KellyJay's Logic

I thought of this while browsing the Science forum but I think it is more appropriate here.

Having read many of his posts and seen a pattern that I think is clear to most people, I think KellyJay's attitude to evidence and what can be deduced using the scientific method is similar to the tortoise in Lewis Carrol's "What the tortoise said to Achilles"

http://fair-use.org/mind/1895/04/what-the-tortoise-said-to-achilles

He also seems to subscribe to a form of "Last Thursdayism"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omphalos_(theology)

though he will never admit it. He does consistantly defend those who think "Last thursday" occured 6000 years ago, always using the same argument so I am tempted to think that this is what he actually believes.

I'm not particularly looking for an answer from KellyJay, partly because all such answers have previously amounted to versions of the above two ideas rather than real answer to the posited questions. You (KJ) don't even confirm that your arguments are actually what you believe. but I'd like to know what others think of this:

Do others think that KJ actually believes the arguments he puts forward? Or is he just constantly trolling?

--- Penguin

Originally posted by Penguin
I thought of this while browsing the Science forum but I think it is more appropriate here.

Having read many of his posts and seen a pattern that I think is clear to most people, I think KellyJay's attitude to evidence and what can be deduced using the scientific method is similar to the tortoise in Lewis Carrol's "What the tortoise said to Achilles"

h ...[text shortened]... eves the arguments he puts forward? Or is he just constantly trolling?

--- Penguin

I think the *effect* of what he is doing is trolling. But his intent is not.

I've heard the same line of arguing, the JK retorics, from some extrem racists, feminists, communists, anarkists, flat-earthers, environmentalists, anti-this, and anti-that, some extrem believers in god, satan, Velikovsky, von Däniken, money, their reverent, leader and even their own father. But they all strongly believe what they're believing. They all dismiss evidence of ignorance, or eye-shaders or sheer stupidity. They are not accustomed to know that we are a lot of people here on Earth with diffeerent beliefs, some scientific, some religious, and they all think that they all have the Truth on their side, even if they are in an extrem minority. "I'm right, everyone else's wrong!"

My experience of mental houses, shows that many of them are found there. They just cant handle their own conspiracy theories.

So I don't really think KJ thinks himself he is trolling, he just does.

Originally posted by Penguin
I thought of this while browsing the Science forum but I think it is more appropriate here.

Having read many of his posts and seen a pattern that I think is clear to most people, I think KellyJay's attitude to evidence and what can be deduced using the scientific method is similar to the tortoise in Lewis Carrol's "What the tortoise said to Achilles"

h ...[text shortened]... eves the arguments he puts forward? Or is he just constantly trolling?

--- Penguin

her

Originally posted by duecer
her

Really?

And also, if KJ is female and not male, does this make a difference?

--- Penguin.

Originally posted by Penguin
Really?

And also, if KJ is female and not male, does this make a difference?

--- Penguin.

I'm pretty sure he mentioned he was a he somewhere on the science forum, but I don't care that much so I could be wrong.

And no it doesn't make a difference really.

Originally posted by Penguin
I thought of this while browsing the Science forum but I think it is more appropriate here.

Having read many of his posts and seen a pattern that I think is clear to most people, I think KellyJay's attitude to evidence and what can be deduced using the scientific method is similar to the tortoise in Lewis Carrol's "What the tortoise said to Achilles"

h ...[text shortened]... eves the arguments he puts forward? Or is he just constantly trolling?

--- Penguin

last thursdaysm is so awesome i am now a member. there is no spoon.

Originally posted by Penguin
I thought of this while browsing the Science forum but I think it is more appropriate here.

Having read many of his posts and seen a pattern that I think is clear to most people, I think KellyJay's attitude to evidence and what can be deduced using the scientific method is similar to the tortoise in Lewis Carrol's "What the tortoise said to Achilles"

h ...[text shortened]... eves the arguments he puts forward? Or is he just constantly trolling?

--- Penguin

KJ is no troll. I think he's a great, sincere guy (yes, KJ is a guy, not a gal, and prides himself on being a good father).

