|
|
|
SleepyTemplar
New Member
USA
4 Posts |
 Posted - 01/31/2003 : 21:35:27 [Permalink]
|
SLATER:
Although your comparision of religion and fiction is good, I moreso use fiction in giving an explanation to those who claim they feel certain emotions in response to their religious beliefs. After all, if the theist admits that an emotional response to something that doesn't exist is possible (i.e. crying at the end of Anna Karenina for example, despite ourselves knowing Anna Karenina isn't real), then their own emotional responses possibly arise from a similar situation.
SNAKE:
Love is an emotion, which involves a biological state, subjectivity of feeling, and behavioral patterns. These can be observed to where the emotion love can be said to exist. Love, however, is not a tangible object (Our saying love exists would be similar to saying an explosion exists).
DARWIN:
>>"Well there you go again Atomic, I really don't think you've given much thought as to the origin of LOGIC have you???"
Who said logic has an origin? You're loading the question with nonsense theistic presuppositions. If logic has an origin, then there exists prior to its origin a time in which the laws of logic do not exist. Hence, if they do not exist, then the laws of excluded middle and noncontradiction are not in effect, and so logic can both exist and not exist at the same time in the same respect despite not having been made yet!
... Yet me guess- you hadn't thought of that?
You sound somewhat like the typical 14 year old Christian who thinks that the laws of logic and science are passed like the laws of society. These laws explain phenomena in the world and what things are.
>>"Or do you now believe there is a REASON for reason, or is rational thought just a lucky happenstance of irrational impersonal forces?"
You invoke a false dilemma fallacy. You've failed to mention that logic needs no origin as another choice, in which the above should deal with.
"Do me a favor and at least think about it before you spout off the party line."
As opposed to the theistic party line, which is dogmatically held nonsense? 
>>"If our thoughts are merely a product of chemical reactions in our brains and logic is evolving then how can we decide between good logic and bad logic? Your view reduces our ability to REASON to pure nonrational chemical reactions.Your dissagreement with me is nothing but bad chilie last night."
If our thoughts are formed from a substance dualist's position, who do you reconcile the unintelligibility of dualist interaction? Or the dependence of the "mind" upon the brain? Surely you've heard of Phineas Gage?
Who said logic is evolving? Cognitive subjectivism is self-refuting. 'Nuff said.
Logic exists to evaluate arguments in determining whether they are sound or unsound (cogent or uncogent in the case of inductive arguments). No one suddenly created circular reasoning. People began to notice that if you assumed what you were trying to prove, you could prove anything, and by the law of noncontradiction, contradictions cannot exist.
The laws of logic act as the foundation of any serious stab at epistemology, since they are what we use in order to be rational at all. The very concept of "evidence" and "proof" presuppose them (hence to ask someone to prove them is to commit circular reasoning), and to deny them is the fallacy of the stolen concept (where what you try to disprove is presuppose by your disproof. I.e. using sense data to disprove the external world, or saying logic is false when true and falsehood presuppose the laws of logic).
Same with science. No one creates a phenomena. They observe it, and theories and laws are formulated to explain such.
As you have yet to provide evidence for any form of dualism, contrasted against materialism's success in providing evidence that our thoughts, consciousness, and learning arise from our physical brain, it quite shows that matter, in the proper configuration, can lead to thought. Of course, since I suspect you're a Christian (hence you simply hold to substance dualism because that's what your religious beliefs state), you once again are loading your comments with unwarranted presuppositions. How is it that matter cannot bring about consciousness and thought? Please note I expect a reasoned reply, not a whiny "because it can't!".
>>"It is you who has BLIND FAITH in magic that SOMEHOW (and you can't say how!) that RATIONAL THINKING BEINGS came from mindless matter. Utter credulity!"
Blind faith? I suppose that's true if we chuck evolution, biology, psychology, neuroscience, and other fields that support materialism out the window. In my studies I've yet to find a falsifible dualist position that isn't plagued with problems (primarily a lack of evidence).
I notice you have a difficult time separating "mind" from "brain". |
The acceptance of unfalsifible beliefs with no evidence in a dogmatic sense leads to nonsense. |
 |
|
|
Snake
SFN Addict
USA
2511 Posts |
Posted - 01/31/2003 : 21:40:01 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by a65phalcon
They won't even come to the realization of evidence let alone have a conversation with you, I say let them huddle together. Let them find comfort in their realities. To each his own.
I've found that to be the case almost all the time, on both sides, of whatever issue. Democrats/Republicans, conservitive/liberal, right/left, and so on. When someone labels himself or is labeled it's difficult to come out of that way of thinking. And the 'other side' can't wait to belittle the other. Each thinks he has the facts, the reason and the logic. There doesn't seem to be any real debate.
I'm talking about not only on this web site but all over too. |
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 01/31/2003 : 21:59:07 [Permalink]
|
Tell me a65phalcon were you born this pompous and asinine or did you need to practice?
there is an abundant amount of information supporting the exsistance of Jesus Christ(the man, not as the Son of God)
There were five threads entitled Did Jesus Really Exist?; that's enough for a fair sized book. And yet none of this abundant amount of information was presented. Feel free to present it now.
