|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
 Posted - 10/12/2005 : 19:44:29 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ASR
I am not using the words incorrectly, I am attempting to redefine them.
You are going somewhere no-one wants to follow.
quote:
Of course you see it as a mistake, because you have looked at my definition of them through the spectacles of the old way of thinking.
The "new" way may not be a better way. We don't think it is, that's why you won't have any followers here.
quote:
Evolution is considered a philosophy because it is not yet known to be absolute fact. Gravity is a fact, you claim it is a philosophy, but now that we know it definitely does exist, it is no longer philosophy but now science, a separation from philosophy because it cannot be debated, which is where your confusion lies.
Actually, we know more about how evolution works, than we know how gravity works. Evolution is more fact that gravity.
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
 |
|
|
ASR
Skeptic Friend
69 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2005 : 21:15:16 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Nobody has to refute "geeblewizzit + spoofugeon = emotion," since it is clearly meaning-free. Even using your "new" definitions, "hard facts + abstract thought = emotion" is devoid of anything refutable.
This is where the tables have turned, for once, you cannot refute it because you do not understand how the human brain creates an emotion.
quote:
Beyond which, if animals have emotions, but cannot philosophize (regardless the definition), then your equation is wrong on its face and you've refuted yourself.
Slighted dogs philosophize leaving excrement on a pillow to exact revenge. My sister's cat became sad when my sister moved out. When my sister got dogs, she became bitter and jealous (do I like my master? No. Why don't I? Because she got dogs.) Flipper commited suicide, I saw the interview with his trainer.
quote:
If your definition of 'existence' is "that which is governed by natural laws" then philosophy (and the act of philosophizing) must also be governed by natural laws, since philosophy (and the act) assuredly exist. So, why do you have a problem with something governed by natural laws creating something else governed by natural laws?
My problem is that who what when where why and how are not laws, natural law cannot construct unnatural thinking.
quote:
This assumes that God exists. If He is not governed by natural laws (which seems to be what His proponents claim), then He doesn't exist, by your "logic."
God took physical form on Earth, he is a physical being. Otherwise, the thought of a spirit or a ghost is nothing new to science or philosophy and thus your point is mute.
quote:
Well, there's the problem right there: evolutionary theory doesn't claim any given trait is necessary for survival, only that a trait which increases survival will itself tend to survive and be passed to future generations.
I deleted the part that this was about, so I can't comment, but for now I will say point made.
quote:
Have you examined all of the planets in the universe and discovered that no such variations exist, anywhere?
If you read my argument on my website you would know that I was defining the HUMAN universe. I mentioned that we probably cannot comprehend how an alien thinks. But with evolution you go with the facts that lead to a logical conclusion about how life began on earth, and if you examine it, it falls short of anything more than science and philosophy. This is an argument for creationism, for all the species on earth it seems unlikely that evolution will produce another form of thinking, since it hasn't yet.
quote:
Yes, which is why actual science and actual philosophy are much more robust and widespread than your geeblewizzit and spoofungeon.
If that is true then name something that cannot be categorized in my definition of science/philosophy/mix |
From the moon they looked down to see if we measured up |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2005 : 21:54:18 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ASR
quote:
Nobody has to refute "geeblewizzit + spoofugeon = emotion," since it is clearly meaning-free. Even using your "new" definitions, "hard facts + abstract thought = emotion" is devoid of anything refutable.
This is where the tables have turned, for once, you cannot refute it because you do not understand how the human brain creates an emotion.
No-one knows exactly, so you don't have the upper hand.
And I don't understand why you insist to use your own made up definition of 'evolution' and 'philosophy' even though you know that we don't accept your definition. You're acting like a broken vinyl-record running the same groove again and again.
quote:
But with evolution you go with the facts that lead to a logical conclusion about how life began on earth, and if you examine it, it falls short of anything more than science and philosophy.
Your definition of science and philosophy, or ours? Because as long as you are using your definition of the words, we will not understand what you are trying to tell us.
quote:
This is an argument for creationism, for all the species on earth it seems unlikely that evolution will produce another form of thinking, since it hasn't yet.
That is a logical fallacy: Argument from incredulity. Just because it hasn't produced it yet doesn't exclude it from happening later.
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
GeeMack
SFN Regular
USA
1093 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2005 : 22:17:44 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ASR...
This is where the tables have turned, for once, you cannot refute it because you do not understand how the human brain creates an emotion.
The comment was, "Nobody has to refute 'geeblewizzit + spoofugeon = emotion,' since it is clearly meaning-free." Although that point was plainly made, obviously you missed it. No "tables have turned." You just don't get it. I mentioned before that some remedial reading courses might help you.quote:
Slighted dogs philosophize leaving excrement on a pillow to exact revenge. My sister's cat became sad when my sister moved out. When my sister got dogs, she became bitter and jealous (do I like my master? No. Why don't I? Because she got dogs.) Flipper commited suicide, I saw the interview with his trainer.
