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.
and you do get that you are describing exactly what Mystic does?
the only difference between me and most, I know we all do it to a degree. But its about levels and columns for me. periods and groups my man, periods and groups describe us all. lol, they even describe red.
I am coming to the conclusion that your ignorance (lack of knowledge) about the extant science and your lack of understanding is beyond redemption. Gaylen, the best expositor I have ever encountered, continues to fail to dent it so I do not feel bad about my failure to penetrate your lack of understanding.
mystic if nobody can understand or make sense of what you are saying then it is of little use or value to anyone except you.
baseball fable is fine for you.
just like virgin birth is fine for others.
neither is science.
they are both simply "religious beliefs"
absolutely identical
you seem desperate to avoid facing that simple fact
Your wriggling does you no good. While you are perhaps understandably conflating your argument that human perception was unreliable with the argument (in the matrix thread - and it may have been his) that we evolved to survive not to know the truth. But divine input gave us the truth (and your input on the revelation thread endorsed that view), my point was that you were making an invalid point because the scientific method counters the imperfect perceptions.
That was my argument and you have strawmanned it - twice now.
If you stopped to think instead of doing blind denial, you'd see that divine input is intended to circumvent imperfect human perception that works out the best attempt at truth that it can manage.
If that is not a match to your hypothesis then pray why should anybody believe in divine input revelation at all? And don't even think of denying that is what you argue, as your 'radio -mind' argument (if your leaky memory can even recall that one) was making that exact point.
The scientific method MITIGATES but does NOT counter the imperfection. So according to you, why should anyone believe in the scientific method? Divine inspiration does NOT remove the imperfections. Everything involving human perception is imperfect and can only be mitigated NOT eliminated. The evolution of the spiritual template in the spiritual fossil record evidences the imperfections as they are removed by advances in knowledge and eventually by the emergence of the Christ narrative.
The scientific method MITIGATES but does NOT counter the imperfection. So according to you, why should anyone believe in the scientific method? Divine inspiration does NOT remove the imperfections. Everything involving human perception is imperfect and can only be mitigated NOT eliminated. The evolution of the spiritual template in the spiritual fossil record evidences the imperfections as they are removed by advances in knowledge and eventually by the emergence of the Christ narrative.
= "magical thinking"
to use your parlance and vocabulary
read that to 3 people, or 5 or 10 people.
can you not hear how it sounds? in particular the line in bold?
that is not science.
i'll say it again.
that is not science. it is (more words of yours here) "dogma" and "doctrines of men"
which is fine and dandy, the baseball fable. but it is not science. you like to try and dress it up in words like "evolution" and "fossil record" and "evidence" and "advances in knowledge" and "synthesis" to make it sound like science.
but it is exactly what you criticize others for: magical thinking. religious dogma. religious beliefs. imaginary fantasy .
that is what it is. if those are things you loathe, then you are what you loathe.
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 01-30-2018 at 06:07 PM..
The scientific method MITIGATES but does NOT counter the imperfection. So according to you, why should anyone believe in the scientific method? Divine inspiration does NOT remove the imperfections. Everything involving human perception is imperfect and can only be mitigated NOT eliminated. The evolution of the spiritual template in the spiritual fossil record evidences the imperfections as they are removed by advances in knowledge and eventually by the emergence of the Christ narrative.
It mitigates,as you say, but you are overlooking that I argued that the results that we come up with are verified and validated again and again. We all use and rely on them.
What we can't verify and validate is 'we don't know' and the burden of proof falls on those who say they do to show it.
Bottom line - referring to human imperfect perception in talking about what we an take as reliable is an invalid argument. That is my point and that is all that my point was.
I would broadly agree with with you evolution of knowledge and understanding, but I do not agree that that there is any reason to claim a god is behind it. Why should we suppose there is?
It mitigates,as you say, but you are overlooking that I argued that the results that we come up with are verified and validated again and again. We all use and rely on them.
What we can't verify and validate is 'we don't know' and the burden of proof falls on those who say they do to show it.
Bottom line - referring to human imperfect perception in talking about what we an take as reliable is an invalid argument. That is my point and that is all that my point was.
I would broadly agree with with you evolution of knowledge and understanding, but I do not agree that that there is any reason to claim a god is behind it. Why should we suppose there is?
because there isn't nothing behind it. that's for sure. deny everything isn't really verified and validated time and time again. maybe by the most hard core fundy-think atheist type.
so you and your fundy think type on one side and the theist fundy on the other. You boiz sure are showing each other who is a fool alright. lmao.
