RE: Benevolent's Taxonomy of Atheism

RE: Benevolent's Taxonomy of Atheism (Full Version)

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

Message

xssve -> RE: Benevolent's Taxonomy of Atheism (3/23/2012 7:55:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: xssve Atheists assume that imaginary things don't exist? That's the problem? You bet it is. Having a cadre of inquisitorial priests imposing upon the unwashed their holy dogma of what is "imaginary" and therefore "doesn't exist" is a problem. Whether from the pulpit or a podium, they're birds of a feather. K. Huh, is that one real or imaginary? The problem is, once you admit one undefined, and undefinable variable, pretty soon you have a hundred - they tend to multiply rapidly. It's just a waste of time debating it, nothing can come of it - publish a testable hypothesis and we'll talk, otherwise you're just yammering about wearing your favorite hair shirt.

BenevolentM -> RE: Benevolent's Taxonomy of Atheism (3/23/2012 10:15:03 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: xssve It's just a waste of time debating it, nothing can come of it - publish a testable hypothesis and we'll talk, otherwise you're just yammering about wearing your favorite hair shirt. Assuming you were addressing me and not Kirata, very magnanimous of you. I wonder what the mental block is. I'm not sure I understand what a testable hypothesis is. I think what you are asking is can something magickal be accomplished with such knowledge? Can it be used to make man a god? A time and space invariant relationship involving concrete things that produce a concrete thing. So when you push this button the engine will start regardless of the time of day or where it is situated. For example, the engine does not start only on the vernal equinox at Stonehenge. Unless the machine was used as part of a ritual that is performed on the vernal equinox at Stonehenge it would not be especially useful. Put an atheist in one room and a Christian in another. Feed them random noise. Who would be the first to make sense of the noise? It seems to me that the inability of the atheist to make sense of the noise is indicative of a deficiency. What I am talking about partially has to do with how results are interpreted. The world is a noisy place. Pattern recognition skills are important even if the person is capable of sin, that is capable of making a false identification. The atheist is so paralyzed by sin that no judgements can be formed. The atheist is face blind.

BenevolentM -> RE: Benevolent's Taxonomy of Atheism (3/23/2012 10:42:28 AM)
In resolving moral problems such face blindness would be especially troublesome. The computational burden required to solve the problem using pure deduction may in some/many instances be prohibitive which is a disincentive. A morally face blind person would feel persecuted. In order to compensate for the general lack of computational ability society would need to rely heavily on simple rules of thumb to resolve moral problems.

BenevolentM -> RE: Benevolent's Taxonomy of Atheism (3/23/2012 10:53:45 AM)
One could argue that the Bible is a collection of empirical observations concerning how morally face blind people behave together with suggestions concerning how to side step the problem.

xssve -> RE: Benevolent's Taxonomy of Atheism (3/23/2012 5:07:02 PM)
No, I was addressing Kirata - I have no idea what the hell you're talking about, I think you stopped even trying for logical consistency many pages ago, it's all some mysto mumbo jumbo now, I can't even keep track of it anymore. That's what happens when you stray from radical empiricism, the bullshit just multiplies exponentially. quote: I wonder what the mental block is. I'm not sure I understand what a testable hypothesis is. You answered your own question there.

Kirata -> RE: Benevolent's Taxonomy of Atheism (3/23/2012 6:56:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: xssve It's just a waste of time debating it, nothing can come of it - publish a testable hypothesis and we'll talk, otherwise you're just yammering about wearing your favorite hair shirt. Excuse me? It's your hypothesis that's in question here. Did you overlook that? Heh. Paganism is science... Monotheism is basically daddy worship... a form of infanitlism Sounds to me like just another hair-shirted priest out to scourge the world of heresy. K.

GotSteel -> RE: Benevolent's Taxonomy of Atheism (3/23/2012 7:08:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BenevolentM I think what you are asking is can something magickal be accomplished with such knowledge? Dude seriously, when talking to us humans you need to speak English not BM. Your idea of "magick" hasn't become any more valid since it was demonstrated to be false earlier in the thread. quote: ORIGINAL: BenevolentM I'm not sure I understand what a testable hypothesis is. Yeah, believe me we all know that. It's been real obvious since page 1. It's also a concept that you'll need to understand in detail in order to discover actual knowledge about reality.

xssve -> RE: Benevolent's Taxonomy of Atheism (3/23/2012 10:44:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: xssve It's just a waste of time debating it, nothing can come of it - publish a testable hypothesis and we'll talk, otherwise you're just yammering about wearing your favorite hair shirt. Excuse me? It's your hypothesis that's in question here. Did you overlook that? Heh. Paganism is science... Monotheism is basically daddy worship... a form of infanitlism Sounds to me like just another hair-shirted priest out to scourge the world of heresy. K. What, you feel oppressed by my opinion? It's a free country, you're free to embrace the neurosis of your choice, but if you're gonna lay that shit on me, I'm free to tell you where you can put it, deal with it. Like a grown up.

BenevolentM -> RE: Benevolent's Taxonomy of Atheism (3/23/2012 11:24:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: xssve page 18 post 348 in response to Kirata What, you feel oppressed by my opinion? It's a free country, you're free to embrace the neurosis of your choice, but if you're gonna lay that shit on me, I'm free to tell you where you can put it, deal with it. Like a grown up. quote: ORIGINAL: BenevolentM page 18 post 343 A morally face blind person would feel persecuted. quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel page 18 page 347 in response to BenevolentM page 18 post 342 It's also a concept that you'll need to understand in detail in order to discover actual knowledge about reality. Examine what I wrote more carefully.

