Originally posted by SuzianneThe problem is, when we subject your 'belief method' to the 'scientific method' it fails.
But faith is also supported by a type of "scientific method". Call it a "belief method".
I agree that science is not faith, but they both yield to their own "method".
This leads me to call faith, like science, another type of knowledge.
Describe your 'belief method' as best you can. Give it to a number of different people. Set them on the 'method' for a few years, without allowing them to communicate with each other.
Will they come to the same results?
If two people have different, contradictory beliefs, do they both have knowledge?
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI'm no materialist, btw. I wonder why science knowledge offends you.
You keep telling yourself that Slacker while you offer up incense to an effigy of Darwin in your University shrines and read from the same hymn books with your abiogenesis creations myths and religious mantras. E=MC^2 All hail the God of Science, in you we put our hope. And yet ask it a question - Why the universe? and look it is absolutely bereft, Man what a bunch of spangles you materialists are.
Why the universe? Therefore your version of the gods, of course.
Originally posted by twhiteheadAnd when we subject your 'scientific method' to the 'belief method' it also fails.
The problem is, when we subject your 'belief method' to the 'scientific method' it fails.
Describe your 'belief method' as best you can. Give it to a number of different people. Set them on the 'method' for a few years, without allowing them to communicate with each other.
Will they come to the same results?
If two people have different, contradictory beliefs, do they both have knowledge?
You judge this 'belief method' by the same standards you judge the 'scientific method'. They're not the same thing, as 'belief' is not the same as 'science'.
It gets so old dealing with the inflexible minds in here sometimes.
1 edit
Originally posted by apathistScientific knowledge offensive? You think you can make up a narrative and have people believe it?
I'm no materialist, btw. I wonder why science knowledge offends you.
Why the universe? Therefore your version of the gods, of course.
Why not the Universe?
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIn the middle of July, it's TOO "roasty toasty".
That's 37 Celsius, nice and roasty toasty.
Every year, somebody forgets their toddler is in the car and by the time they remember he's there, he's dead. A few pets are lost this way too. Arizona heat is no joke in the summer. Combine this with the prevalence of backyard pools, and summer is dangerous for kids here.
Originally posted by apathistGod is not an elephant.
You are not average, Suzianne.
Throughout history we invent religions, there must be a reason why.
Think of blind men and elephants.
And man will be man. He always looks for acceptance from his peers and for the easy way out. The wise man looks for acceptance from God and is not afraid of a little hard work.
"Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:
Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it." -- Matthew 7:13-14, KJV
Originally posted by SuzianneTrue, which is why man looks for those that will say what man wants to hear, man likes that
God is not an elephant.
And man will be man. He always looks for acceptance from his peers and for the easy way out. The wise man looks for acceptance from God and is not afraid of a little hard work.
"Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:
Be ...[text shortened]... row is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it." -- Matthew 7:13-14, KJV
much more than dealing with hard truths.
Originally posted by SuzianneI judge all methods by the scientific method because the scientific method is known to be reliable. If you have an argument for why the scientific method does not work, let's hear it. I see a possible Nobel Prize in your future!
You judge this 'belief method' by the same standards you judge the 'scientific method'. They're not the same thing, as 'belief' is not the same as 'science'.
It gets so old dealing with the inflexible minds in here sometimes.
I think my point conclusively demonstrates that your 'belief method' does not work. If you disagree, rather than making stupid comments about the inflexibility of my mind, why not give a counter argument or explain where I went wrong?
Have I misunderstood what your 'belief method' entails?
Does your 'belief method' produce different results from what I have suggested?
Or does logic not apply to your 'belief method'?
Perhaps you could start by giving a brief description of what your 'belief method' actually entails?
Originally posted by SuzianneArizona! Heat deaths every year. PSA for your pets. Free water, as a matter of law. I walk three miles to move two, just for the shade.
In the middle of July, it's TOO "roasty toasty".
Every year, somebody forgets their toddler is in the car and by the time they remember he's there, he's dead. A few pets are lost this way too. Arizona heat is no joke in the summer. Combine this with the prevalence of backyard pools, and summer is dangerous for kids here.
Originally posted by SuzianneGod is not an elephant.Buddhists. For example. What does your view say happens to them in the afterlife.
And man will be man. He always looks for acceptance from his peers and for the easy way out. The wise man looks for acceptance from God and is not afraid of a little hard work.
"Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:
Because ...[text shortened]... row is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it." -- Matthew 7:13-14, KJV[/b]