RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang

RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

GotSteel -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/14/2011 9:13:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl I did NOT bring up Harris. You have reading problems yet again. This certainly isn't the statement of someone else: quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl My thoughts about Harris... ahem... are not kind. He is arrogant, and thats the nicest thing i can say about him. I dont put too much stock into someone who feels the need to be superior by way of telling others how inferior they are. You were presented with an idea and attacked the person instead of discussing the validity of the idea. You made the discussion about Sam Harris as a person, you're the one who brought that up. quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Amazingly it took you two days to come up with that pathetic argument. As it typically does when you are caught with your pants down around your ankles. Tazzy, get off the wambulance about how I have a life. quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl I was specifically asked what my impression was about what Harris said. I responded. Yes, you were asked about an idea and responded by attacking Harris as a person. quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Dont like my response.. big fucking deal. While person attacks aren't necessarily intellectually dishonest in and of themselves, engaging in such an attack in an attempt to invalidate said persons position certainly is. I'm not certain if that's what you were doing or if you just really hate Sam Harris. Either way lying about engaging in said person attacks isn't intellectually honest. quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl I dont like most of what you have to say because most of what you say is repeated rhetoric of what someone else has to say. I think mostly what I end up doing here is advocating that people make arguments which aren't logically fallacious. quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Do you even have an original thought process? Something that isnt repeated by someone else? I'd certainly like to think so but not knowing every thought process that someone has had before, I couldn't possibly know. quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl I dont like what your guru Harris said. Big whoop. But dont make me out to be the bad guy when you fell flat on your ass. You were wrong, I showed you where, and you STILL dont have the ability (no surprise there) to admit you were wrong. I've seen two or three videos by the guy (one of which was just put up by Kirata) and read a couple of articles by him. But even if he was my guru, so what? That in no way changes the validity of you attacking him personally and subsequently lying about it. quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Yeah, Big man of steel, huh. Actually, I was studying blacksmithing in Japan when I picked out my screen name. It has to do with actual steel not some allusion to myself.

anthrosub -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/14/2011 9:15:56 PM)
Okay I need to post a follow up. I just spent some time researching Michael Cremo (whom I never heard of until seeing Kirata's link). I'm beginning to wonder if Kirata isn't playing with us to see which way we'll twitch when he throws a bone for his own amusement. I'll admit I'm quick to give the benefit of the doubt and have no problem doing so. But even when I hear someone out, there's still the skeptic in me that steps up to the plate before I accept anything completely. Perhaps I'm passive/aggressive. Cremo was debunked...completely...and not just once but several times over the past 15 years. Ironically he has been criticized by both the religious and scientific communities alike. Most of his scientific colleages are associated with creationist or Hindu based organizations and/or movements. His claim that the scientific community "filters out" data that conflicts with accepted mainstream scientific theory is exactly what his television program did to the scientific community when his program aired in 1996. No opportunity was given for them to show their contrary findings to his claims. I should have noticed the red flag when I saw that Charlton Heston narrated the program. A search on the Internet of Michael Cremo provides a landslide of information debunking his book while only his site advocates for it. I would think if his theory held water there would be much more of both sides being offered including genuine scientists taking his side. I seriously doubt the entire world scientific community has it in for Michael. To believe this you would also have to believe there's some sort of conspiracy on the same scale. In spite of this, I will hold with what I said about science in my first response to this article. It is certainly possible for people to misuse and abuse information when they can benefit from it. But my confidence in scientific methodology and theory remains. Sadly, Kirata's credibility just took a nose dive for me. Sorry pal. Here's a link detailing the criticisms: http://www.xmission.com/~tlacy/mom.txt

GotSteel -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/14/2011 9:28:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata To believe in the literal truth of some book is, in religious terms, idolatry. Only the practice of a religious discipline can lead to an understanding of that which is embodied in the varied symbologies of our religions. A study comparing Carmelite nuns, who practice contemplative prayer, with practitioners of Buddhist meditation found the same patterns of brain activation in both groups. The apparently irreconcilable differences between theistic and non-theistic traditions are meaningless from the point of view of an absolute that is simultaneously both and beyond both. It seems to me that the sentence in bold argues to the meaninglessness of theism.

GotSteel -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/14/2011 10:03:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: anthrosub It is certainly possible for people to misuse and abuse information when they can benefit from it. But my confidence in scientific methodology and theory remains. It's certainly possible for science as a body of knowledge to be compromised in the short term by individuals who aren't actually following science as a methodology. However because of science as a methodology continually makes science as a body of knowledge more accurate such compromises are corrected over the long term.

