RE: thoughts on the power of religion

RE: thoughts on the power of religion (Full Version)

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

Message

Kirata -> RE: thoughts on the power of religion (4/4/2015 5:12:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer I don't care, K. Whatever. Well if you want to leave it at bald claims with no supporting argument, that's fine with me. The $300 haircut, then. K.

PeonForHer -> RE: thoughts on the power of religion (4/4/2015 5:30:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer I don't care, K. Whatever. Well if you want to leave it at bald claims with no supporting argument, that's fine with me. The $300 haircut, then. K. As far as I'm concerned if one continues to argue with something, one is still in some way attached to it and it's still therefore stopping one from moving on. For me, in religion, there's just nothing there for me to argue with. On the other hand if you want to provide one to defend religion, that's up to you.

Kirata -> RE: thoughts on the power of religion (4/4/2015 6:27:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer As far as I'm concerned if one continues to argue with something, one is still in some way attached to it and it's still therefore stopping one from moving on. For me, in religion, there's just nothing there for me to argue with. On the other hand if you want to provide one to defend religion, that's up to you. Yes, I understand. But apparently you haven't yet "moved on" enough to resist provoking the unwashed with unflattering claims that you can't be bothered supporting. Something to work on, perhaps. K.

PeonForHer -> RE: thoughts on the power of religion (4/4/2015 6:41:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata Yes, I understand. But apparently you haven't yet "moved on" enough to resist provoking the unwashed with unflattering claims that you can't be bothered supporting. Something to work on, perhaps. As I said, there's nothing there for me to see, so I can't help you. On the other hand, if you have an argument in favour of the epistemological strength of religion, you're welcome to present it. Also, I've just thought - oh dear. If I argue with you, then I am, apparently, still stuck in the way I mentioned earlier. If I don't argue, I'm being haughty, or something. That'd be a charge I'll always cherish, coming from you, K!

Dvr22999874 -> RE: thoughts on the power of religion (4/4/2015 6:43:46 PM)
By the mother Kazan Peon, there are people on here who remind me of a cross between my mother (who would argue black was white, just for the sake of arguing) and the schoolyard sneak ( who would call you names and then run and hide behind teacher because he figured he was safe there). No names, no pack-drill but I am sure you can figure out the ones I mean. It's a waste of time arguing with them.

dcnovice -> RE: thoughts on the power of religion (4/4/2015 7:04:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Dvr22999874 By the mother Kazan Peon, there are people on here who remind me of a cross between my mother (who would argue black was white, just for the sake of arguing) and the schoolyard sneak ( who would call you names and then run and hide behind teacher because he figured he was safe there). No names, no pack-drill but I am sure you can figure out the ones I mean. It's a waste of time arguing with them. [:)]

dcnovice -> RE: thoughts on the power of religion (4/4/2015 7:16:59 PM)
quote: widely-accepted and long-term-popular myths, that's all. Of course, myths can convey truths in their own way. [;)]

Kirata -> RE: thoughts on the power of religion (4/4/2015 7:19:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer As I said, there's nothing there for me to see, so I can't help you. On the other hand, if you have an argument in favour of the epistemological strength of religion, you're welcome to present it. You started out claiming that there wasn't "much to know" about religion because some viewpoints (atheism and agnosticism) view it as just a lot of rationalizations. But that is a rather obvious non sequitur. Then you claimed, "there are lots of possibly correct epistemologies but religion can't be one of them - it doesn't even make the necessary effort to qualify." Yet what knowledge is, how it can be acquired, and the extent to which it can be acquired (epistemology) are central questions in the discourse of some religions. So recalling the statement you chose to dispute, "a reasonable prerequisite to a discussion of religion is knowing something about the subject," you'll understand why it seems to me that all you've accomplished so far is to prove it. K.

Dvr22999874 -> RE: thoughts on the power of religion (4/4/2015 7:26:11 PM)
okay mother

Kirata -> RE: thoughts on the power of religion (4/4/2015 7:29:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Dvr22999874 okay mother Buzz off, bozo. K.

Dvr22999874 -> RE: thoughts on the power of religion (4/4/2015 7:36:46 PM)
oooooh, that was so nasty. I am cut to the quick. I am so sorry mother/sneak and will never speak to you again. SFB.

GotSteel -> RE: thoughts on the power of religion (4/4/2015 7:46:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent Dawkins is a biologist by trade and so he is hardly an authority on religious matters any more than you or I. Quite true. quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent Also, you may not be aware that Dawkins has paid to have slogans put on buses denouncing the belief in a God, and he appears on our television pleading with schoolchildren to not believe in 'a fantasy'. Hardly the actions of a reasonable human being. How so? quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent ...meaning that not unlike religion it is open to being proven wide of the mark farther down the line. [sm=rofl.gif]

NorthernGent -> RE: thoughts on the power of religion (4/4/2015 11:45:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent Dawkins is a biologist by trade and so he is hardly an authority on religious matters any more than you or I. Quite true. quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent Also, you may not be aware that Dawkins has paid to have slogans put on buses denouncing the belief in a God, and he appears on our television pleading with schoolchildren to not believe in 'a fantasy'. Hardly the actions of a reasonable human being. How so? quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent ...meaning that not unlike religion it is open to being proven wide of the mark farther down the line. [sm=rofl.gif] Human beings have imagined since the dawn of time and continue to do so. It follows it is reasonable to assume this is part of our make-up and no good reason to attempt to eradicate it. Nor is it particularly reasonable to pay to have slogans put on buses, particularly in a country that had this argument out about three to four hundred years back and concluded that religion and science can quite easily live in the same society - a need being served by both. He is a militant, and militancy isn't reasonable. And, in the event you're arguing that science is not bound by the constraints of what we know today, which may change tomorrow, then it's difficult to have a conversation with you. Science is concerned with that which is probable.