DA started a thread and his OP said Let us take a look the arguments pro and con and when con is presented he goes into hysterics.
But what can be expected from adults who have an invisible friend in the sky. I shudder to think how awful your childhoods must have been that you feel the need to concoct an imaginary super daddy. That you have the compulsion to turn your back on reality and fervently embrace fantasy, shrieking at the very mention of the real. What could have possibly brought you to such a sorry state where you think all of mankind has somehow "fallen?" Your superstitions are so dark and so sad that I don't know if I feel pity or only revolution towards you.
|
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 01/31/2003 : 22:42:44 [Permalink]
|
quote:
YOu can argue all day long with the majority of people on this board and it will not do a damn bit of good.
Should I laugh or cry at this? You don't even get the point that DA is not arguing. he's just trying to whine his way towards a point. And then, as if that wasn't enough, you are impressed by this.
@tomic |
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law!
Sportsbettingacumen.com: The science of sports betting |
|
|
|
Fireballn
Skeptic Friend
Canada
179 Posts |
Posted - 02/01/2003 : 00:12:42 [Permalink]
|
Slater's quote: There were five threads entitled Did Jesus Really Exist?; that's enough for a fair sized book.
Atomic why don't you publish that fair sized book, and then throw one fair sized party? I think most people here would attend.... |
If i were the supreme being, I wouldn't have messed around with butterflies and daffodils. I would have started with lasers 8 o'clock day one!
-Time Bandits- |
|
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
Posted - 02/01/2003 : 00:12:43 [Permalink]
|
Sleepy T: quote:
Who said logic has an origin?
Point noted a better word would have been source. quote:
You sound somewhat like the typical 14 year old Christian who thinks that the laws of logic and science are passed like the
laws of society. These laws explain phenomena in the world and what things are.
An ad hominen not needed. quote:
>>"Or do you now believe there is a REASON for reason, or is rational thought just a lucky happenstance of irrational
impersonal forces?"
You invoke a false dilemma fallacy. You've failed to mention that logic needs no origin as another choice, in which the
above should deal with.
Not true as you state elsewhere:The laws of logic act as the foundation of any serious stab at epistemology, since they are what we use in order to be
rational at all. The very concept of "evidence" and "proof" presuppose them . Because our ability to reasondepends on the ontological existence of such a foundation both logic and our ability cannot be the products of blind impersonal chance, that would be like playin craps with loaded dice. quote:
As you have yet to provide evidence for any form of dualism, contrasted against materialism's success in providing
evidence that our thoughts, consciousness, and learning arise from our physical brain, it quite shows that matter, in the
proper configuration, can lead to thought.
WRONG AGAIN,the inability of your materlistic view to provide the otological foundation for both IS EVIDENCE for the existence of both our dualistic nature and the existence of THE LOGOS from which both derive.Since you have not and ,I believe cannot support you ridiculious position "that matter, in the proper configuration,can lead to thought." (if I'm wrong you really need to check out the "Million Dollar Award" over the ID thread if you can prove that your in for quite a bit of cash,Good Luck).(edited for ref.
http://www.us.net/life/ ) |
To deny logic you must use it.To deny Jesus Existed you must throw away all your knowledge of the ancient world. To deny ID
you must refute all analogical reasoning. So the question is why deny? |
| Edited by - darwin alogos on 02/01/2003 00:28:48 |
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 02/01/2003 : 00:19:02 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Atomic why don't you publish that fair sized book, and then throw one fair sized party? I think most people here would attend....
This is something that needs doing. They would make a great article and I have intended to do this for some time so that people can more easily access the concepts and facts presented. Don't know what you are talking about when you say party. But I can say that is you are being sarcastic you will need to learn how to be clever first.
@tomic |
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law!
Sportsbettingacumen.com: The science of sports betting |
|
|
|
Fireballn
Skeptic Friend
Canada
179 Posts |
Posted - 02/01/2003 : 00:34:00 [Permalink]
|
| I wasn't being sarcastic, I'll bring the dip! We will need a hot tub though.... Female skeptics....are you in? |
If i were the supreme being, I wouldn't have messed around with butterflies and daffodils. I would have started with lasers 8 o'clock day one!
-Time Bandits- |
| Edited by - Fireballn on 02/01/2003 00:36:18 |
|
|
|
Fireballn
Skeptic Friend
Canada
179 Posts |
Posted - 02/01/2003 : 00:42:28 [Permalink]
|
Darwin, remember reading Job when he and his family were either being tortured or killed? Then finally Job questioned God, why a God fearing man could be subjected to such atrocities? What did God say. He asked Job if he was there at the beginning of time when he created the universe. God is saying I created the universe, if that's the way it is, that is the way it is, go lick you're wounds.
