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.
I don't recall ever saying that "debate" - strictly speaking - is necessary for critical thinking, but a willingness to understand alternative perspectives definitely is an important aspect, and you are not really going to understand alternative perspectives if you refuse to listen to the people who are most knowledgeable about those perspectives. And when it comes to views that you don't like, the most knowledgeable people could be people who you don't like....
.
Or how about this. I have listened to the "alternate perspectives." I do understand the perspective. I was surrounded by that perspective for decades. I found it wanting. I found other perspectives that made more sense to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gaylenwoof
...it does require careful consideration of the best evidence and arguments for and against whatever view is being critically considered.
Yes I did that. That's exactly why I am where i am now.
I have "tried on and found wanting" a number of different belief systems over the past 5 decades.
...
...I think it would be foolish for anyone to simply accept your word on this unless, of course, they have a mystical experience of their own that leads them to the same conclusion. I don't see any scientific or logical reasons to accept your views about the role of Jesus.
...you searched around for a way to make sense of it, and you eventually settled on the Jesus narrative as the best fit. This suggests to me that the experience, in and of itself, did not come pre-packaged with any one particular necessary interpretation.
Your experience does not, in itself, specify that Jesus is the perfect resonance with God, nor does it specify that Jesus is the only perfect resonance with God.
...I am simply not convinced that Jesus is the perfect resonance, and even if he is, I'm not convinced that he is the only perfect one.....
MPD acknowledges what you are saying Gaylen that (according to MPD) typically interpretations of "visions" are not accurate:
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD
.... Humans are flawed and fallible beings. They receive INSPIRATIONS (not dictation ) from God and use their existing knowledge, beliefs, and superstitions to interpret them. It would be extraordinarily unusual for them to be accurate. That does NOT mean the original inspirations were flawed. It means the human receivers were flawed and influenced by their lack of knowledge, superstitions, primitive beliefs, values....
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 02-04-2018 at 02:23 AM..
Or we could start with the non-religious truth tellers such as Lawrence Krauss, Sam Harris and Neil deGrasse Tyson who have offered a lot of great insight to humanity.
This is what religion does very well.
Again this is what religion does...better not worship any other god!
again? thats not what you said at first. Yes, fundamentals claiming "worship my god only" are the problem. They are as bad as "deny anything" to sell atheist fundamentals. Atheist that say "shun, hide, don't speak of science that makes it harder to recruit my type of atheists" are equally as bad.
and basically is what I have been saying since day one. I don't "how the universe works" base on team t-shirt colors.
actually you said list the woes of the behavior of religion's people.
"There are problems with religion, the "holy" books and the behaviors of "religious" folks.
I could pen a list that would take up pages."
"holy books'? Its literal people that are the problem with a book. heck, I have seen people ruin a great idea like "help others when one can" by taking it to a literal form of "I say I can take what I want from people to help who I want." They take a great idea of "it's our duty to offer charity" and weaponries it to naked anti-religious socialism.
I listed some people like poh pot, stalin, hitler, and moa that did far worse than any religious person to date.
I am ok with the guys you isted but harris. Degrasse is my hero and presents science views exactly how I feel they should be presented. Harris is a light weight.
I have always said maddy, use science data and the scientific method to form any belief you want. as grey points out, when people are taught how to believe the magical stuff kind of falls off naturally.
Where i diverge from your sect of atheism is using science a a club, by people that do not understand the science. And I disagree with how you beat religious people over the head and do not offer your spiritual whoo stuff as an alternative to them. Look at krauss' universe from nothing. It was not from nothing, it totaled to zero. and any idea about how the universe started is unknown and made up. Its as made up as "god". m-theory, branes, quantum soups, are all made up and untreatable, let alone untestable..
Literal believers (fundymentalists) in "universe from nothing" completely misrepresent what it says and where it came from.
so what do we do and still be open and honest. we offer them what we think maddy. with no strings attached.
When people ask me "well, what do you belief", I offer them the best descriptor of how the universe works. I say, The biosphere as life and the connections all life has to all other life is what people are misrepresenting as this god thing. Its a valid alternative. Its certainly more valid than deny everything and beating people over the head with science against religion. Both are deceitful.
I don't just club them over the head with how wrong they are. Its offers the a soft alternative that encourages them to uses their commonsense. I also ask them "did I ask you to drop commonsense?" I say, "In fact, I used what you know to describe my belief." I used what we know to describe the short comingings in my belief and your belief.