BenevolentM -> RE: Benevolent's Taxonomy of Atheism (3/23/2012 11:43:47 PM)
What I wrote on page 18 post 342 343 and 344 suggest that sin is not derived from the performance of sinful acts per se, as difficult as this may seem. Absence of sin involves correct judgements and the willingness/capacity to act in accordance with those judgements. This view I believe is consistent with the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church. Conventional thinking says that sin is simply the performance of sinful acts.

BenevolentM -> RE: Benevolent's Taxonomy of Atheism (3/23/2012 11:59:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BenevolentM Examine what I wrote more carefully. What I wrote contained a trap for the unwary.

Kirata -> RE: Benevolent's Taxonomy of Atheism (3/24/2012 12:12:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: xssve What, you feel oppressed by my opinion? It's a free country, you're free to embrace the neurosis of your choice, but if you're gonna lay that shit on me, I'm free to tell you where you can put it, deal with it. Oppressed? By you? Heh. Well no, sorry, do I seem to be acting a little shy? K.

Musicmystery -> RE: Benevolent's Taxonomy of Atheism (3/24/2012 12:15:56 AM)
quote: Like a grown up. This from one who's earlier debate response was "You fart?"

BenevolentM -> RE: Benevolent's Taxonomy of Atheism (3/24/2012 12:19:01 AM)
An atheist feels that man is God and is capable of feats of magick. This is not altogether untrue. Man is capable of feats of magick, but this is not the same as claiming that man is God. Atheists assume that moral problems result in problems that are computationally feasible and do not rely on a talent which enables man to carry out such computations on the fly. Having to resolve the face of God figures prominently in such computations.

BenevolentM -> RE: Benevolent's Taxonomy of Atheism (3/24/2012 12:30:32 AM)
Once the face of God is resolved the morally correct path is known.

Musicmystery -> RE: Benevolent's Taxonomy of Atheism (3/24/2012 12:31:26 AM)
You talk to yourself a LOT.

BenevolentM -> RE: Benevolent's Taxonomy of Atheism (3/24/2012 1:40:16 AM)
I am likely taking a some liberties in this post, but it seems reasonable to me that if I was a Jew living in Judea that had gone to the Temple to study, I would be called Rabbi. quote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabbi There is a mitzvah to stand up for a Rabbi or Torah Scholar when they enter one's presence. ... In many places today and throughout history, Rabbis and Torah Scholars had the power to place individuals who insulted them in excommunication.

Kirata -> RE: Benevolent's Taxonomy of Atheism (3/24/2012 2:15:43 AM)
~ FR ~ As a contribution to the taxonomy of Atheism, and Christianity as well while I'm at it, I submit the following. Patrick Greene, had recently threatened to sue over the presence of a nativity scene on public property. He abandoned the lawsuit, the Friendly Atheist blog reports, when he found out that he was suffering from a serious eye condition that could lead to blindness... Despite the rift between Greene and the Christians supporting the scene, Jessica Crye, an Athens woman, rallied believers to assist Greene in paying for groceries and other needs following his retirement as a result of the illness... Greene said he and his wife debated whether the check might be for $10 or maybe $50 or even $60. To their astonishment that any Christian would ignore the fact that they are atheist and help, the check was for $400... In addition to these funds, another $500 was donated by atheists who were also moved by Greene’s plight. The man and his wife were so moved by the gesture that they actually purchased an electrical star for the nativity scene and had it shipped to Henderson County. “I saw the nativity scene on a video on YouTube. There’s no star on top of it. Shouldn’t there be one?,” Greene pondered. “I just hope that the Christians that weren‘t a part of this contribution to us don’t mind that an atheist bought them a star.” Reference: The Blaze K.

xssve -> RE: Benevolent's Taxonomy of Atheism (3/24/2012 6:53:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: xssve What, you feel oppressed by my opinion? It's a free country, you're free to embrace the neurosis of your choice, but if you're gonna lay that shit on me, I'm free to tell you where you can put it, deal with it. Oppressed? By you? Heh. Well no, sorry, do I seem to be acting a little shy? K. quote: Sounds to me like just another hair-shirted priest out to scourge the world of heresy. No, just a little put upon. Wah.

BenevolentM -> RE: Benevolent's Taxonomy of Atheism (3/24/2012 9:54:06 AM)
If there is to be peace, for example between Atheists and Christians, a better understanding of each other will be needed. In a previous era mankind may have lacked the necessary sophistication to pull this off. There is room for improvement concerning our understanding of God and what God wants and expects of us. As such there is hope. The past need not be an indicator of what lies ahead of us in the future. Better rules of engagement are needed. How is a Christian to confront or have dealings with an atheist so as not to cause God to frown upon them? A good Christian only cares about what God thinks. It is all about pleasing God. If they do good works it is to please God and not you. So his or her understanding of what God wants or expects of them is essential. Take me as a case in point. God made it clear that if I were to fail in my mission of mercy, I should not fret. I am pleasing to Him. He made this explicit. God is rarely explicit. These are the sort of assurances God gives to the faithful.

Page: << < prev 16 17 [18] 19 20 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875