tazzygirl -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/14/2011 10:23:09 PM)
Waaaa waaaa waaa. Damn, can you cry anymore? I never heard of Harris before this thread... and frankly, hearing about him was a waste of my time. I still think he is an egomaniac, self-centered and an all around asshole who doesnt know what the fuck he is talking about. And employs intellectual dishonesty as his argument. But that isnt here nor there. As far as you having a life. Who cares? You were on these boards in the days it took you to respond to my post. But, again, who the fuck cares. Certainly not me. You cannot even give a valid argument. quote: Yes, you were asked about an idea and responded by attacking Harris as a person His idea was extremely self-centered. Dont like that? Tough. Funny how a self-professed atheist like yourself can run around these boards and attack anyone over their religious feelings, including the Pope... but hot damn, if someone attacks your Guru, hell will be to pay! A little hypocritical there, arent ya big boy? Ok ok... not a little bit.. but a LOT! But, no one attacked the great Sam Harris. I dont know him from joe blow. I didnt like what he said.. and i gave my impression. And here you are, still whining about it. Cry and get over it buddy... my position isnt changing any time soon... about either of you.

tweakabelle -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/14/2011 11:03:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata To believe in the literal truth of some book is, in religious terms, idolatry. Only the practice of a religious discipline can lead to an understanding of that which is embodied in the varied symbologies of our religions. A study comparing Carmelite nuns, who practice contemplative prayer, with practitioners of Buddhist meditation found the same patterns of brain activation in both groups. The apparently irreconcilable differences between theistic and non-theistic traditions are meaningless from the point of view of an absolute that is simultaneously both and beyond both. It seems to me that the sentence in bold argues to the meaninglessness of theism. Yes. I agree with you. For me, that is certainly one valid interpretation. And we are under no obligation to limit ourselves to just one interpretation are we? While I'm perfectly comfortable with your interpretation, I would prefer a slightly different wording with a differing emphasis: it suggests that theism is irrelevant to metaphysical enquiry. I'm sure there are other perfectly valid interpretations in there too. My feeling is that there are other insights in the original yet to be discussed.

Kirata -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/14/2011 11:09:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: anthrosub Sorry pal. Here's a link detailing the criticisms: http://www.xmission.com/~tlacy/mom.txt Firstly, I'm not your pal. Secondly, your link points to a re-post from the talk.origins newsgroup of a review of the "Mysterious Origins of Man" production, which segues through the claims of at least 14 different people. I did not link to that production. And thirdly, the review is an ignorant rant to which a rebuttal was posted that you do not appear to have considered. Reply to a "Review" of the NBC Television Show "The Mysterious Origins of Man" K.

Kirata -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/15/2011 1:31:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata The apparently irreconcilable differences between theistic and non-theistic traditions are meaningless from the point of view of an absolute that is simultaneously both and beyond both. It seems to me that the sentence in bold argues to the meaninglessness of theism. Really? How odd. I could have sworn it argued to the meaninglessness of the differences between theism and non-theism. Go figure, eh? K.

Kirata -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/15/2011 1:50:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle we are under no obligation to limit ourselves to just one interpretation are we? ...I would prefer a slightly different wording I would too. It's simply wrong to dismiss theism as "meaningless." Theism isn't necessary, but the devotional path to union is as valid as any other. K.

anthrosub -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/15/2011 6:36:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: anthrosub Sorry pal. Here's a link detailing the criticisms: http://www.xmission.com/~tlacy/mom.txt Firstly, I'm not your pal. Secondly, your link points to a re-post from the talk.origins newsgroup of a review of the "Mysterious Origins of Man" production, which segues through the claims of at least 14 different people. I did not link to that production. And thirdly, the review is an ignorant rant to which a rebuttal was posted that you do not appear to have considered. Reply to a "Review" of the NBC Television Show "The Mysterious Origins of Man" K. Before things get too far out of hand...please let me apologize. As I turned in last night the thought occurred to me that maybe the links you posted were meant to demonstrate an instance where people deliberately misrepresent the data. I signed on here this morning expecting I may have jumped the gun. So to clear the air...I did jump the gun...and my thought that maybe your first links are examples of people deliberately misrepresenting data is also wrong. You posted those links to show that the scientific community as a whole is not without its own problems regarding data it has found and my confidence in science needs to be revisited in that regard. I hope you will give me credit for owning my mistakes. Finally I have a question. Do you enjoy these conversations? I ask because aside from what just transpired, your "voice" comes across with a bit of an edge to it at times. At least that's my impression...I can't speak for others. You have my attention and I wish to continue the exchange. So on that note I would like to ask what you think about the data in Cremo's presentation. It seems to me there certainly is a valid line of discovery taking place by the scientific community at large that is telling its own story regardless of the theories (traditional or otherwise).

anthrosub -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/15/2011 7:18:14 AM)
This is a general post to the entire thread. There are several debates ongoing and attempting to reply to them individually increases the thread count, making it a bit of a maze to follow. I'm trying to avoid contributing to that. I think we can agree that all positions whether they be theistic or non-theistic are at root an attempt to understand and explain the unknown. People are going to join with whichever explanation satisfies their unique need for a world view and what determines that need is complicated to be sure. I also think it can be seen that none of the explanations are in fact the absolute truth. If anything, each provides insights unique to how it frames the question and as such will always be irreconcilable to each other when taken to extremes. It is meaningless to argue over who's right and who's wrong but it is not meaningless to keep looking. I think it's important for all of us to own up to the limitations of whatever tool of inquiry we choose to use...this is true intellectual honesty.

