|
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. |
![]() |
#601 |
Tergiversator
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,998
|
Oh, you want to know my personal information.
Well it isn't hard to determine my identify on this website. It's even more suspect that you want so badly to have this information at your site. That doesn't sound like the desires of an honest man. Yes, you claim this, but you have yet to demonstrate this. The ball is in your court. Considering you were not descriptive of what you meant by "coming out", yes you did. Your lack of clarity in defining your meaning isn't my failing. So you believe in a supernatural origin? Yes, I know. That's clearly what I am asking you to defend. I've given you a very clear opportunity to refute my argument. I've stated where man has the ability to do so based upon cognitive studies. You can show me how I am wrong, by explaining where these studies are false. |
__________________
What's the best argument for UHC? This argument against UHC. "Perhaps one reason per capita GDP is lower in UHC countries is because they've tried to prevent this important function [bankrupting the sick] and thus carry forward considerable economic dead wood?"-BeAChooser |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#602 |
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 321
|
Oh, I've been quite aware of the efforts, such as you further demonstrate, to change the subject.
The issue I have introduced, along with an argument and a variety of claims I make for it, is the inference from atheism which, to date, is a matter of "belief"; lacking in empirical confirmation. Quite UNcontroversial; the reaction here being quite interesting as it has "evolved". Atheists believe it. This theist, and all or many others, doesn't. It's not about me defending theism. The topic I have taken up is the affirmative, positive inference(s) from atheism which are noted as being a matter of "belief"; the observation regarding Dennett which I quoted being unrebutted. That it has passed in favor of further, misguided bantering from my adversaries is another point of interest in my forming of opinions regarding this venue and its active particpants. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#603 |
Tergiversator
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,998
|
please don't project yourself onto me. You were the one who attempted for multiple pages to get viewers to your website.
belief in the loosest sense. But, my argument goes one step further. I don't simply claim that belief in god "could" have originated by man. What you call the imagination origin. I'm stating that it was inevitable based upon what we now know about human mental modelling ability. Just like we mistakenly see faces where a face shouldn't be, we see agency where agency isn't. Consider this a type of mental optical illusion. We see patterns where they aren't all the time. We even have new data to suggest that this organic origin of the god concept is supported by my argument. http://www.pnas.org/content/106/51/21533.full the advantage of my argument is that it is fundamentally testable. If one could inhibit this social modelling ability, would that also inhibit the capacity to invent/imagine god? Your quote of dennett was rather obscured in a mound of poor syntax. I apologize for not commenting on it. I agree to some extent with his position. Although, as I hypothesize that the god belief to be an inherent aspect of our cognitive make up, I do go one step further to suggest that we can test the hypothesis that god is merely a byproduct of our mental capacity. |
__________________
What's the best argument for UHC? This argument against UHC. "Perhaps one reason per capita GDP is lower in UHC countries is because they've tried to prevent this important function [bankrupting the sick] and thus carry forward considerable economic dead wood?"-BeAChooser |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#604 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 326
|
You based an arguement on claims/assumptions which several posters asked you to back up with evidence, your response was handwaving and a failure to do so. Your whole arguement is built on a foundation of sand whilst the structure may not have fallen down it still sank and all the while you dance round smiling claiming to be a master builder......sorry nobody is impressed.
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#605 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 326
|
Is it just me that has an image of his Goliath staggering about punch drunk and bleeding from every orifice all the time muttering "never hurt abit" like the de-limbed knight in Monty Pythons Holy Grail yelling at a disgusted Arthur "come back n I'll bite ya legs off "?
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#606 |
Tergiversator
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,998
|
|
__________________
What's the best argument for UHC? This argument against UHC. "Perhaps one reason per capita GDP is lower in UHC countries is because they've tried to prevent this important function [bankrupting the sick] and thus carry forward considerable economic dead wood?"-BeAChooser |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#607 |
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 321
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#608 |
Dental Floss Tycoon
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 19,791
|
It isn't a change of subject, it is the subject, as introduced by you. Your entire argument boils down to the claim that early humans could not have invented gods, therefor they must have known about them through reason and/or revelation. Your inability to support your assertion, along with your failure to address the evidence that early humans (who had the same brains that we have today) most certainly were able to imagine gods, results in the collapse of your entire argument.
|
__________________
Counterbalance in the little town of Ridgeview, Ohio. Two people permanently enslaved by the tyranny of fear and superstitution, facing the future with a kind of helpless dread. Two others facing the future with confidence - having escaped one of the darker places of the Twilight Zone. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#609 | |||
Dental Floss Tycoon
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 19,791
|
I must admit that I am impressed by your single-minded ability to ignore the failures of your argument.
