Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
* There must be a god since the majority of all people believe in a god.
or
* I don't want to be lumped together with other religionists.
???
The latter. I have never asserted ad populum. My certainty about God and my confidence in my Synthesis are derived experientially. The narratives in the spiritual fossil record simply add context and a rationale for my BELIEFS.
The latter. I have never asserted ad populum. My certainty about God and my confidence in my Synthesis are derived experientially. The narratives in the spiritual fossil record simply add context and a rationale for my BELIEFS.
As a person with an emphasis in paleontology in my geology degrees, the concept of a "spiritual fossil record" is nothing more than an attempt to make something which is not scientific sound scientific.
As a person with an emphasis in paleontology in my geology degrees, the concept of a "spiritual fossil record" is nothing more than an attempt to make something which is not scientific sound scientific.
Thinking abstractly is not a common feature of human cognitive functioning. But given the immeasurability of cognitive content (unlike our physical bones) the existence of indirect recorded cognitive content ("fossilized") as evidence of prior cognitive content is in principle NOT that dissimilar to fossilized bones. You ARE always going on about principles, Phet. .
Thinking abstractly is not a common feature of human cognitive functioning. But given the immeasurability of cognitive content (unlike our physical bones) the existence of indirect recorded cognitive content ("fossilized") as evidence of prior cognitive content is in principle NOT that dissimilar to fossilized bones. You ARE always going on about principles, Phet. .
I just googled "spiritual fossil record" and came up with...zilch. Except for a few posts on this forum. So much for a body of scientific knowledge.
I just googled "spiritual fossil record" and came up with...zilch. Except for a few posts on this forum. So much for a body of scientific knowledge.
His term does not even make sense. He is referring to doctrine that he thinks he has grown above but is still in current use by manynmore believers than himself. At which point did the bones o that doctrine be replaced my minerals and became fossils? Of course he is not speaking of literal mineral displacement however the original doctrines and beliefs are still aluve and with us.
Did Rock become a fossil when Rap became common, and his highly evolved beliefs are not even common on these forums?
I think Tolkein used more common word useage in creating Middle Earth.
His term does not even make sense. He is referring to doctrine that he thinks he has grown above but is still in current use by manynmore believers than himself. At which point did the bones o that doctrine be replaced my minerals and became fossils? Of course he is not speaking of literal mineral displacement however the original doctrines and beliefs are still aluve and with us.
Did Rock become a fossil when Rap became common, and his highly evolved beliefs are not even common on these forums?
I think Tolkein used more common word useage in creating Middle Earth.
I suspect his spiritual fossil record will become extinct.
I certainly understand your frustration with the fundies! But if I had to guess given your inexplicable animosity towards me, I would say you are mistakenly lumping me in with them for some reason.
Mystic, your arrogance is shining brightly right now. I was not talking about you. You weren't even in my mind but if you think the shoe fits, well then.....do you think you're the only one that harasses me? Hey, talk away about me all you want because it's all right here on C-D anyway right? It's my place to repeat what I've said if I so choose, it's none of your damn business. It's been years, let it go!
It's not like I haven't posted things that were rude and insulting, we all have. But to constantly hit me with your superior, "inexplicable" crap and turn around and talk about me like I'm not even here is beyond childish. How old are you?
And then you try to say that you were just trying to help. Pfffft that's another load of crap. Yeah, help me look bad. I'm an athiest now Mystic, you need to face it. Doesn't matter how I arrived here, what matters is that I did.
I was way over your creepiness until now. You've gone done it, you reopened that wound and I think I might be angry, is that ok with you and whoever thinks I'm going to come through their computer screen and punch them?
You guys (yes, you're in the group) are unbelievable. You wouldn't be here arguing with atheists and losing friends if you were soooo happy. You were once an atheist. And you require that all of us believe in some fairy tale just because you had an experience while meditating? I told you to stay away from those mushrooms.
Thinking abstractly is not a common feature of human cognitive functioning. But given the immeasurability of cognitive content (unlike our physical bones) the existence of indirect recorded cognitive content ("fossilized") as evidence of prior cognitive content is in principle NOT that dissimilar to fossilized bones. You ARE always going on about principles, Phet. .
Quote:
Originally Posted by phetaroi
I just googled "spiritual fossil record" and came up with...zilch. Except for a few posts on this forum. So much for a body of scientific knowledge.
I am beginning to question all your claims about your education and former job if you are not just trolling me. Do you actually NOT see the applicability of the abstract principle involved just because it is cognitive content and not physical bones???? If you are just punking me, you are doing a bad job of it.
I am beginning to question all your claims about your education and former job if you are not just trolling me. Do you actually NOT see the applicability of the abstract principle involved just because it is cognitive content and not physical bones???? If you are just punking me, you are doing a bad job of it.
I'm going to say it again. In my view the use of the phrase is an attempt to make something that is not scientific sound like it's scientific. I would go so far as to call it intellectual fraud.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
.
