ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy
 


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.
Tags Allan Kardec , life after death , spiritism , spiritualism

Reply
Old 19th August 2019, 10:16 AM   #281
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 12,463
Originally Posted by Ricardo View Post
their approach causes ... a twitch in my left shoulder ... to me this is evidence of the existence of spirits ... I came to this conclusion ... from my own experience ...
It's a symptom of a repetitive motion injury.

You must stop patting yourself on the back for your "enlightened" knowledge of the spirit world.
__________________
"When a man who is honestly mistaken, hears the truth, he will either cease being mistaken or cease being honest." - Anonymous

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2019, 04:13 AM   #282
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 25,303
Okay, trying to dig in to the scientific revelations directly from spirits in the last book a little deeper.

The spirit goes full-on into pushing luminiferous aether as the explanation for everything - something that was the contemporary scientific paradigm but since proven false - complete with saying that it is the medium of transmission of light, sound, and heat. The spirit further describes the fundamental forces (which we know of as electromagnetism, gravity, strong nuclear, and weak nuclear) as being "weight, cohesion, affinity, attraction, magnetism, and active electricity".

It advocates for the idea of spontaneous creation of life.

It's explanation for the formation of the solar system (concentrating on the Earth) is that a nebula condensed down into a sphere, which started rotating. The rotation became so fast that centrifugal forces threw a ring of matter out from it. That ring condensed into a sphere, which itself began to rotate so fast that it threw off a ring of matter, which became the moon. The reason the moon always faces us is that that side is denser than the other, and therefore heavier. That is also why that side has no atmosphere or life, whereas the far side will have both atmosphere and water.

The following planets have no moons: Mercury (correct), Venus (correct), Mars (incorrect). The reason Saturn's ring has not condensed into a satellite is that every single molecule is equidistant from every other molecule and, as such, there are no denser points to attract the rest of the matter.

Comets are suns, which wander from sun to sun acquiring mass.

This phrasing is a little ambiguous, but it's either claimed that there are 30 million stars like our sun in the Milky Way, or that there are 30 million stars in the Milky Way. The first is more likely to be the intended meaning [edited to add - it's later made clear that the latter is actually what is intended]. Not that it matters, as there are likely 20 billion stars like our sun in the Milky Way - 10% of the 200 billion total stars. It's also claimed that there are "millions" of galaxies, whereas the latest figure seems to be that there are likely 2 trillion.

It's claimed that Sirius is "thousands" of times larger than our sun, when in fact Sirius A is twice as big as the sun, and Sirius B is the same size as the sun. It's also claimed that Sirius has "a very great number" of planets orbiting it, when there are actually none. There is no mention of it being a binary star system, with the next sentence in fact speaking of binary systems as being different. Gallileo apparently concurs that there are inhabited worlds orbiting binary stars, and that the people living on these worlds get white light due to the different colours of light from the different suns combining.

I'm taking another break after that lot. I hope Ricardo will share his thoughts on the above.
__________________
I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.
Squeegee Beckenheim is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2019, 04:40 AM   #283
Ricardo
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Posts: 484
Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim View Post
Okay, trying to dig in to the scientific revelations directly from spirits in the last book a little deeper.

The spirit goes full-on into pushing luminiferous aether as the explanation for everything - something that was the contemporary scientific paradigm but since proven false - complete with saying that it is the medium of transmission of light, sound, and heat. The spirit further describes the fundamental forces (which we know of as electromagnetism, gravity, strong nuclear, and weak nuclear) as being "weight, cohesion, affinity, attraction, magnetism, and active electricity".

It advocates for the idea of spontaneous creation of life.

It's explanation for the formation of the solar system (concentrating on the Earth) is that a nebula condensed down into a sphere, which started rotating. The rotation became so fast that centrifugal forces threw a ring of matter out from it. That ring condensed into a sphere, which itself began to rotate so fast that it threw off a ring of matter, which became the moon. The reason the moon always faces us is that that side is denser than the other, and therefore heavier. That is also why that side has no atmosphere or life, whereas the far side will have both atmosphere and water.

The following planets have no moons: Mercury (correct), Venus (correct), Mars (incorrect). The reason Saturn's ring has not condensed into a satellite is that every single molecule is equidistant from every other molecule and, as such, there are no denser points to attract the rest of the matter.

Comets are suns, which wander from sun to sun acquiring mass.

