1 edit
I can respect theists who base their belief on personal experience (although I argue that personal experience is not proof) or on "gut feeling" (in which case they should not try to evangelise and pursuade others who do not have that "gut feeling"😉
However I am enraged by those that give "proof" for their beliefs, particularly when these same characters debunk scientific proof for established theory like ; big-bang, evolution, etc.
To debate:
WHAT DRIVES THESE IDIOTS TO DEFEND THEIR RIDICULOUS POSITIONS?
OR
Is their Logic superior to mine .......................... ?
PLEASE NOTE
This is NOT an attack on theists, only an attack on theists who insist their faith is "provable" "self-evident" or "logical".
1 edit
Originally posted by wolfgang59The only way to get into deeper spiritual understandings is to discard dualisms such as "superior" and such. Any devisive terms like that one shoud be changed/be upgraded.
I can respect theists who base their belief on personal experience (although I argue that personal experience is not proof) or on "gut feeling" (in which case they should not try to evangelise and pursuade others who do not have that "gut feeling"😉.
However I am enraged by those that give "proof" for their beliefs, particularly when these same characte ...[text shortened]... RIDICULOUS POSITIONS?
OR
Is their Logic superiour to mine ..........................
Gut feelings are not nearly as good as personal experience, and even with PE we still need to weed out the ones that have had a clear, non bised take on their experince, and those that just have "fleeting visions" ,(often clouded by their own biases), without furthur proof.
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
Originally posted by karoly aczelI'm as one with you on discarding dualisms, but as a basis for theism, the only personal experiences I feel a need to weed out are those that are not my own.😉
The only way to get into deeper spiritual understandings is to discard dualisms such as "superior" and such. Any devisive terms like that one shoud be changed/be upgraded.
Gut feelings are not nearly as good as personal experience, and even with PE we still need to weed out the ones that have had a clear, non bised take on their experince, and those ...[text shortened]... at just have "fleeting visions" ,(often clouded by their own biases), without furthur proof.
Originally posted by wolfgang59Well then I don't know if your attack is directed at me or not.
I can respect theists who base their belief on personal experience (although I argue that personal experience is not proof) or on "gut feeling" (in which case they should not try to evangelise and pursuade others who do not have that "gut feeling"😉
However I am enraged by those that give "proof" for their beliefs, particularly when these same character ...[text shortened]... attack on theists who insist their faith is "provable" "self-evident" or "logical".
Because I think my faith is logical and rational. But I do not think it should be logical to anyone without faith... nor was it logical to me, before I had faith.
Does that make any sense?
Originally posted by sumydidThe heart has its own reasons ! Seriously speaking, the emotional half of our brain, which is the right half, controlling all emotions, activities like sports, music, gymnastics, dance, singing, poetry, is very much developed in women. The ability to arrive at flash decisions, intuition are also governed by this half. Faith is governed by this brain. It is as active as the logical left brain.
Well then I don't know if your attack is directed at me or not.
Because I think my faith is logical and rational. But I do not think it should be logical to anyone without faith... nor was it logical to me, before I had faith.
Does that make any sense?
Originally posted by rvsakhadeoSo you're saying I'm a girly man?
The heart has its own reasons ! Seriously speaking, the emotional half of our brain, which is the right half, controlling all emotions, activities like sports, music, gymnastics, dance, singing, poetry, is very much developed in women. The ability to arrive at flash decisions, intuition are also governed by this half. Faith is governed by this brain. It is as active as the logical left brain.
How DARE you. 😠
Originally posted by sumydidProviding you can trace your logical argument for your relgion back to personal-experience/gut-feeling/holy-spirit or whatever mystic feelings you have had (still have) then fine, I can respect that.
Well then I don't know if your attack is directed at me or not.
Because I think my faith is logical and rational. But I do not think it should be logical to anyone without faith... nor was it logical to me, before I had faith.
Does that make any sense?
I am not attacking any individual - only the pretension that religion is somehow a logical conclusion to the universe arouund us. There is NO PROOF. (Although individuals may have personal proof to satisfy themselves.)
Originally posted by wolfgang59It sounds like you are attacking this IDIOT.
I can respect theists who base their belief on personal experience (although I argue that personal experience is not proof) or on "gut feeling" (in which case they should not try to evangelise and pursuade others who do not have that "gut feeling"😉
However I am enraged by those that give "proof" for their beliefs, particularly when these same character ...[text shortened]... attack on theists who insist their faith is "provable" "self-evident" or "logical".
Originally posted by sumydidNo, not at all. While many women do have well developed right brains, it has nothing to do with femininity. Many men too have dominant right brains. It might of interest to you to know that William James put forth that i) the tender minded temparament is religous, likes to have definite and unchanging dogmas and a priori truths, takes to free will, idealism, monism, and optimism. ii) the tough minded temparament is irreligous, materialistic, empiricist, sceptical, pessimistic. There are some temparaments which take up theories from both groups.
So you're saying I'm a girly man?
How DARE you. 😠
2 edits
Originally posted by rvsakhadeosome people just dont like it that sometimes words can have two meanings, or that
No, not at all. While many women do have well developed right brains, it has nothing to do with femininity. Many men too have dominant right brains. It might of interest to you to know that William James put forth that i) the tender minded temparament is religous, likes to have definite and unchanging dogmas and a priori truths, takes to free will, ideal ...[text shortened]... st, sceptical, pessimistic. There are some temparaments which take up theories from both groups.
theories and scientific data are open to interpretation.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieVery true. The approach to knowledge, must be free from prejudices of every kind. Arbitrary categorisation like William James did, hinders rather than helps, although in the first flush, it appears that it has helped to simplify matters.
some people just dont like it that sometimes words can have two meanings, or that
theories and scientific data are open to interpretation.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
1 edit
Originally posted by galveston75
Well this is one thing we agree on. I think he's calling the kettle black.... How anyone could fall for the THEORY of evolution I'll never understand.
Take 20 minutes and find out.
EDIT:
and here are the scripts from those videos if you don't have the bandwidth for them
http://darwinwasright.homestead.com/15thFFoCPt1.html
http://darwinwasright.homestead.com/15thFFoCPt2.html
Originally posted by googlefudgeI think some are trying to change the definiton of evolution because
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wv6kgjOEL0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGmLDKQp_Qc
Take 20 minutes and find out.
EDIT:
and here are the scripts from those videos if you don't have the bandwidth for them
http://darwinwasright.homestead.com/15thFFoCPt1.html
http://darwinwasright.homestead.com/15thFFoCPt2.html
they are beginning to realize it doen't work.