God is also saying that humans are not given all the information for their surroundings. This is where evolutionists have the advantage. They are finding the answers for themselves. Defending creationism on a natural level is futile, just like a evolutionist defending evolution on a supernatural level is futile. You are not privy to the answers to these questions.....by faith you have them all. |
If i were the supreme being, I wouldn't have messed around with butterflies and daffodils. I would have started with lasers 8 o'clock day one!
-Time Bandits- |
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 02/01/2003 : 06:41:08 [Permalink]
|
by faith you have them all
And there you have the whole problem with all of your answers. They don't come from looking for actual answers they come straight from your imagination. You have to use faith because, as you admit, you have no proof. But since you have no proof your faith is baseless. |
|
|
|
SleepyTemplar
New Member
USA
4 Posts |
Posted - 02/01/2003 : 09:45:58 [Permalink]
|
>>"WRONG AGAIN,the inability of your materlistic view to provide the otological foundation for both IS EVIDENCE for the existence of both our dualistic nature and the existence of THE LOGOS from which both derive.Since you have not and ,I believe cannot support you ridiculious position "that matter, in the proper configuration,can lead to thought." (if I'm wrong you really need to check out the "Million Dollar Award" over the ID thread if you can prove that your in for quite a bit of cash,Good Luck).(edited for ref."
An appeal to ignorance is hardly necessary. That would be no different than saying the lack of evidence for your deity proves it doesn't exist.
I notice you failed to rebut two problems with dualism I mentioned. I was expecting an answer, but you've yet to give one. All you've done is do what I asked you not to do, that is to give a whiny "Dualism is true but I'm not supplying any evidence or arguments" bit.
Perhaps in your next post you might first explain what form of dualism you hold, and provide something in support of it.
>>"Because our ability to reasondepends on the ontological existence of such a foundation both logic and our ability cannot be the products of blind impersonal chance, that would be like playin craps with loaded dice."
Once again, you're assuming from the start that logic has a source or origin. People don't suddenly create circular reasoning; they notice if you argue in a circle you can prove anything. The same goes with science, you observe phenomena that occurs in the world and formulate laws and theories that explain this phenomena. |
The acceptance of unfalsifible beliefs with no evidence in a dogmatic sense leads to nonsense. |
|
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
Posted - 02/01/2003 : 09:50:29 [Permalink]
|
Slater: quote:
And there you have the whole problem with all of your answers. They don't come from looking for actual answers they come straight from your imagination. You have to use faith because, as you admit, you have no proof. But since you have no proof your faith is baseless.
However we see blind faith in materialism below, quote:
Prominent evolutionist Richard Lewontin wrote:
Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural. We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counterintuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.
{"Billions and Billions of Demons" New York Review of Books, January 9, 1997, p. 28; quoted at: www.ucsb.edu/fscf/FAQ/evolution.ht" target="_blank">http://id-www.ucsb.edu/fscf/FAQ/evolution.ht
(emph.mine) |
To deny logic you must use it.To deny Jesus Existed you must throw away all your knowledge of the ancient world. To deny ID
you must refute all analogical reasoning. So the question is why deny? |
|
|
|
SleepyTemplar
New Member
USA
4 Posts |
Posted - 02/01/2003 : 09:52:54 [Permalink]
|
| And that has exactly what to do with supporting dualism? |
The acceptance of unfalsifible beliefs with no evidence in a dogmatic sense leads to nonsense. |
|
|
|
Fireballn
Skeptic Friend
Canada
179 Posts |
Posted - 02/01/2003 : 17:58:28 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Slater
by faith you have them all
And there you have the whole problem with all of your answers. They don't come from looking for actual answers they come straight from your imagination. You have to use faith because, as you admit, you have no proof. But since you have no proof your faith is baseless.
Slater......exactly......on a natural level anyway. |
If i were the supreme being, I wouldn't have messed around with butterflies and daffodils. I would have started with lasers 8 o'clock day one!
-Time Bandits- |
| Edited by - Fireballn on 02/01/2003 18:04:22 |
|
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
Posted - 02/02/2003 : 08:40:02 [Permalink]
|
ST: quote:
An appeal to ignorance is hardly necessary. That would be no different than saying the lack of evidence for your deity proves it doesn't exist.
I take it that you didn't submit your form to collect your Million Dollars(http://www.us.net/life/ )? That speaks volumes,it tells me that in spite of your tough talk in claiming quote:
"that matter, in the proper configuration,can lead to thought."
that you haven't got a clue as to the origin of life or human thought.You see my friend it is you who "appeal to ignorance" because WE KNOW:1.That design = Intelligence;2.That Life comes from Life;3.By the same token, thought comes from THOUGHT;4.That what chance creates chance destroys. These are indisputable facts my friend and they destroy your worldview,so its time to either deny what WE ALL KNOW or your materialistic worldview.(ed.for exc.wd's). |
To deny logic you must use it.To deny Jesus Existed you must throw away all your knowledge of the ancient world. To deny ID
you must refute all analogical reasoning. So the question is why deny? |
| Edited by - darwin alogos on 02/02/2003 09:26:17 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
