Thread: Religion of Peace Update

Originally Posted by ArmadaBC

What is a man ? What is an atheist ? Definition cannot describe all that is a man, if it did so the definition would lose it utility as it would be a list of traits incredibly long. All knowledge is castle built on definition and thus can only be true in a certain set of circumstances.

This is actually great as knowledge or thinking is only of limited use. Some animals got big claws or amazing eye sight we got really big brains so we could do what we call thinking. Its a tool nothing more, so those that want to substitute thinking for reality have made a grave mistake, reality itself is just a concept, reality does not exist on its own...

Here you go.



there used to be a better video where you could see the slides. That certain set of circumstances is unique to each of us.

Originally Posted by PNWbrit

Hey now.

You started it.

Technically, should I describe myself as being agnostic about your being Napoleon Bonaparte? I always thought you a bit too tall for it. But would J C C Smart agree?

I think knowledge and belief are distinct and really don't have much to do with each other. Theists and atheists (in the narrow sense) seem to me to be pretty much the same: dead set on some concept for which there can be no proof or disproof. A waste of time and source of rancor.

You can describe yourself however you want. And I won't follow the cheap shots.

Originally Posted by PNWbrit

?

Like your earlier "full of shit" edit?

I only just saw it.... seemed a trifle unnecessary IMHO.

'Follow' is the operative word here. Believe what you want.

As far as me being first, thats not true either. Review the thread from the beginning, not that it's any justification. I'd rather be up front than backstab or sniggle behind someones back.

The notion of scientific thought is much much more than semantics. If you don't get it, so be it.

Originally Posted by Buster Highmen

I think knowledge and belief are distinct and really don't have much to do with each other. Theists and atheists (in the narrow sense) seem to me to be pretty much the same: dead set on some concept for which there can be no proof or disproof. A waste of time and source of rancor.

This is mostly an argument of semantics at this point.

I believe Jer is a bearded recluse who smells of gun oil and has Latin bumper stickers tattooed on his arms, because that is what the evidence presented her leads me to think. I have no first hand knowledge of Jer, but that is what the evidence suggests. I don't have a strongly held belief that that is what he(she?) actually looks like, and could change my belief if someone presented evidence that he is really an effeminate crossdresser who drives a Prius with an Obama 2012 bumper sticker. Should I ever meet Jer and have first hand knowledge of what he is actually like I will adjust my belief system to reflect that present reality.

You and others go on and on that atheists and theist are exactly the same. Using a very narrow definition you are correct, if that definition is based only on a blind faith. I contend most atheists do not base there "belief" based on faith, but rather on reason, logic and available evidence (and lack of evidence to believe otherwise,) while theists have only faith, or fuzzy logic on which to base their beliefs..."The world is beautiful and prefect, so only an all loving god could make it such."

In actually fact, since no one has actually seen Jer, we can't even be sure he exists, but if if does, I bet he does in fact have an Obama bumper sticker.

I've got a few RECALL WALKER bumper stickers. Not on any of my vehicles tho.

I hear ya on the faith vs. logic and evidence tho. I have an extremely bleak worldview.

Lynx and those two guys at Bohemia know I'm real. I'm not God, you know.

Originally Posted by Jer

I'm not God, you know.

I'll take your word for it,




but there goes my church.

Originally Posted by kingdom-tele

Here you go.



there used to be a better video where you could see the slides. That certain set of circumstances is unique to each of us.

Very cool, thanks for putting that on my radar

Originally Posted by ArmadaBC

Very cool, thanks for putting that on my radar

glad you enjoyed. you might also enjoy Alain Berthoz, a french neurophysiologist, The Brain's Sense of Movement especially, might give you a different appreciation for that joy we find in movement/skiing. He has another book, Simplexity, which ties into Edelman's theory. Pretty amazing structure. People might be less inclined to take such firm stances on perception knowing how many holes we are filling in.