You continue to make some pretty far fetched claims without evidentiary support. It seems like you're saying since you can't possibly believe evolution is true, it isn't. That does not constitute evidence. It does lend credence to the notion that you're not intelligent enough, or not willing to understand evolution.quote:
God took physical form on Earth, he is a physical being. Otherwise, the thought of a spirit or a ghost is nothing new to science or philosophy and thus your point is mute.
And your evidence for this is? Without evidence these are just more irrelevant comments.quote:
If you read my argument on my website you would know that I was defining the HUMAN universe. I mentioned that we probably cannot comprehend how an alien thinks. But with evolution you go with the facts that lead to a logical conclusion about how life began on earth, and if you examine it, it falls short of anything more than science and philosophy. This is an argument for creationism, for all the species on earth it seems unlikely that evolution will produce another form of thinking, since it hasn't yet.
You aren't supporting creationism, nor are you providing any substantive argument against evolution. You're deluded, and you're babbling nonsense. You'll find very few people on Earth who will refute nonsense, but that doesn't mean nonsense must therefore be reality.
The fact that you are intellectually deficient, or otherwise incapable of understanding the scientific method, is not support for your delusions being facts of any sort. Again, your belief that you are holding your own in this discussion comes from your having such poor communication skills. You don't have the vaguest understanding of the scientific process, and your knowledge of the theory of evolution is clearly lacking. Until you can communicate your thoughts in a clear and cogent manner, get a grasp on the necessary steps required to develop and present a scientific theory, and gain at least conversational knowledge about evolution, your comments continue to simply be gibberish.quote:
If that is true then name something that cannot be categorized in my definition of science/philosophy/mix
Since we've already accepted your definitions of science and philosophy are exactly equivalent to "geeblewizzit" and "spoofugeon", whether or not anything can be categorized by your definitions of those words is moot. It is only relevant to your delusion, and although it's safe to assume your delusion is important to you, it has no basis in reality and no bearing on how the real world works.
|
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2005 : 23:09:57 [Permalink]
|
I hope somebody is making sure ASR is taking his/her meds.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 10/13/2005 : 00:03:36 [Permalink]
|
Quite frankly, I don't understand what it is we're talking about here. I see no discussion of the theory of evolution that makes any sense, nor has there been anything coherent put forth supporting creation. All there has been, on all sides of the argument, is a lot of philosophical jabber of the sort my brother used to get into when he was in college, and I didn't understand it then, either.
<shrugs> One man's philosophy is another's bullshit, and none of it makes any difference at all to an ant. Doesn't make a hell of a lot to me either, comes to that.
So, from an evolutionary point of view, or a creation point of view if we must, is an ant in any way superior to a human? Or vise-versa?
Is the theory of evolution a mere philosophy? Is creationism? And by what reasoning is that conclusion reached and what emperical evidence supports that reasoning?
Ah well, out on the limb I go again: the theory of evolution is so well supported by all of the available evidence found and studied thus far, it is a theory in name only, and only because of the scientific definition of 'theory'. For all practical purposes, it is a stone fact.
Now, who's gonna saw that limb off?
 |
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
|
furshur
SFN Regular
USA
1536 Posts |
Posted - 10/13/2005 : 06:23:00 [Permalink]
|
quote:
My writing skills have taken a considerable blow since developing schizophrenia, I apologize for incoherency, but I'm in a recovery stage.
ASR, I sincerely wish you continued progress in your recovery.
|
If I knew then what I know now then I would know more now than I know. |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 10/13/2005 : 07:29:42 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ASR
quote:
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
quote:
Originally posted by ASR
all things that can be defined with yes or no i should say.
False dilemma.
http://www.datanation.com/fallacies/distract/fd.htm
Hydrogen content of the Sun: Yes? No? When? 70%?
Philosophy asks "Whats the hydrogen content of the sun?" philosophy answers "Around 70%" BUT is this TRUE? Science question "Is the hydrogen content of the sun 70%? answer: Yes"
No. Science measures and observes. By shifting the answer into the question, you make a false dilemma. Philosophy asks the question "is this all I am or am I something more". Something that is dreamed about and wondered about.
"How does this work" is a science question. "how much of this is there" is a science question.