Quote:
|
|||
__________________
Counterbalance in the little town of Ridgeview, Ohio. Two people permanently enslaved by the tyranny of fear and superstitution, facing the future with a kind of helpless dread. Two others facing the future with confidence - having escaped one of the darker places of the Twilight Zone. |
||||
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#610 |
Dental Floss Tycoon
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 19,791
|
|
__________________
Counterbalance in the little town of Ridgeview, Ohio. Two people permanently enslaved by the tyranny of fear and superstitution, facing the future with a kind of helpless dread. Two others facing the future with confidence - having escaped one of the darker places of the Twilight Zone. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#611 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,561
|
Hi RLBaty,
Would you mind posting a link to your site, or directing me to a link if you have already posted one? I am curious and would like to do some reading there. Thanks, Canis |
__________________
"...The chief deficiency I see in the skeptical movement is its polarization: Us vs. Them -- the sense that we have a monopoly on the truth; that those other people who believe in all these stupid doctrines are morons; that if you're sensible, you'll listen to us; and if not, to hell with you. This is nonconstructive. It does not get our message across. It condemns us to permanent minority status." - Carl Sagan
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#612 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 326
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#613 |
Dental Floss Tycoon
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 19,791
|
|
__________________
Counterbalance in the little town of Ridgeview, Ohio. Two people permanently enslaved by the tyranny of fear and superstitution, facing the future with a kind of helpless dread. Two others facing the future with confidence - having escaped one of the darker places of the Twilight Zone. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#614 |
Tergiversator
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,998
|
I think his point is that just because god COULD be created through imagination doesn't mean it HAD to be created through imagination. As such, we are left with an argument similar to the evolution/abiogenesis distinction. Just because we see evidence for the diversity of life originating from naturalistic means doesn't mean abiogensis is also a result of natrualistic means.
His point, i think, is that one CAN'T exclude god on natural grounds and therefore Strong atheism is also an unsupported belief system. A point that I find uninteresting as I mostly agree with it. However, I think it is quite possible that we could find an origin to god beliefs using cognitive science research. If one eliminated/hindered the social other model capacity of our brain, would that hinder god from occurring? Conversely, if one overstimulated that aspect, would it give god like revelations? Such a study would nearly effectively eliminate god as a real entity, but merely a mental byproduct of our emergent cognitive skills. Of course, even that isn't 100%, but neither is the evidence for the naiver stokes equation. There still exist no proof that naiver stokes is valid under all circumstances. But it is so effective for so long, that I think it safer to assume it is than to build an entire belief system on the off chance that it isn't/ |
__________________
What's the best argument for UHC? This argument against UHC. "Perhaps one reason per capita GDP is lower in UHC countries is because they've tried to prevent this important function [bankrupting the sick] and thus carry forward considerable economic dead wood?"-BeAChooser |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#615 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 5,399
|
|
__________________
"If I actually believed that Jesus was coming to end the world in 2050, I'd be preparing by stocking up on timber and nails" - PZ Myers |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#616 |
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 321
|
Those who "believe" it accounts for the origin of the idea/concept of God obviously "believe" it to be so. So, what's the fuss about; that's what my argument and the claims I have made for it deal with. Oh, that's right; y'all just don't like me surfing in here and pointing out such a simple, fundamental inference from atheism. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#617 |
Hostile Nanobacon
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 30,587
|
Nope, didn't faze me a bit. Anyone else?
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#618 |
Winking at the Moon
Deputy Admin
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 15,326
|
Why the unnecessary quotes? Are you trying to get a mention on this site?
That gods - all gods - could be the product of the collective imaginations of people, folklore to explain the world around them is, I think, indisputable. Human imagination is pretty much limitless. The fact that some religions contradict others makes it unlikely that all religions are true, and began by divine revelation. |
__________________
Why can't you be more like Agatha? - Loss Leader |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#619 |
Hostile Nanobacon
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 30,587
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#620 |
Tergiversator
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,998
|
If you have multiple people misunderstanding you, then the problem is likely your's. Simplify your sentences. Avoid using needless asides, and you will be able to create more informative posts.
ETA: I've never seen anyone use a semicolon as much as you do. It's like you have stock in orphaned punctuation. |
__________________
What's the best argument for UHC? This argument against UHC. "Perhaps one reason per capita GDP is lower in UHC countries is because they've tried to prevent this important function [bankrupting the sick] and thus carry forward considerable economic dead wood?"-BeAChooser |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#621 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,435
|
There's no such thing as an inference from atheism. Atheism is simply lack of belief in gods. The only thing you can infer from someone's atheism is that they lack a belief in gods.
