Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/27/2010 2:11:07 PM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: hertz

I don't know if BBC content is blocked to the US or not, but there was an interesting discussion about Scientism on BBC Radio 4 this afternoon. Try Here  or Here. The discussion starts at the 17.14 minute mark and continues for 10 minutes.

It's a discussion with Ian Angell about his book...

Science’s First Mistake : Delusions in Pursuit of Theory

which, it appears, is available as a free download under Creative Commons. If you're wondering whether it is worth a read, the very last Chapter 'Science's First Mistake' summarises where the book goes. I think it probably is worth a look, and I have every intention of giving it a go - it looks like heavy going, though...



Godel Escher and Bach addressed the authors' basic premises without the IS claptrap. What the authors dont bother to address is that even if they are right that everything is interpretable and subjective, it doesnt matter one iota, nor does it obviate scientism. The universe behaves in predictable ways. Even if the basis of making predictions is illusory, the theories underlying the predictions work. It is akin to philsophical arguments regarding free will. Guess what...it doesnt matter whether free will exists or not, we still must function as if it does. If ultimately it doesnt exist, then what we think we are deciding doesnt matter in the least. If it does exist then our actions are critical to our being.

Their attempts to cross disciplines is ultimately doomed to failure, as evidenced by a glaring misstatement in the introduction:

"In a detour, the book rather grandiosely, and with not a little irony, challenges the endeavour in physics of searching out a Grand Unified Theory (science’s ultimate dominion over the human condition)"

GUT has absolutely nothing to do with "the human condition" much less dominion over it.

The book does nothing to advance what their apparent favorite philosopher, Nietzche, propounded in the 19th century. Play masturbatory mind games all you want, existentialism is a dead end that cannot possibly have applicability to the universe we have to function in. After you cum, you still need Kleenex to clean up the mess.

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to hertz)
Profile   Post #: 101
RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/27/2010 2:21:22 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy
The banning of the pledge of allegiance in schools, for example, has had farreaching effects on how the US is viewed by different generations. The Courts have been used to enforce a tyranny of the atheist minority.

What court has banned the Pledge in schools?



The 9th circuit banned the PoA totally and the SCOTUS banned mandatory recitation.

Care to cite that 9th circuit ruling?


On March 11, 2010, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance in the case of Newdow vs Rio Linda Union School District.[27][28] In a 2-1 decision, the appellate court ruled that the words were of a "ceremonial and patriotic nature" and did not constitute an establishment of religion.[27]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pledge_of_Allegiance

[27] We hold that California Education Code § 52720 and
the School District’s Policy of having teachers lead students
in the daily recitation of the Pledge, and allowing those who
do not wish to participate to refuse to do so with impunity, do
not violate the Establishment Clause. Therefore, we reverse
the decision of the district court holding the School District’s
Policy unconstitutional and vacate the permanent injunction
prohibiting the recitation of the Pledge by willing students.

REVERSED.

http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2010/03/11/05-17257.pdf

pg 61/193

How precisely is this ruling a ban on recitation of the pledge?

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 102
RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/27/2010 2:23:01 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline 		It was originally, then overturned.

Amazing how they left that part out.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 103
RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/27/2010 2:25:22 PM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

It was originally, then overturned.

Amazing how they left that part out.


Amazing that you skipped over where "they" didnt leave it out, and why it is still important.

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 104
RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/27/2010 2:28:50 PM   
hertz


Posts: 1315
Joined: 8/7/2010
Status: offline
quote:

The universe behaves in predictable ways. Even if the basis of making predictions is illusory, the theories underlying the predictions work.


One of the points Ian Angell makes is that regardless of how well a scientific theory makes predictions, at the end all we can say with any certainty is that the theory makes predictions which can be tested. What we cannot say is that the theory describes the truth, because we simply do not know if it does or not.

One of the examples given in the discussion is that for 300 years, science believed gravity to be a force. More recent discoveries suggest it is not. Newton may have been utterly wrong, but it matters not a jot, because whatever gravity is about, apples continue to fall to the ground, and humanity can navigate to the moon and walk on its surface.

Just because you have a working theory, you cannot say that your belief is correct.

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 105
RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/27/2010 2:40:17 PM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: hertz

quote:

The universe behaves in predictable ways. Even if the basis of making predictions is illusory, the theories underlying the predictions work.