PeonForHer -> RE: thoughts on the power of religion (4/5/2015 2:55:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer As I said, there's nothing there for me to see, so I can't help you. On the other hand, if you have an argument in favour of the epistemological strength of religion, you're welcome to present it. You started out claiming that there wasn't "much to know" about religion because some viewpoints (atheism and agnosticism) view it as just a lot of rationalizations. But that is a rather obvious non sequitur. Then you claimed, "there are lots of possibly correct epistemologies but religion can't be one of them - it doesn't even make the necessary effort to qualify." Yet what knowledge is, how it can be acquired, and the extent to which it can be acquired (epistemology) are central questions in the discourse of some religions. So recalling the statement you chose to dispute, "a reasonable prerequisite to a discussion of religion is knowing something about the subject," you'll understand why it seems to me that all you've accomplished so far is to prove it. K. 'Faith' is the key term and this is what most atheists would have a problem with, regarding (any) religion's epistemological claims. St Augustine of Hippo highlights the problem when he says "Faith is to believe what we do not see; the reward of faith is to see what we believe." I mean, hell: Is this implying that, if we believe as hard as we can in, say, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, we should consider it a reward that we'll eventually see - 'know' him? You can imagine how outrageous this might look to the Dawkinses of this world. Faith precedes any epistemological pursuit, it seems. St Augustine adds, "Understanding is the reward of faith. Therefore, seek not to understand that thou mayest believe, but believe that thou mayest understand." This is one reason why Dawkins ends up saying things like: "Faith is the great cop-out, the great excuse to evade the need to think and evaluate evidence. Faith is belief in spite of, even perhaps because of, the lack of evidence."

thishereboi -> RE: thoughts on the power of religion (4/5/2015 5:18:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer As far as I'm concerned if one continues to argue with something, one is still in some way attached to it and it's still therefore stopping one from moving on. For me, in religion, there's just nothing there for me to argue with. On the other hand if you want to provide one to defend religion, that's up to you. Ya know, for someone who claims there is nothing there for you to argue, you do spend a lot of time in religious threads arguing.

Politesub53 -> RE: thoughts on the power of religion (4/5/2015 5:23:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer As far as I'm concerned if one continues to argue with something, one is still in some way attached to it and it's still therefore stopping one from moving on. For me, in religion, there's just nothing there for me to argue with. On the other hand if you want to provide one to defend religion, that's up to you. Ya know, for someone who claims there is nothing there for you to argue, you do spend a lot of time in religious threads arguing. You still dont get how forums work, do you.

PeonForHer -> RE: thoughts on the power of religion (4/5/2015 5:31:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi Ya know, for someone who claims there is nothing there for you to argue, you do spend a lot of time in religious threads arguing. Sigh. No I don't, THB. That's just one of your rich array of prejudices talking, as usual.

GotSteel -> RE: thoughts on the power of religion (4/5/2015 5:54:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent Human beings have imagined since the dawn of time and continue to do so. It follows it is reasonable to assume this is part of our make-up and no good reason to attempt to eradicate it. Nor is it particularly reasonable to pay to have slogans put on buses, particularly in a country that had this argument out about three to four hundred years back and concluded that religion and science can quite easily live in the same society - a need being served by both. Except that isn't working. Dawkins didn't just randomly decide to talk about religion. Evolutionary biology has been under significant long term attack and Dawkins felt that in order to do his job as the University of Oxford's Professor for Public Understanding of Science he had to talk about the elephant in the room. Also Dawkins has no problem with the imagination which is an important part of science. quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent He is a militant, and militancy isn't reasonable. [image]local://upfiles/566126/07BD1E39BE8E4E6E992D9DD5EC3A8944.gif[/image]

GotSteel -> RE: thoughts on the power of religion (4/5/2015 6:04:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent Oh, and your interpretation of science doesn't tally with mine. Science, in my view, aims to understand the world and our place in it within the constraints of what we know, think we know and accept we don't know; meaning that not unlike religion it is open to being proven wide of the mark farther down the line. quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent And, in the event you're arguing that science is not bound by the constraints of what we know today, which may change tomorrow, then it's difficult to have a conversation with you. Science is concerned with that which is probable. No I'm laughing at the idea that religion is open to being wrong.

Sanity -> RE: thoughts on the power of religion (4/5/2015 8:37:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent Human beings have imagined since the dawn of time and continue to do so. It follows it is reasonable to assume this is part of our make-up and no good reason to attempt to eradicate it. Nor is it particularly reasonable to pay to have slogans put on buses, particularly in a country that had this argument out about three to four hundred years back and concluded that religion and science can quite easily live in the same society - a need being served by both. Except that isn't working. Dawkins didn't just randomly decide to talk about religion. Evolutionary biology has been under significant long term attack and Dawkins felt that in order to do his job as the University of Oxford's Professor for Public Understanding of Science he had to talk about the elephant in the room. Also Dawkins has no problem with the imagination which is an important part of science. quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent He is a militant, and militancy isn't reasonable. [image]local://upfiles/566126/07BD1E39BE8E4E6E992D9DD5EC3A8944.gif[/image] Radical Atheist Kills Three Muslims in North Carolina Stalin, Mao & Co also murdered millions and millions and millions more I would say Islamists and leftists / atheists may be about even on the mass murder tote board

Page: << < prev 6 7 [8] 9 10 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

5.859375E-02