it.

I was exercising a modicum of restraint. What surprises me is that I was able to shoot down the entire pro-reincarnation argument with just one post; like the sniper who waits for the opportunity to make the one crucial shot that will end the entire war.

CanyonWind wrote:
Usually he's funnier than hell, but topics like this always turn him grumpier than a geriatric orangutan.

When people believe in something without really understanding the nature of their belief, it's like walking into a cinema where the entire audience faces away from the screen - people may think they know what's really going on, but they're not even paying attention to the movie.

CanyonWind wrote:
Personally, I wouldn't say I necessarily believe in it, but I think it's interesting to think about. I also think it's valuable to look at the events and circumstances of my life and my own nature in terms of "what is there to be learned?"

The unexamined faith is not worth believing.

CanyonWind wrote:
I also think there are questions that lie outside the realm of physical evidence and clunky linear logic.

No, all questions are in the mind. Some questions have affirming answers, some have repudiating answers, and some questions can only be answered with a roll of the eyes and a shake of the head. :roll:


_________________
The mere fact that science may not yet adequately explain an object, event, or experience does not mean the immediate explanation should automatically default to a conspiratorial, extraterrestrial, paranormal, or supernatural cause.


slowmutant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Feb 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,430
Location: Ontario, Canada

19 Sep 2008, 4:07 pm

Fnord wrote:
slowmutant wrote:
I dunno. Maybe we should all give up and think exactly what you think.

Is "Faith" itself necessary, or is it just a pleasant option?


Faith is absolutely necessary. Certainty is the pleasant option.



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,959
Location:      

19 Sep 2008, 4:14 pm

Why is Faith, in and of itself, necessary?


_________________
The mere fact that science may not yet adequately explain an object, event, or experience does not mean the immediate explanation should automatically default to a conspiratorial, extraterrestrial, paranormal, or supernatural cause.


slowmutant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Feb 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,430
Location: Ontario, Canada

19 Sep 2008, 4:25 pm

Fnord wrote:
Why is Faith, in and of itself, necessary?


Without faith, we shrivel and die. Faith in God, faith in the stock-market, faith in a spouse, faith in in seatbelts, condoms, foreign cars ...



wilbury
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 27 Aug 2008
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 97
Location: Derbyshire, UK

19 Sep 2008, 4:27 pm

i'm a Buddist anyway, so yes, i believe in re-incarnation.


_________________
it's easier to critize somebody else than to see yourself!


Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,959
Location:      

19 Sep 2008, 5:52 pm

slowmutant wrote:
Fnord wrote:
Why is Faith, in and of itself, necessary?


Without faith, we shrivel and die. Faith in God, faith in the stock-market, faith in a spouse, faith in in seatbelts, condoms, foreign cars ...

Faith in material entities or causal events is actually belief, since it is based on reason. We have reason to believe in the stock-market, our spouses, seatbelts, condoms, foreign cars, the regular progression of days, et cetera, because we can either measure their physical properties, or we can accurately and consistently predict their causal nature (this may exclude the stock market, however ... :wink: ).

Faith is the belief in intangible and unmeasurable - and thus unprovable - concepts, and is therefore the realm of gods, fairies, ghosts, and other legendary or mythical things.

In light of these two loose definitions, can anyone say if we need Faith; and if so, why?

... anyone ... anyone ... Beuller ... ?


_________________
The mere fact that science may not yet adequately explain an object, event, or experience does not mean the immediate explanation should automatically default to a conspiratorial, extraterrestrial, paranormal, or supernatural cause.


Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,959
Location:      

19 Sep 2008, 5:55 pm

wilbury wrote:
i'm a Buddist anyway, so yes, i believe in re-incarnation.

Do you believe in reincarnation because you are a Buddhist, or are you a Buddhist because you believe in reincarnation?

Which is the cause and which is the effect?


_________________
The mere fact that science may not yet adequately explain an object, event, or experience does not mean the immediate explanation should automatically default to a conspiratorial, extraterrestrial, paranormal, or supernatural cause.


slowmutant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Feb 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,430
Location: Ontario, Canada

19 Sep 2008, 6:54 pm

Fnord wrote:
wilbury wrote:
i'm a Buddist anyway, so yes, i believe in re-incarnation.

Do you believe in reincarnation because you are a Buddhist, or are you a Buddhist because you believe in reincarnation?

Which is the cause and which is the effect?


Maybe in this case the directionality of cause-effect can't be determined. It could be that the Buddhism caused the belief in reincarnation just as easily as the belief in reincarnation caused the Buddhism. Chicken/Egg.



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,959
Location:      

19 Sep 2008, 7:01 pm

If causality can not be determined, then is the event relevant?


_________________
The mere fact that science may not yet adequately explain an object, event, or experience does not mean the immediate explanation should automatically default to a conspiratorial, extraterrestrial, paranormal, or supernatural cause.


slowmutant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Feb 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,430
Location: Ontario, Canada

19 Sep 2008, 7:08 pm

Fnord wrote:
If causality can not be determined, then is the event relevant?


Yup still is.



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,959
Location:      

19 Sep 2008, 7:14 pm

slowmutant wrote:
Fnord wrote:
If causality can not be determined, then is the event relevant?

Yup still is.

I'm bored ... cite an example.


_________________
The mere fact that science may not yet adequately explain an object, event, or experience does not mean the immediate explanation should automatically default to a conspiratorial, extraterrestrial, paranormal, or supernatural cause.


slowmutant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Feb 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,430
Location: Ontario, Canada

19 Sep 2008, 7:16 pm

Fnord wrote:
slowmutant wrote:
Fnord wrote:
If causality can not be determined, then is the event relevant?

Yup still is.

I'm bored ... cite an example.


The Tunguska Blast of 1908.



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,959
Location:      

19 Sep 2008, 7:18 pm

slowmutant wrote:
Fnord wrote:
slowmutant wrote:
Fnord wrote:
If causality can not be determined, then is the event relevant?

Yup still is.

I'm bored ... cite an example.

The Tunguska Blast of 1908.

I was hoping you'd cite chickens and eggs because they're both consumed as food, but I'll go with your answer.

Have a nice weekend!



(Psst! It was an icy cometary fragment! Shhh!)


_________________
The mere fact that science may not yet adequately explain an object, event, or experience does not mean the immediate explanation should automatically default to a conspiratorial, extraterrestrial, paranormal, or supernatural cause.