One of the points Ian Angell makes is that regardless of how well a scientific theory makes predictions, at the end all we can say with any certainty is that the theory makes predictions which can be tested. What we cannot say is that the theory describes the truth, because we simply do not know if it does or not.



What you are missing is that it DOESNT MATTER whether it describes the "truth" or not. Science does very well in ordering and improving our existence regardless of philosophical bullshit about "truth".

< Message edited by willbeurdaddy -- 10/27/2010 2:41:36 PM >

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to hertz)
Profile   Post #: 106
RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/27/2010 2:45:15 PM   
hertz


Posts: 1315
Joined: 8/7/2010
Status: offline 		I don't know what you are talking about, but the rest of us are discussing scientism..

quote:

Scientism Unlike the use of the scientific method as only one mode of reaching knowledge, scientism claims that science alone can render truth about the world and reality. Scientism's single-minded adherence to only the empirical, or testable, makes it a strictly scientifc worldview, in much the same way that a Protestant fundamentalism that rejects science can be seen as a strictly religious worldview. Scientism sees it necessary to do away with most, if not all, metaphysical, philosophical, and religious claims, as the truths they proclaim cannot be apprehended by the scientific method. In essence, scientism sees science as the absolute and only justifiable access to the truth.http://www.pbs.org/faithandreason/gengloss/sciism-body.html



quote:

Science does very well in ordering and improving our existence regardless of philosophical bullshit about "truth".


Religion also does this.



< Message edited by hertz -- 10/27/2010 2:47:17 PM >

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 107
RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/27/2010 2:49:16 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

It was originally, then overturned.

Amazing how they left that part out.


Amazing that you skipped over where "they" didnt leave it out, and why it is still important.


Actually, you kept on insisting its banned... it isnt. Even the court ruling you keep citing was overturned.. something you failed (as your typical fashion) to mention.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 108
RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/27/2010 2:49:25 PM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: hertz

I don't know what you are talking about, but the rest of us are discussing scientism..

quote:

Scientism Unlike the use of the scientific method as only one mode of reaching knowledge, scientism claims that science alone can render truth about the world and reality. Scientism's single-minded adherence to only the empirical, or testable, makes it a strictly scientifc worldview, in much the same way that a Protestant fundamentalism that rejects science can be seen as a strictly religious worldview. Scientism sees it necessary to do away with most, if not all, metaphysical, philosophical, and religious claims, as the truths they proclaim cannot be apprehended by the scientific method. In essence, scientism sees science as the absolute and only justifiable access to the truth.http://www.pbs.org/faithandreason/gengloss/sciism-body.html



I dont know what youre talking about. Because something is the only possible path to truth doesnt imply that 1) truth actually exists or 2) it matters whether it exists or not. All it says is that science is the only way to ascertain truth IF it exists, which is absolutely correct.

Ultimately knowing the "truth" requires omniscience, something that no scientist Ive ever read or been taught by, claims exists.

< Message edited by willbeurdaddy -- 10/27/2010 2:53:01 PM >

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to hertz)
Profile   Post #: 109
RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/27/2010 2:53:24 PM   
kdsub


Posts: 12180
Joined: 8/16/2007
Status: offline 		Heh tazzygirl...why don't you say screwem and come have pizza with us...just wondering if you get a little frisky after a few heavenly beers...

Butch

< Message edited by kdsub -- 10/27/2010 2:54:03 PM >

_____________________________

Mark Twain:

I don't see any use in having a uniform and arbitrary way of spelling words. We might as well make all clothes alike and cook all dishes alike. Sameness is tiresome; variety is pleasing

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 110
RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/27/2010 2:57:58 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline 		~grins

sounds heavenly!

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to kdsub)
Profile   Post #: 111
RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/27/2010 2:58:07 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

It was originally, then overturned.

Amazing how they left that part out.


Amazing that you skipped over where "they" didnt leave it out, and why it is still important.

No. you claimed the 9th circuit banned the pledge. That is simply not the case.