I am of a defect sect of atheism than you maddy. I am not afraid of religion or the letters, g, o, d. I only do how the universe works.
Last edited by Arach Angle; 02-04-2018 at 06:37 AM..
Oh so now science can establish God exists? When did that happen? Give us a link to a journal article.
What he means is that we can try to test if the universe is acting like a quantum computer. We can test if the universe has quantum computing processing that produces patterns we classify as life.
so what do you think? is it doing it or not? and can we test the process? We can list the traits and compare it to the traits of your god.
Or how about this. I have listened to the "alternate perspectives." I do understand the perspective. I was surrounded by that perspective for decades. I found it wanting. I found other perspectives that made more sense to me.
Yes I did that. That's exactly why I am where i am now.
I have "tried on and found wanting" a number of different belief systems over the past 5 decades.
well, we in science and engineering, we accepted that we die "wanting to know and won't know", and its a buzz kill to be sure. so what do some of us do? we focus on what we do get to know; compared to what our forefathers didn't know.
This is fantastic.
I love this. Rich with imagery and meaning on sooooo many levels.
Genius. Poetic. Powerful.
I thank you, deat lady. I have a way with words and imagery. But that of course does not make me right.
I have (I hope) explained how I have tired to get Mystic's' beliefs and now explain why they fail on a number of levels.
I think enough had been done that any objective observer will see that at least by objections are valid and not because of lack on understanding, education, open -mindedness or any of the deficiencies that Mystic has imputed to me.
I was a way a while celebrating making it to 71 (cheer me on) with the family, and coming back, I think I have done enough and I should leave the thread to Mystic and others.
I really don't want to waste time banging away at a really quite unimportant Take on Theistic evolution.
"holy books'? Its literal people that are the problem with a book.
Well, yes. but it is even deeper than that: it is the idea that a "holy book" should be viewed as an authority by the ones who follow any part of it as opposed to "a source in 'the fossil record'" that expresses elements of truth that have been found to be true by other methods.
It is not just believers who have trouble with this, it is scoffers who view any citation of those books as an appeal to authority rather than just the expression of a truth it is meant to be.
I have "tried on and found wanting" a number of different belief systems over the past 5 decades.
Would you be willing to watch this 6-minute video and let me know if there is anything in it that highlights one of the belief systems that you have rejected? I think this would help me to understand your perspective.
Would you be willing to watch this 6-minute video and let me know if there is anything in it that highlights one of the belief systems that you have rejected? I think this would help me to understand your perspective.
I agree with most of what the video presents, including these elements:
Look at our beliefs
Clearly identify our beliefs
What we believe and why we believe it
I would add:
Is this belief valid for me still?
I held this belief at one time but is it still valid for me?
Is it a healthy and life affirming belief?
Where did I get this belief?
What people or groups believe this and do I want to be associated with them?
What feelings or attitudes does this belief incite?
What behaviors or actions does this belief lead people to?
Do I choose to keep this belief or is it time for me to discard this belief?
If I am changing this belief what am I changing it to?
I disagree that "one shouldn't be told how to live"
If im told eat healthy, than i want guidelines on what is healthy eating and what is not. If i'm told live an ethical life I want guidance on how to achieve that. Otherwise the practical how to do it piece (the most important in actually putting it into action) is missing. "Do this" falls flat in my view without a "how to" guide.
I agree that if we don't unearth and examine our beliefs we're stuck with whatever people around us seem to believe or whatever we were taught growing up which may be a pack of lies. That is default belief not chosen belief.
I take it a step further regarding the importance of not only examining and identifying our underlying beliefs but also consciously choosing our own beliefs. Because our beliefs create our reality. The beliefs we hold are the blueprint that creates our reality. So yes they are important.
Also beliefs are not facts.
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 02-04-2018 at 10:36 AM..
I thank you, deat lady. I have a way with words and imagery. But that of course does not make me right.
I have (I hope) explained how I have tired to get Mystic's' beliefs and now explain why they fail on a number of levels.
I think enough had been done that any objective observer will see that at least by objections are valid and not because of lack on understanding, education, open -mindedness or any of the deficiencies that Mystic has imputed to me.
I was a way a while celebrating making it to 71 (cheer me on) with the family, and coming back, I think I have done enough and I should leave the thread to Mystic and others.
I really don't want to waste time banging away at a really quite unimportant Take on Theistic evolution.
Happy Birthday Trans! I truly enjoy your posts also your comments and insights regarding music they opened doors for me I had not yet explored.
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 02-04-2018 at 10:38 AM..
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.