Quote:
What you are doing is rephrasing disbelief in a thing's existence due to lack of demonstration of the thing's existence as a positive inference that the thing doesn't exist deriving from the fact that the disbeliever rejects the notion that the believer who has not demonstrated the existence nevertheless has special privy knowledge of the existence. This is sophistry. It amounts to an attempt to try to substitute a claim for private knowledge as a demonstration of existence. Such an attempt rightfully has no effect on most sane people. It's much simpler than this. The thing hasn't been demonstrated to exist. Ergo, there's no reason to believe it does. You need not go further. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#622 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: central Illinois
Posts: 39,700
|
|
__________________
I suspect you are a sandwich, metaphorically speaking. -Donn And a shot rang out. Now Space is doing time... -Ben Burch You built the toilet - don't complain when people crap in it. _Kid Eager Never underestimate the power of the Random Number God. More of evolutionary history is His doing than people think. - Dinwar |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#623 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,435
|
No, atheists simply don't believe in a god. Since they don't believe in a god, then yes, it's trivial that they don't believe that god revealed himself to you.
However, you are implying two facts that are not inferred by atheism, as all atheism is is a lack of believing in god. These are:
So long as the person doesn't believe that your revelation came from a god, there's room for that person to be an atheist.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#624 |
Tergiversator
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,998
|
good for you.
If that was your entire point, you could have simply stated that and no one would have cared. Instead, you attempted to gussy up the argument in convoluted sentence structure. Now, of course, how much weight you put into the word belief is a different matter. Given your use of quotes, I shall assume you are being intentionally obtuse with it. yawn. |
__________________
What's the best argument for UHC? This argument against UHC. "Perhaps one reason per capita GDP is lower in UHC countries is because they've tried to prevent this important function [bankrupting the sick] and thus carry forward considerable economic dead wood?"-BeAChooser |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#625 |
Tergiversator
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,998
|
|
__________________
What's the best argument for UHC? This argument against UHC. "Perhaps one reason per capita GDP is lower in UHC countries is because they've tried to prevent this important function [bankrupting the sick] and thus carry forward considerable economic dead wood?"-BeAChooser |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#626 |
Dental Floss Tycoon
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 19,791
|
Is anyone else reminded of Lewis' lame "liar, lunatic or lord" argument?
|
__________________
Counterbalance in the little town of Ridgeview, Ohio. Two people permanently enslaved by the tyranny of fear and superstitution, facing the future with a kind of helpless dread. Two others facing the future with confidence - having escaped one of the darker places of the Twilight Zone. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#627 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,435
|
By what means are you ensuring that it is exhaustive? Dancing David has a few other ideas.
I know it's not mutually exclusive. Reason often entails quite a bit of imagination.
Quote:
I have no idea what you're talking about with this "David" thing. Perhaps, since you're playing a game of gotcha, you think that this is the game people are supposed to play, and maybe by "David" you mean somebody who forces you to change your mind about something. If that's the case, I have a feeling you'll never find David. I'm not interested in your finding David myself, nor do I see sufficient potential value to solicit your forum. I'm just a simple guy. I like my eggs yolkless, my ham still on a happy pig, and my beliefs justified.
Quote:
Quote:
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#628 |
Satan's Helper
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 44,024
|
There may come a day when some people (but I doubt all of them) will understand that there is a giant, massive, ridiculously large and left-to-explain gap between "I, personally, can't mentally conceive how this happened" and "Thus, Goddidit"
... but I won't be holding my breath for that day of enlightenment. |
__________________
"I am a collection of water, calcium and organic molecules called Carl Sagan" Carl Sagan |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#629 |
Muse
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 734
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#630 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: central Illinois
Posts: 39,700
|
More overgeneralization and false dichotomy.
I am a pluralist so such simplitic thinking seems rather imposed and artificial to me. Most observable events fall along a spectrum of results and most observable events seem to be multivariate. Now the other issue is that you seem to be baiting more than discussing. |
__________________
I suspect you are a sandwich, metaphorically speaking. -Donn And a shot rang out. Now Space is doing time... -Ben Burch You built the toilet - don't complain when people crap in it. _Kid Eager Never underestimate the power of the Random Number God. More of evolutionary history is His doing than people think. - Dinwar |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#631 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: central Illinois
Posts: 39,700
|
|
__________________
I suspect you are a sandwich, metaphorically speaking. -Donn And a shot rang out. Now Space is doing time... -Ben Burch You built the toilet - don't complain when people crap in it. _Kid Eager Never underestimate the power of the Random Number God. More of evolutionary history is His doing than people think. - Dinwar |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#632 |
121.92-meter mutant fire-breathing lizard-thingy
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Northern St. Louis County, Missouri.
Posts: 42,180
|
|
__________________
Guns that are instantly available for use are instantly available for misuse. World War II Diplomatic and Political Resources Hyperwar, WWII Military History Buying conspiracy books is a voluntary tax on stupid. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#633 |
Hostile Nanobacon
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 30,587
|
Not much point to it if you've already claimed to have won, is there?