This phrasing is a little ambiguous, but it's either claimed that there are 30 million stars like our sun in the Milky Way, or that there are 30 million stars in the Milky Way. The first is more likely to be the intended meaning [edited to add - it's later made clear that the latter is actually what is intended]. Not that it matters, as there are likely 20 billion stars like our sun in the Milky Way - 10% of the 200 billion total stars. It's also claimed that there are "millions" of galaxies, whereas the latest figure seems to be that there are likely 2 trillion.

It's claimed that Sirius is "thousands" of times larger than our sun, when in fact Sirius A is twice as big as the sun, and Sirius B is the same size as the sun. It's also claimed that Sirius has "a very great number" of planets orbiting it, when there are actually none. There is no mention of it being a binary star system, with the next sentence in fact speaking of binary systems as being different. Gallileo apparently concurs that there are inhabited worlds orbiting binary stars, and that the people living on these worlds get white light due to the different colours of light from the different suns combining.

I'm taking another break after that lot. I hope Ricardo will share his thoughts on the above.
19th century science and astronomy

It is important that in these books are documented and recorded the evidence of the existence of spirits.
Ricardo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2019, 06:03 AM   #284
jond
Illuminator
 
jond's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,324
Originally Posted by Ricardo View Post
19th century science and astronomy

It is important that in these books are documented and recorded the evidence of the existence of spirits.
No, what is recorded and documented in these books is his belief in the existence of spirits. Not evidence, belief.
jond is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2019, 07:12 AM   #285
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 25,303
Originally Posted by Ricardo View Post
19th century science and astronomy
Why is an advanced spirit who has witnessed these things first hand, and who is revealing absolute truths constrained by 19th century science and astronomy? I can understand why a 19th century human who is working within his or her own perceptions and knowledge would say things like this which are patently wrong. But the source of this knowledge is not purported to be a person from the 19th century. It's purported to be an advanced, non-corporeal being who has absolute knowledge of such matters.

If spirits can only tell you things that you already know, and if those things can be completely incorrect, then what's the point in asking the spirits for knowledge?

The funny thing is that in the introduction the book itself addresses what knowledge is contained within it, and what the conclusion should be if any of that knowledge is wrong:

Quote:
It is the concordant, collective teaching of the spirits who have passed beyond which constitutes the logical criterion, giving strength to the spiritual doctrine and assuring to it perpetuity. In order to change it, it would be necessary that the universal experience and teachings of spirits should change, and that one day they would contradict what they have previously declared. Considering that it has its source in the teachings of the spirits, in order for it to fail would be necessary the cessation of the existence of the spirits.
If the spirits are shown to be wrong, then the explanation is that spirits don't exist. That's according to the book itself.

In the next paragraph, the author re-states this in a different way:

Quote:
The Spirits’ Book has seen its credit consolidate, because it is the expression of a collective thought. In the month of April, 1867, it accomplished its first decennial period. In this interval, the fundamental principles which form its base have been successively completed and developed by following progressive teachings of the spirits; but not one of its declarations has received contradiction through the trial. All without exception have remained firm, stronger than ever; while, among all the contradictory ideas with which persons have tried to oppose
them, not one has prevailed, because on all sides the spiritual teaching was confirmatory. This characteristic result we can proclaim without vanity, as its merit is not attributable to us.
It's strength comes from the fact that it hasn't been contradicted.

If you truly believe in the teachings of this man, then you have to conclude that spirits don't exist.
__________________
I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.
Squeegee Beckenheim is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2019, 09:26 AM   #286
Lukraak_Sisser
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,454
I always find it interesting that these alleged spirits can manipulate matter, yet not use computers.

There have been a LOT of computer programmers that have died by now, why has not one just used his/her spirit powers to type out answers?
Lukraak_Sisser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2019, 09:37 AM   #287
Joe Random
Master Poster
 
Joe Random's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,062
Originally Posted by Lukraak_Sisser View Post
I always find it interesting that these alleged spirits can manipulate matter, yet not use computers.

There have been a LOT of computer programmers that have died by now, why has not one just used his/her spirit powers to type out answers?


You might not like what they have to say ...


Joe Random is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2019, 09:39 AM   #288
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 84,559
Originally Posted by Ricardo View Post
Allan Kardec ... the codifier of the Spiritist doctrine ... used his own methodology ... to get the evidence of the existence of the spirits ... BELZ .. even using the methodology that is in these books that I indicated can get the evidence of spirit stocks ... this can be done in your own home ... I believe you are the carrier of unconscious intuitive mediumship ... use the methodology of Allan Kardec ... it is in the mediums book ...http://ssbaltimore.org/e-books/
I have got to hand it to you. You have a rare talent for posting things unrelated to what you're replying to.