But I agree that it can be frustrating debating scientific matters with him because he exudes deep skepticism toward abductive reasoning -- but only very selectively (and inconsistently). As far as I can tell, he takes no issue with abductive reasoning in everyday cases; but as soon as the conclusions bear on religious propositions he holds dear, then the reasoning process suddenly transforms into a demonstration of mere "faith" where all conclusions seem to have the same epistemic value. It's a tough nut to crack!

But I really think he's a great guy -- no troll mentality.

KellyJay reminds me of Bishop Berkeley. He could also be a Christian Pyrrhonist, like Montaigne.

Can only echo LemonJello on the absence of troll mentality.

Originally posted by Penguin
I thought of this while browsing the Science forum but I think it is more appropriate here.

Having read many of his posts and seen a pattern that I think is clear to most people, I think KellyJay's attitude to evidence and what can be deduced using the scientific method is similar to the tortoise in Lewis Carrol's "What the tortoise said to Achilles"

h eves the arguments he puts forward? Or is he just constantly trolling?

--- Penguin

I haven't follow everything that KJ posted, but I get a very different impression of him. It seems to me that KJ understands that a large percentage of what everyone "knows" is taken on faith from an "authority" that they choose to recognize. He places the "authority" of the Bible above the "authority" of scientists. KJ also seems to understand that what science "knows" currently is very different from what science will "know" two or three hundred years from now and two or three hundred years from that. In every age, Man has liked believe that he had a realistic view of reality. History shows that Man has always been wrong in that belief. As much as many would like to think differently, Man is also wrong now.

I think that this is at the heart of what KJ keeps trying to say.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
I haven't follow everything that KJ posted, but I get a very different impression of him. It seems to me that KJ understands that a large percentage of what everyone "knows" is taken on faith from an "authority" that they choose to recognize. He places the "authority" of the Bible above the "authority" of scientists. KJ also seems to understand that what so wrong now.

I think that this is at the heart of what KJ keeps trying to say.

…Man has liked believe that he had a realistic view of reality. History shows that Man has ALWAYS been wrong in that belief.…(my emphasis)

has history shown that Man and science has been wrong in his belief that, for example, the Earth is round?

… As much as many would like to think differently, Man is also wrong now…

So do you believe that Man is now, for example, wrong about the Earth being round?

Do you think it is likely that many hundreds of years from now that science will be proven wrong about the Earth being round and that it is in fact flat? -or that the whole of physics and science is so wrong that it is in fact impossible for computer and nuclear power stations to work?

Science might be currently wrong about a few things such as some of the more dubious scientific theories not supported by good evidence or reasoning but it logically cannot be true that “Man has ALWAYS been wrong in the belief that he had a realistic view of reality” as you suggested. It must be possible to have “a realistic view of reality” by basing your judgment of reality on logic, observation and evidence since science has been proven correct about a lot of things.
If science was wrong about literally everything then modern technology wouldn’t work -so science must be right about SOME things -right?

Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
[b]…Man has liked believe that he had a realistic view of reality. History shows that Man has ALWAYS been wrong in that belief.…(my emphasis)

has history shown that Man and science has been wrong in his belief that, for example, the Earth is round?

… As much as many would like to think differently, Man is also wrong no ...[text shortened]... g then modern technology wouldn’t work -so science must be right about SOME things -right?

[/b]I didn't say that Man hasn't been right about some things. I said that Man has always been wrong in his belief that he had a true view of reality. If Man's view is not completely true, it is not true on the whole. I'd thought this would be understood. I guess there's no underestimating some.

If you Believe in the Bible is that not a True view of reality?

Originally posted by daniel58
If you Believe in the Bible is that not a True view of reality?

If it was then we wouldn't need a forum now would we?

KellyJays 'logic' ?
Lol.
Sorry Kelly but it seems funny to me.
Your still cool in my book though, even if you do lack a bit of logic at times🙂

I didn't say we did, but if you won't use the Bible, we have to use something else.