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 112
RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/27/2010 3:02:57 PM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: hertz

I don't know what you are talking about, but the rest of us are discussing scientism..

quote:

Scientism Unlike the use of the scientific method as only one mode of reaching knowledge, scientism claims that science alone can render truth about the world and reality. Scientism's single-minded adherence to only the empirical, or testable, makes it a strictly scientifc worldview, in much the same way that a Protestant fundamentalism that rejects science can be seen as a strictly religious worldview. Scientism sees it necessary to do away with most, if not all, metaphysical, philosophical, and religious claims, as the truths they proclaim cannot be apprehended by the scientific method. In essence, scientism sees science as the absolute and only justifiable access to the truth.http://www.pbs.org/faithandreason/gengloss/sciism-body.html



quote:

Science does very well in ordering and improving our existence regardless of philosophical bullshit about "truth".


Religion also does this.




I disagree.

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to hertz)
Profile   Post #: 113
RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/27/2010 3:04:09 PM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

It was originally, then overturned.

Amazing how they left that part out.


Amazing that you skipped over where "they" didnt leave it out, and why it is still important.

No. you claimed the 9th circuit banned the pledge. That is simply not the case.



sigggh....and I later posted that while it was subsequently overturned that many school districts did not reinstate the pledge after it was overturned.


_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 114
RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/27/2010 3:38:19 PM   
Nslavu


Posts: 342
Joined: 2/1/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


I dont know what youre talking about. Because something is the only possible path to truth doesnt imply that 1) truth actually exists or 2) it matters whether it exists or not.


Untrue. "I am" is truth, perhaps the only one; but as such this quite handily refutes your words since 'I' matters greatly in existence.

quote:


Ultimately knowing the "truth" requires omniscience, something that no scientist Ive ever read or been taught by, claims exists.


Again, I think you are mistaken in light of ultimately that "I am". Am I omniscient is in question; but nevertheless a truth without your assigned requirement.

I'm not arguing for science only because this possibly omniscient being believes everything is mutable and entropic outside the self and for the most part there is no truth beyond what is self evident. And that changes like the bloody weather. Science, religion... meh ... it's all humans moving in a direction trying to reach a destination that is quite likely where they already are. No where.

< Message edited by Nslavu -- 10/27/2010 3:39:06 PM >

_____________________________

I used to love anal until I ran into people who's heads I had to remove first.

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 115
RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/27/2010 3:50:26 PM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nslavu

"I am" is truth


Depends on the definition of "am". Since you may not exist (in the eyes of philosophers) "am" may be inapplicable.

As Cicero said : There is nothing so absurd that some philosopher has not already said it.


_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to Nslavu)
Profile   Post #: 116
RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/27/2010 5:57:17 PM   
Nslavu


Posts: 342
Joined: 2/1/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nslavu

"I am" is truth


Depends on the definition of "am". Since you may not exist (in the eyes of philosophers) "am" may be inapplicable.

As Cicero said : There is nothing so absurd that some philosopher has not already said it.



Since when were philosophers required to prove my existence? Let them prove their own. :-D .. 'I am' with or without them. Again self evident is the only truth that will ever matter no matter what truth one attaches their selves to. There is something to be said for the train of thought though, in returning to the most basic truth of "I" without the encumbrances of 'am'. However; I think truth is problematic without the awareness. "Am' is the awareness of self, however you define 'am'.

As I said, it's all mutable entropic mush, people going no where, over and over the same shit time and time again. Omniscience constantly revisiting itself,
in hopes of being/finding something different than it was.

Are they provably Cicero's words or do they spring from omniscience?

I ;-)




_____________________________

I used to love anal until I ran into people who's heads I had to remove first.

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 117
RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/27/2010 6:17:14 PM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nslavu


'I am' with or without them.


Prove it without philosophy.

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to Nslavu)
Profile   Post #: 118
RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/28/2010 11:30:31 AM   
GotSteel


Posts: 5871
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata
Well not quite, there is at the very least a phenomenological difference. Whatever it may be that people subsume under the word "God," nobody (as far as I know) has ever claimed to have experienced or felt the presence of the Tooth Fairy or Santa Claus or the Easter Rabbit.

K.

In that cause would God fall into the same catagory as fairies and the loch ness monster?

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 119
RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/28/2010 11:36:44 AM   
Nslavu


Posts: 342
Joined: 2/1/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nslavu


'I am' with or without them.


Prove it without philosophy.


ah... you still ignore self evidence. I have said this 3 times now.

You seeking more than this proof is philosophy.


_____________________________

I used to love anal until I ran into people who's heads I had to remove first.

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 120
Page:   <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.236