Now, if you were to admit here that your argument has been thoroughly demolished and it was just a lame attempt at getting traffic to your site, I would consider visiting your site. Do we have an accord? |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#634 |
Tergiversator
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,998
|
If you believe you've won, then I guess there's nothing left to discuss.
We are out here. As I mentioned. And as you failed to answer my question regarding the activity of your site, I went there to see and it turns out I was right. Only you had posted on Sunday. Since then, one to two others have been in attendance. As such, I see no reason to spend my energy at a location which receives such little attention. If you have an actual argument or point to make, feel free to make it. If you are afraid to do so, go ahead and continue making your bizarre lists of JREF members who responded to you and your running tally of post counts and page views since you posted on this thread. Just keep in mind that while you may feel the activity in response to your posts is high, it's only a tiny fraction of the activity and exchange of ideas that goes on at the JREF forum. It's why I think your request to continue the conversation at your site is laughable. Posts here reach more people with a wide ranging backgrounds of education and expertise. I've learned a lot here. So could you. Indeed, you already have. After all, you seemed to not know what anthropomorphism was, nor the advances in cognitive science that relate to the subject. Just think what more you could learn if you abandoned your sophistry and games. |
__________________
What's the best argument for UHC? This argument against UHC. "Perhaps one reason per capita GDP is lower in UHC countries is because they've tried to prevent this important function [bankrupting the sick] and thus carry forward considerable economic dead wood?"-BeAChooser |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#635 |
Dental Floss Tycoon
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 19,791
|
|
__________________
Counterbalance in the little town of Ridgeview, Ohio. Two people permanently enslaved by the tyranny of fear and superstitution, facing the future with a kind of helpless dread. Two others facing the future with confidence - having escaped one of the darker places of the Twilight Zone. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#636 |
Hostile Nanobacon
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 30,587
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#637 |
Tergiversator
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,998
|
I have never claimed to "win". It's a silly thing to do in a debate as the goal of a debate should be to get to the truth. If the debate succeeds at that, then everyone wins.
Because you clearly don't believe the statement. Otherwise, you wouldn't continue. I think you are confused here. There are 32 participants. not "adversaries". I am not an adversary of anyone's here. My goal is mutual edification. What is your goal? If you want a one on one debate, then it is possible to set up a moderated debate here. It has happened in the past and can happen again. I see no reason to post at a website that is so desolate. Your phrasing here is quite telling. |
__________________
What's the best argument for UHC? This argument against UHC. "Perhaps one reason per capita GDP is lower in UHC countries is because they've tried to prevent this important function [bankrupting the sick] and thus carry forward considerable economic dead wood?"-BeAChooser |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#638 |
Tergiversator
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,998
|
I would love to see that.
I simply don't know why you keep evading the discussion. Would you like to set up a moderated thread here? I can see if we can arrange it. If me, that's fine. If someone else, that's fine to. However, and I want this to be Ultimately clear, I do not speak for JREF. I do not speak for anyone other than myself. If you wish to copy paste the content here to there, that's fine. ok. |
__________________
What's the best argument for UHC? This argument against UHC. "Perhaps one reason per capita GDP is lower in UHC countries is because they've tried to prevent this important function [bankrupting the sick] and thus carry forward considerable economic dead wood?"-BeAChooser |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#639 |
Tergiversator
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,998
|
Well, as I said, my goal isn't to bring hits to your site. Secondly, your adversarial approach and need to label things as "david" and "Goliath" is just not welcoming or interesting. It's a bit childish and I do not wish to have a childish discussion.
My goal is constructive open discussion in a public form. your site doesn't provide that for me. If you wish to use it as a repository of the discussion, that's fine by me. Maybe someone else would entertain your whimsy in this matter. if it's unilateral, it's not really a discussion or debate, is it? That's just preaching. As such, you are most definitely evading discussion. Such behavior doesn't bode well for a one on one debate. Moreover, this forum has rather strict rules regarding derailing and your continued request to take it elsewhere could be likely considered such a derail. Now, in the interest of open discussion, most here have likely not minded your derail as it may lead to an actual discussion. that is, of course, up to you. No one else, but you. I am not interested in that task. you have your answer. I've given you my interests. Others have stated their's. Perhaps someone will take you up on your terms. Note that that person wouldn't be a "david" as that person would only be a representative of himself. Just like I only claim to represent myself. However, You are likely not going to find a person to argue with you at your site as it serves no draw. Perhaps that's what you were hoping for after all? You can now return to your site of 3 members and claim the JREF forumites are "afraid" to discuss things with you. Would that please your ego enough? |
__________________
What's the best argument for UHC? This argument against UHC. "Perhaps one reason per capita GDP is lower in UHC countries is because they've tried to prevent this important function [bankrupting the sick] and thus carry forward considerable economic dead wood?"-BeAChooser |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#640 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,679
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | |
|
|