Quote:
but the pain disappeared immediately ... it was a matter of seconds ...
So?
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2019, 10:45 AM   #289
kali1137
Muse
 
kali1137's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Purgatory, PA
Posts: 953
Originally Posted by paiute View Post
He'll be a newt soon.
But he'll get better!

I would so like to discuss the finer points of the spiritualist doctrine with you but you are currently not qualified to speak with me. Please read 30 Stephen King books as they amuse me and then we can begin discussing!
kali1137 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2019, 10:59 AM   #290
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 12,463
Originally Posted by Ricardo View Post
19th century science and astronomy

It is important that in these books are documented and recorded the evidence his belief of the existence of spirits.
FIFY

What he believes is one thing - what he believes he proves isn't in evidence.
__________________
"When a man who is honestly mistaken, hears the truth, he will either cease being mistaken or cease being honest." - Anonymous

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2019, 12:12 PM   #291
Ricardo
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Posts: 484
Questioning Pseudo-Skepticism

Pseudo-skepticism is worse than religious fanaticism!
Ricardo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2019, 12:18 PM   #292
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 84,559
Originally Posted by Ricardo View Post
Pseudo-skepticism is worse than religious fanaticism!
1) No it's not.
2) You don't get to call actual skepticism "pseudo-skepticism" just because it's directed at something you believe in. You're the unskeptical one, and that isn't our problem.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2019, 12:22 PM   #293
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 12,463
Originally Posted by Ricardo View Post
Pseudo-skepticism is worse than religious fanaticism!
Credulous thinking built on fairy tales doesn't take skepticism to rebut.

The fact you believe in something doesn't establish that your beliefs are true.
__________________
"When a man who is honestly mistaken, hears the truth, he will either cease being mistaken or cease being honest." - Anonymous

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2019, 12:24 PM   #294
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 21,363
Originally Posted by Myriad View Post
Originally Posted by Ricardo View Post
These pseudo-skeptics don't even know about the Spiritist Doctrine ... the debate is over before it begins! Waste of time with pseudo-skeptics!

On pages 26 and 27 of the thread Scorpion linked to, I raised several objections and important questions about the spiritualist reincarnation narrative as I understand it. I was disappointed that Scorpion didn't reply to most of them, though it's understandable as he was responding to many other members throughout the thread.

I'm interested in discussing it in depth, even to the point of reading books you recommended provided they provide deeper answers to specific questions we're already discussing. The key question I want to address (excerpted from that thread, with a few tweaks) is this:

Quote:
Any reincarnated successor "self" of mine... doesn't have my current memories of my current life. Doesn't have my learned knowledge or beliefs (those being types of memories). Doesn't have my specific genetic physical characteristics. Doesn't have my life history of interactions with the world. Doesn't share the follow-ons of that history (such as, people who know me, things I've written, property I used to own... all of which, if I had merely lost all my memories but were still living, would still be associated with me even if I didn't remember them myself).

So, in what way is that successor myself? The only thing we share is eventual future access to some hypothetical locked-away memory store that will be restored to "me" at some future time along my supposedly educational spiritual journey.

Aside from that, the reincarnation narrative tells me that I have far more in common with you than with any of my predecessor or reincarnated successor "selves." You and I share large amounts of culture, similar environments we've lived in and experiences we've lived through, and perhaps a common language in which we can actually converse. That's not true of my reincarnated selves. I can't talk to them, they can't talk to me; they live in my past and future, and most likely in far-away places with different ways of life. They're complete strangers.

Why would I be tempted to single out a few specific past and future lives, rather than the people I know around me today (or, perhaps, every conscious being), as additional "selves" of mine? What qualifies them for that distinction?
Exactly - it really isn't profound.
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2019, 12:24 PM   #295
Czarcasm
Groovy Groovy Guru
 
Czarcasm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 1,076
The constant misuse of the word by people trying to push woo can certainly be a pain in the tush.
Czarcasm is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2019, 12:25 PM   #296
jond
Illuminator
 
jond's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,324
Originally Posted by Ricardo View Post
Pseudo-skepticism is worse than religious fanaticism!
Fortunately, this board is largely populated skeptics, not pseudo-skeptics. Religious fanatics like yourself hate being shown with facts that you are very wrong. You accuse us of being closed minded, but your mind is entirely closed to the possibility that you are wrong.

