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.
Reply
Old Yesterday, 04:54 AM   #1681
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 23,893
This is the lowest moral high ground I've ever seen someone try to argue from.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue 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 Yesterday, 06:07 AM   #1682
zooterkin
Nitpicking dilettante
Administrator
 
zooterkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Berkshire, mostly
Posts: 44,842
Mod WarningThe thread seems have drifted a long way from the ostensible topic. While we do allow some drift, there are plenty of other threads where clinic bombings or predatory priests are on-topic.

If you have something further to say on Sagan’s dragon in the garage analogy, please have at it; otherwise, please find a more appropriate thread (starting a new one is an option, of course).
Posted By:zooterkin
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.Bertrand Russell
Zooterkin is correct Darat
Nerd! Hokulele
Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232
Ezekiel 23:20
zooterkin 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 Yesterday, 07:11 AM   #1683
Lithrael
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,735
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Again, my experience with religious types are that they are way more casual in interpretation than many assume. Strict legalists are a dying breed, largely because we can read and stuff now.
The point of my post didn’t get across then. I’m not talking only about legalists.

I’m saying that unless you’ve dug all the way down to religion-in-name-only, like maybe Unitarians, the underlying current is that you’re trying to do right by God and nobody can definitely sit down and say what that even is. So anytime someone powerful, someone charismatic, someone compelling, figures that god wants something, they have got this huge, huge club automatically tied to their argument, ‘god wants this,’ and people who genuinely just want to do right by god are forced to choose between discord with someone who says they figured out what god wants, or roll along with it. When that idea is ‘run a soup kitchen’ that is great. When it’s ‘abortion is evil’ it causes a lot of unnecessary harm even if nobody gets past the point of waving signs. Even if it just causes someone to have to leave their church! Where they fostered this relationship to their community and to god, that was so important to them! To even have to think “what if they’re right about god wants?”

God is too big and too mysterious and too not actually there for the times when people mistake their own moral crusades for what god wants.

ETA ah, didn’t see the mod box. If people thought it was important to please the dragon because it was infinitely good, obviously the garage is where I’d be telling them piles of gold belonged. Dragons love piles of gold. How do I know there’s a dragon in my garage that wants piles of gold? Well my friend you see.....

Last edited by Lithrael; Yesterday at 07:20 AM.
Lithrael 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 Yesterday, 07:44 AM   #1684
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 23,893
The point of the Dragon in the Garage metaphor is that it's intellectually dishonest to argue for something by reducing it down to something that functionally doesn't exist.

That's the point of the metaphor. It's not that the person in the metaphor literally believes in an invisible, intangible, mute, floating dragon in their garage (again as noted it's important detail in the metaphor that he starts of claiming just a "dragon" but adds the special pleadings as ways of showing a dragon is in the garage are suggested) he believes there's a dragon in his garage and everything else are just various straws he grasps at to maintain that belief.

Which is exactly what is being done here. We're having to argue against neutered Gods and neutered religions that don't do anything that nobody believes in just to keep the questions of God on the table. It's absurd.

It's, like I've said, functionally do different then looking into the fridge for a beer, seeing no beer, and instead of just accepting that there is no beer sitting there making up (and demanding other people do the same) new alternatives versions of beer with fewer and fewer identifying characteristics until your so deep in the semantic weeds you've created a flavorless, odorless beer you can't see, hear, taste, touch, or in anyway otherwise sense, a beer that has so few qualities it is functionally identical to "no beer" just to keep the idea of their being a beer in your fridge going.

And, back to the elephant in the room, that's the problem. We all recognize this in literally every other context. If you've looked in the fridge for a beer, have found no beer, and you're 20 minutes later still looking for a beer by removing the defining qualities of beer one by one, it's because you still think there's a beer with the original qualities in the fridge that you just haven't found yet.

That's the thing people are putting on a big show of pretending not to understand.

When someone tells me a dragon lives in their garage and goes "Oh but it's invisible you can't see it" only after I ask why I can't see a dragon... THEY'RE LYING. They don't think the dragon is invisible, they still "see" (sorta) the dragon because they think they have some special magical mental power I don't have (faith or some variation thereof) that I don't have.

Same thing here. When someone says "Okay but God" or "Okay but maybe God" at first and only then starts listing off reasons the God is undetectable... THEY'RE LYING. They are still arguing for the original concept of God first put on the table in some way.

If there is zero evidence for a dragon in the garage, indeed zero reason to even be asking the question in the first place then the person arguing there definitely is a dragon in the garage and the person who demands we not take the question of a dragon in the garage off the table ARE MAKING THE SAME ARGUMENT.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue 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 Yesterday, 08:51 AM   #1685
Lithrael
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,735
Yeah. And you don’t have to be a theist to say ‘oh come on, lots of people derive a lot of good from feeling like there’s a dragon in their garage.’ But you’re certainly a non-theist that is handwaving the whole problem that the dragon is the only thing where we’re asked to entertain the idea that we don’t know if it’s there or not when we have no evidence at all that it is there.

And then proposes that things that aren’t evidence are evidence.

If there was an area of the brain that everyone has, that you could stimulate in a lab, and the person would report they felt the presence of a dragon, that’s evidence that the brain has structures that make you feel the presence of the serpentine, not evidence that dragons are there and you can sense them using those structures.

Isn’t the ‘silly’ thread actually on that now? About how some brain disorders give you a powerful sense of religious connection?

Last edited by Lithrael; Yesterday at 10:16 AM.
Lithrael 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 Yesterday, 08:54 AM   #1686
Lithrael
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,735
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
If there is zero evidence for a dragon in the garage, indeed zero reason to even be asking the question in the first place then the person arguing there definitely is a dragon in the garage and the person who demands we not take the question of a dragon in the garage off the table ARE MAKING THE SAME ARGUMENT.
Yeah.
Lithrael 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 06:20 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, 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.