The scientific method MITIGATES but does NOT counter the imperfection. So according to you, why should anyone believe in the scientific method? Divine inspiration does NOT remove the imperfections. Everything involving human perception is imperfect and can only be mitigated NOT eliminated. The evolution of the spiritual template in the spiritual fossil record evidences the imperfections as they are removed by advances in knowledge and eventually by the emergence of the Christ narrative.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRANSPONDER
It mitigates,as you say, but you are overlooking that I argued that the results that we come up with are verified and validated again and again. We all use and rely on them.
What we can't verify and validate is 'we don't know' and the burden of proof falls on those who say they do to show it.
This is where your train goes off the rails. Since "we don't know," your preference for the name Nature or Universe or Multiverse is no more the automatic default than my preference for the name God. You do NOT have a preferential position despite your inflated opinion of your view.
Quote:
Bottom line - referring to human imperfect perception in talking about what we an take as reliable is an invalid argument. That is my point and that is all that my point was.
Invalid in what way?
Your point is very unclear. There is no way whatsoever to remove the imperfection in our human perceptions or our understanding.
Quote:
I would broadly agree with with you evolution of knowledge and understanding, but I do not agree that there is any reason to claim a god is behind it. Why should we suppose there is?
For you and those who have no experience to draw on, there is no reason to suppose God is behind everything. You can retain your "we don't know" labels of Nature or Universe or Multiverse but they are in no way the default.
... you completely blind yourself to the BEST ideas being offered. By turning off the video at the first signs of discomfort, you missed virtually all of the key concepts being presented.
i gave you my opinion.
for me the best ideas offered are in the excerpt from the Foundation for Critical Thinking. it felt like a more neutral source. without any religious agenda. critical thinking is a human behavior and thought process. It has nothing to do with a person's religious beliefs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gaylenwoof
...
As for the "red flags" themselves: Are you saying that there are no false ideas or ideologies? Is the "Flat Earth" concept not a false idea? Isn't white supremacy a bad ideology? Isn't human slavery based on some bad ideas and bad ideologies? And shouldn't critical thinking help us to avoid these things? Notice I am not saying that we should apply purely black&white standards nor am I saying that we shouldn't ask why people think this way or that and explore some subtle distinctions; I'm just saying that, at the end of the day, critical thinking can help us make some critical decisions about such things. If you had watched more of the video, you would have seen that, in the overall context, it was not advocating simplistic "true false" inquiry...
i am saying it is simplistic to simply think in terms of "false" and "bad."
with critical thinking we need to be able to understand and articulate why it is harmful, why it is dangerous, what it can lead to, how it affects people, how it can be addressed.
we have seen some examples in this thread so far that could be explored further and make for important fruitful engaging discussion. I'd like to see that, how people address for instance: "why is it problematic when someone says 'respect is a crock.' ?" and "Why are double standards problematic? Why are double standards not rational? How can people address and resolve double standards? "
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 01-30-2018 at 08:09 PM..
i gave you my opinion.
for me the best ideas offered are in the excerpt from the Foundation for Critical Thinking. it felt like a more neutral source. without any religious agenda. critical thinking is a human behavior and thought process. It has nothing to do with a person's religious beliefs.
I don't think that the video really has a "religious agenda" - that is something that you are projecting into it. But if you were to actually watch the video, perhaps you could show where I'm mistaken?
Quote:
i am saying it is simplistic to simply think in terms of "false" and "bad."
It can be. But I think that, at some point, we ought to conclude that the Flat Earth theory is, frankly, just wrong insofar as it makes claims that are just not true. And brutally raping people is morally wrong. Yes you can have many hours of conversation making subtle distinctions and give anthropological evidence for the origins of rape and talk about relativism and explain the rapist's perspective and you could even tell a story that helps to understand why the rapist rapes, and so on. I've been in countless hours worth of conversations of this sort. But taking all of that into account ultimately does not change the bottom line: rape is morally wrong.
Quote:
with critical thinking we need to be able to understand and articulate why it is harmful, why it is dangerous, what it can lead to, how it affects people, how it can be addressed.
. Yes, but once again, taking all of this into account, rape is still morally wrong.
I don't think that the video really has a "religious agenda" - that is something that you are projecting into it. But if you were to actually watch the video, perhaps you could show where I'm mistaken?
It can be. But I think that, at some point, we ought to conclude that the Flat Earth theory is, frankly, just wrong insofar as it makes claims that are just not true. ...rape is still morally wrong.
i agree with you.
rape is morally wrong.
no one is saying it is not.
and i agree with you that the earth is not flat.
no one is saying it is not.
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.