And wrong you are:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...1#post12792691

How surprising that you have run away when forced to confront the facts.
jond is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2019, 12:26 PM   #297
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
 
kookbreaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 12,218
The cry and accusation of ‘pseudo-skeptic’ to actual cases of pseudo-skepticism is around 100 to 1.
__________________
www.spectrum-scientifics.com <- My store of science toys, instruments and general fun!

Thanks for helping me win Best Toys in Philly Voter in 2011,2012, and 2014! We won' be discussing the disappointment that was 2013.
kookbreaker is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2019, 12:39 PM   #298
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 31,346
Originally Posted by Ricardo View Post
19th century science and astronomy

Indeed. Which rather suggests that the “knowledge” comes from 19th century people, not spirits, doesn’t it?
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2019, 12:39 PM   #299
Ricardo
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Posts: 484
I'm not criticizing anyone here, I just want to question pseudo-skepticism! because it really exists!
Ricardo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2019, 12:40 PM   #300
Czarcasm
Groovy Groovy Guru
 
Czarcasm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 1,076
Originally Posted by Ricardo View Post
I'm not criticizing anyone here, I just want to question pseudo-skepticism! because it really exists!
Define it! Please!
Czarcasm is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2019, 12:42 PM   #301
Ricardo
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Posts: 484
Originally Posted by jond View Post
Fortunately, this board is largely populated skeptics, not pseudo-skeptics. Religious fanatics like yourself hate being shown with facts that you are very wrong. You accuse us of being closed minded, but your mind is entirely closed to the possibility that you are wrong.

And wrong you are:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...1#post12792691

How surprising that you have run away when forced to confront the facts.
Science is not infallible and cannot yet explain everything!
Ricardo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2019, 12:45 PM   #302
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 31,346
Originally Posted by Ricardo View Post
Science is not infallible and cannot yet explain everything!

At least it can explain, or at least reliably describe and predict,* some things.


*See item 17.
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky

Last edited by Mojo; 20th August 2019 at 12:49 PM.
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2019, 12:50 PM   #303
jond
Illuminator
 
jond's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,324
Originally Posted by Ricardo View Post
Science is not infallible and cannot yet explain everything!
Yes, science cannot explain everything. But we do know that your book is absolutely wrong, which means you are wrong. And you are too close minded to consider these facts.
jond is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2019, 12:59 PM   #304
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 12,463
Originally Posted by Ricardo View Post
Science is not infallible and cannot yet explain everything!
Superstition, myth and credulous thinking doesn't trump science.
__________________
"When a man who is honestly mistaken, hears the truth, he will either cease being mistaken or cease being honest." - Anonymous

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2019, 01:13 PM   #305
Ricardo
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Posts: 484
One must fight pathological skepticism or pseudo-skepticism in order not to harm science! you need to study Marcello Truzzi!
Ricardo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2019, 01:17 PM   #306
Foster Zygote
Dental Floss Tycoon
 
Foster Zygote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 16,965
Originally Posted by Ricardo View Post
Science is not infallible and cannot yet explain everything!
If it ever explains everything, we'll stop doing science.
__________________
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.
Foster Zygote is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2019, 02:52 PM   #307
Trebuchet
Penultimate Amazing
 
Trebuchet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: The Great Northwet
Posts: 22,626
Originally Posted by Ricardo View Post
Science is not infallible and cannot yet explain everything!
Anti-Science, on the other hand, cannot explain anything.
__________________
Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.
Trebuchet is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2019, 02:59 PM   #308
Kid Eager
Philosopher
 
Kid Eager's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,808
I’m still waiting for the question. So far all that OP has managed to deliver is a series of short verbal ejaculations. Sad.
__________________
What do Narwhals, Magnets and Apollo 13 have in common? Think about it....
Kid Eager is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2019, 03:12 PM   #309
fromdownunder
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,471
Originally Posted by Ricardo View Post
you need to study Marcello Truzzi!

What does he say?


Norm
__________________
Against stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in Vain


fromdownunder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2019, 04:19 PM   #310
Wolrab
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,546
I'd really like to see a definition of pseudo skepticism.
__________________
"Such reports are usually based on the sighting of something the sighters cannot explain and that they (or someone else on their behalf) explain as representing an interstellar spaceship-often by saying "But what else can it be?" as though thier own ignorance is a decisive factor." Isaac Asimov
Wolrab is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2019, 04:23 PM   #311
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 18,934
Originally Posted by slythe View Post
Define it! Please!
Originally Posted by Wolrab View Post
I'd really like to see a definition of pseudo skepticism.
That would be quite useful to furthering the topic of the thread.
__________________
Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa

If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake.
Dr. Keith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2019, 04:28 PM   #312
Wolrab
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,546
Originally Posted by slythe
Quote:
Define it! Please!
Originally Posted by Wolrab
Quote:
I'd really like to see a definition of pseudo skepticism.

Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post
That would be quite useful to furthering the topic of the thread.
Oh my God! There's the proof! slythe saw my post from the future and paraphrased it! What else could it be?
__________________
"Such reports are usually based on the sighting of something the sighters cannot explain and that they (or someone else on their behalf) explain as representing an interstellar spaceship-often by saying "But what else can it be?" as though thier own ignorance is a decisive factor." Isaac Asimov
Wolrab is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2019, 05:12 PM   #313
Steve001
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,516
Originally Posted by Ricardo View Post
Science is not infallible and cannot yet explain everything!
Firstly, I applaud you for walking into the lions den. Secondly, I too would like you to define the term.
Thirdly, I like to know which things you'd like not to be casually dismissed as absolutely false?

Last edited by Steve001; 20th August 2019 at 05:22 PM.
Steve001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2019, 05:20 PM   #314
sackett
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Detroit
Posts: 5,593
Superman performs nightly at the Colorado Brothel!

Originally Posted by Kid Eager View Post
I’m still waiting for the question. So far all that OP has managed to deliver is a series of short verbal ejaculations. Sad.
But you have to admire his stamina.
__________________
Fill the seats of justice with good men; not so absolute in goodness as to forget what human frailty is. -- Thomas Jefferson

What region of the earth is not filled with our calamities? -- Virgil
sackett is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2019, 05:21 PM   #315
Ricardo
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Posts: 484
Pseudo-skeptics don't care to study anything, they don't want to see the data, they don't want to analyze the evidence, they don't care about the witnesses ... All they want is for the opposing theory to go off the map as quickly as possible before others get to know her!
Ricardo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2019, 05:22 PM   #316
Ricardo
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Posts: 484
The pseudo-skeptic attempts to rationalize his own personal beliefs and will attempt to foul, denigrate, discard, and destroy the new information (including the scientific proof of the afterlife) that causes the pseudo-skeptic much distress.
Ricardo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2019, 05:23 PM   #317
Ricardo
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Posts: 484
He will defend his pseudo-skepticism and cruelly ridicule and attack any positive evidence for the afterlife - which is causing the pseudo-skeptic distress. Again, all sense of scientific objectivity of the pseudo-skeptic will be lost.
Ricardo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2019, 05:29 PM   #318
Norman Alexander
Philosopher
 
Norman Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 6,059
Hi Winston Wu! How have you been these past years?
__________________
...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornets’ nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015
Norman Alexander is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2019, 05:50 PM   #319
fromdownunder
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,471
Originally Posted by Ricardo View Post
Pseudo-skeptics don't care to study anything, they don't want to see the data, they don't want to analyze the evidence, they don't care about the witnesses ... All they want is for the opposing theory to go off the map as quickly as possible before others get to know her!

Put your theory here and we will discuss it further.



1. Define what your case/theory on this thread is.
2. Show us your evidence.
3. Show us your supporting data.
4. Tell us who the witnesses are - verifiable from an independent source.



Then we will have something to discuss. Simple really. Except you will not do this and will refuse to provide any of the information in points 1 - 4 above to even allow discussion to start.



Norm
__________________
Against stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in Vain


fromdownunder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2019, 06:38 PM   #320
Robin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 10,402
Originally Posted by Ricardo View Post
Pseudo-skeptics don't care to study anything, they don't want to see the data, they don't want to analyze the evidence, they don't care about the witnesses ... All they want is for the opposing theory to go off the map as quickly as possible before others get to know her!
On this site we have examined dozens of case studies, checked the calculations, closely questioned anyone who has made claims of paranormal events

There are people who have carefully read the documents you have supplied and asked you questions about them which you have dodged claiming problems with your English language ability.

Why don't you face it? The evidence just isn't there.
__________________
The non-theoretical character of metaphysics would not be in itself a defect; all arts have this non-theoretical character without thereby losing their high value for personal as well as for social life. The danger lies in the deceptive character of metaphysics; it gives the illusion of knowledge without actually giving any knowledge. This is the reason why we reject it. - Rudolf Carnap "Philosophy and Logical Syntax"
Robin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:56 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.