GotSteel -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/15/2011 2:30:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl! But, no one attacked the great Sam Harris. That's a lie, you did so right here: quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl My thoughts about Harris... ahem... are not kind. He is arrogant, and thats the nicest thing i can say about him. I dont put too much stock into someone who feels the need to be superior by way of telling others how inferior they are.

GotSteel -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/15/2011 2:32:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata I could have sworn it argued to the meaninglessness of the differences between theism and non-theism. That strikes me as a distinction without a difference. If we can agree that the extra claim made by theism which differentiates it from non-theism is meaningless, that's the same as saying that theism is meaningless.

tweakabelle -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/15/2011 5:25:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata I could have sworn it argued to the meaninglessness of the differences between theism and non-theism. That strikes me as a distinction without a difference. If we can agree that the extra claim made by theism which differentiates it from non-theism is meaningless, that's the same as saying that theism is meaningless. Yes that's one way of looking at it. And it's valid as long as one insists that the relationship between theism and non-theism is one solely and purely one of opposition. At a conceptual level, this relationship is also one of dependency. Both -isms rely on each other for their meaning (or meaninglessness if you prefer). The relationship between theism and non-theism can be seen as like that of a fish to water - unable to breath anywhere else. So it seems perfectly valid to me to say that the differences might be meaningless if viewed from a particular perspective without necessarily implying that either -ism is meaningless in itself. This is more than mere pedantry, it allows the discussion to move on.

Kirata -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/15/2011 7:14:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: anthrosub I would like to ask what you think about the data in Cremo's presentation. It seems to me there certainly is a valid line of discovery taking place by the scientific community at large that is telling its own story regardless of the theories (traditional or otherwise). I don't know what to make of it. But aside from the origins of humanity, I think there is evidence of an ancient civilization on this Earth that navigated the globe, knew the order of the planetary bodies, was aware of precession, and possessed mind-boggling engineering skills. K.

GotSteel -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/15/2011 9:59:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle At a conceptual level, this relationship is also one of dependency. Both -isms rely on each other for their meaning (or meaninglessness if you prefer). The relationship between theism and non-theism can be seen as like that of a fish to water - unable to breath anywhere else. Could you explain and support this position. Certainly non-theism as a word relies on theism for it's definition. However non-theism doesn't actually rely on the existence of theism. If theism had never been invented, non-theism would get along just fine, we'd all be practitioners of it.

tazzygirl -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/15/2011 10:02:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl! But, no one attacked the great Sam Harris. That's a lie, you did so right here: quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl My thoughts about Harris... ahem... are not kind. He is arrogant, and thats the nicest thing i can say about him. I dont put too much stock into someone who feels the need to be superior by way of telling others how inferior they are. You blooming idiot. That was in response to the post anthrosub posted to me.... quote: While often defined as an atheist, Harris asserts that the term is not necessary. His position is that "atheism" is not a worldview or a philosophy, but the "destruction of bad ideas." He states that religion is especially rife with bad ideas, calling it "one of the most perverse misuses of intelligence we have ever devised." He compares modern religious beliefs to the myths of the Ancient Greeks, which were once accepted as fact but which are obsolete today. In a January 2007 interview with PBS, Harris said, "We don't have a word for not believing in Zeus, which is to say we are all atheists in respect to Zeus. And we don't have a word for not being an astrologer." He goes on to say that the term will be retired only when "we all just achieve a level of intellectual honesty where we are no longer going to pretend to be certain about things we are not certain about." And i stand by what i said. He is arrogant in that statement, telling others who do not believe as he does that they are wasting their intelligence and that they are all "pretending". quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl My thoughts about Harris... ahem... are not kind. He is arrogant, and thats the nicest thing i can say about him. I dont put too much stock into someone who feels the need to be superior by way of telling others how inferior they are. His statement, as given to me by anthrosub, is full of arrogance and the belief that he is right against those who do not believe as he wishes. If you see that as an attack... ~grins you are as arrogant as he is. And his argument doesnt utilize intellectual honesty... its dishonesty... as shown by my previous post.

Kirata -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/15/2011 10:05:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel non-theism doesn't actually rely on the existence of theism. If theism had never been invented, non-theism would get along just fine, we'd all be practitioners of it. Theism doesn't actually rely on the existence of non-theism. If non-theism had never been invented, theism would get along just fine, we'd all be practitioners of it. But thanks, that was fun. K.

GotSteel -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/15/2011 10:59:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata Theism doesn't actually rely on the existence of non-theism. Never said it did. Tweakabelle is the one claiming a mutually dependent relationship, not me. quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata If non-theism had never been invented, theism would get along just fine, we'd all be practitioners of it. Non-theism inherently exists, we are all born that way. But thanks, that was nonsensical.

wittynamehere -> RE: Pope Says God is Behind the Big Bang (1/15/2011 11:05:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata If non-theism had never been invented, theism would get along just fine, we'd all be practitioners of it. Yikes. That really doesn't make any sense, person-with-hat.

Page: << < prev 8 9 [10] 11 12 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0234375