You cannot redefine words at your leisure and then expect others to conform to your redefinition. We'll stick with the standard definitions to words as it is necessary to have common definitions of words when expressing concepts. It cuts down on misunderstandings. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 10/13/2005 : 07:35:32 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ASR
Whatever, I bit my tongue when philosophize was spelled philosophy. Rather than ask intelligent questions you make me out to be an idiot, you obviously don't understand some of what I am saying, which is partially my fault from a poorly written essay, however you could ask for clarification, but your ego will not allow it.
We've seen a few people who have claimed to be the father of new knowledge and skepticism. We've also heard them bray at being insulted and put down because we asked basic questions and insisted on a common nomenclature.
We have read your essay, understood it in the context of commonly accepted nomenclature and responded. Your responses have been somewhat cryptic and simplistic and we have refuted those contentions as a means to spark responses by you to better define or defend your position. You have now said that you will not be bound by common nomeclature. Therefore, further conversation is useless with you as we have no common frame of reference.
We still contend that the existance of philosophy and emotion is meaningless to the existance of evolution as a biological process. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
pleco
SFN Addict
USA
2998 Posts |
Posted - 10/13/2005 : 08:23:25 [Permalink]
|
Evolution has produced a wide variety of life on this planet (and other planets, probably). Of this wide variety. a species evolved that is able produce what the species itself calls "abstract thought". Objectively, thought is merely chemical reactions in the brains of humans, following the familiar laws of physics and chemistry. Abstract thought, much like sharp rocks and fire, is merely a tool used by humans to help the species survive. Other species may exhibit abstract thought, especially the ones that are the closest relatives to humans.
I see no reason or evidence to place the ability to think abstractly as anything other than an evolved adaptation that so far has worked for humans, though it may eventually lead to the extinction of the species.
I submit the following two abstract thoughts:
Love is an abstract thought which helps procreate the species. Merely a modification of the instinct to pro-create. Why do we have this? If we didn't, we wouldn't be discussing this in the first place, since humans would be an extinct species long ago.
War is more than a mere competition for resources though early in the human development war was only a competition until abstract thought evolved. Now, with the "advance" of abstract thought, humans have the capability to completely wipe themselves off the planet over ideas like "religion" or "politics", not over resources (though this still plays a major role and usuall the abstract is used to cover this)
Evolution does not care nor has the ability to care about what happens to humans as a species. If/when humans become extinct, then another species may evolve to fill the niche. Our existence may be keeping further devlopment of sentient beings on this planet from happening. |
by Filthy
The neo-con methane machine will soon be running at full fart. |
|
| Edited by - pleco on 10/13/2005 08:28:39 |
|
|
|
furshur
SFN Regular
USA
1536 Posts |
Posted - 10/13/2005 : 08:28:49 [Permalink]
|
I'm really getting confused on the whole lets change the meaning of commonly used terms.
I think that based on ASR's definition of science, creationism is science as illustrated by the following question.
Q Is there any proof to support creationism?
A No.
Therefore creationism is a science.
Right??
|
If I knew then what I know now then I would know more now than I know. |
|
|
|
astropin
SFN Regular
USA
970 Posts |
Posted - 10/13/2005 : 10:13:24 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by filthy
Did you know that Termites were among the first, terrestrial arthropods to use chemical warfare? And that some species of them were the ancestors of cockroaches as well as Tom DeLay?
S'true.
Filthy, I would love to sit on a porch and have a beer with you. That go's for most of the regulars on this board. We should have a Skeptic Friends get together.
Time for this thread to be closed...I think. |
I would rather face a cold reality than delude myself with comforting fantasies.
You are free to believe what you want to believe and I am free to ridicule you for it.
Atheism:
The result of an unbiased and rational search for the truth.
Infinitus est numerus stultorum |
|
|
|
Siberia
SFN Addict
Brazil
2322 Posts |
Posted - 10/13/2005 : 10:31:59 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by astropin
quote:
Originally posted by filthy
Did you know that Termites were among the first, terrestrial arthropods to use chemical warfare? And that some species of them were the ancestors of cockroaches as well as Tom DeLay?
S'true.
Filthy, I would love to sit on a porch and have a beer with you. That go's for most of the regulars on this board. We should have a Skeptic Friends get together.
Time for this thread to be closed...I think.
Me too! Though I don't like beer... I'll have a soft drink instead 
But alas, I am too stranded in the southern hemisphere... |
"Why are you afraid of something you're not even sure exists?"
- The Kovenant, Via Negativa
"People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs."
-- unknown
|
|
|
|
furshur
SFN Regular
USA
1536 Posts |
Posted - 10/13/2005 : 11:25:14 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Me too! Though I don't like beer... I'll have a soft drink instead
But alas, I am too stranded in the southern hemisphere...
Well it's settled then...
PARTY at Siberia's house! |
If I knew then what I know now then I would know more now than I know. |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
