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 Today, 05:37 AM   #2081
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 9,839
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
Tit for tat. One who dig pit for other fall into it himself. Do regard everyone as you do to yourself....there may be some many different languages to it since long back. I do not know, how fall back electron after excitation and emitting photon, obey this rule?
???
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett
Pixel42 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 Today, 06:07 AM   #2082
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 29,593
Originally Posted by Pixel42 View Post
???

Kumar has finally realised that he has once again had his arse handed to him, and has retreated into incoherence and nonsensical platitudes.
__________________
"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 Today, 06:25 AM   #2083
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 13,869
Originally Posted by Pixel42 View Post
???
Nothing relevant to topic. Ignore.
__________________
To try reach to Absolute & Final(A&F) is my honest desire. Let the things be A&F or die in themselves, if odd. Just Logical & Equanimious Discussions, No commitments.
Kumar 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 Today, 06:27 AM   #2084
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 29,593
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
Nothing relevant to topic.

Yes, that's why Pixel42 was puzzled. But then why did you post 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 Today, 06:31 AM   #2085
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 13,869
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
Yes, that's why Pixel42 was puzzled. But then why did you post it?
To puzzle her.
__________________
To try reach to Absolute & Final(A&F) is my honest desire. Let the things be A&F or die in themselves, if odd. Just Logical & Equanimious Discussions, No commitments.
Kumar 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 Today, 08:04 AM   #2086
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 21,689
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
That was common logic. Moreover people here had much made me aware real non A&F status of science, though I feel, it is also degrading the science.
I've missed a couple of days here, on a trip, and probably will have been "nija'ed" by Jay by now, but common logic is something you certainly have not demonstrated a knowledge of. It is inherent in science that it can never be "A&F" and it is certainly not degrading to say so. The only thing that can be truly "A&F" is faith, because it ignores the complexity of reality and makes things up.
__________________
Sir, I have found you an argument; but I am not obliged to find you an understanding. (Samuel Johnson)

I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)
bruto 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 Today, 09:05 AM   #2087
Peregrinus
Muse
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 978
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
Nothing relevant to topic. Ignore.
Fifty-some pages in and you've completely lost sight of the fact that others continually, fruitlessly try pointing out your view of almost everything does not match reality or any rational explanation of reality. You chase your A&F tail in endless circles and the only thing you accomplish is wearing a slight depression in the floor like Uncle Scrooge McDuck in his worry room.
Peregrinus 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 Today, 09:26 AM   #2088
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 21,689
By the way, not 100 percent relevant to the current discussion, but I was reading today a little biographical information about the great logician George Boole (on whose logical principles much of computer science relies), and I found it particularly ironic that he was killed by homeopathy.
__________________
Sir, I have found you an argument; but I am not obliged to find you an understanding. (Samuel Johnson)

I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)
bruto 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 Today, 09:40 AM   #2089
fagin
Illuminator
 
fagin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: As far away from casebro as possible.
Posts: 4,833
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
To puzzle her.
Being rude to someone who has been patient and helpful is nasty.

Is that part of your religion, or did you fail at that too?
__________________
There is no secret ingredient - Kung Fu Panda
fagin 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 Today, 09:56 AM   #2090
fuelair
Cythraul Enfys
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 55,379
Originally Posted by fagin View Post
Being rude to someone who has been patient and helpful is nasty.

Is that part of your religion, or did you fail at that too?
That would certainly A&F!!!!
__________________
There is no problem so great that it cannot be fixed by small explosives carefully placed.

Wash this space!

We fight for the Lady Babylon!!!
fuelair 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 Today, 09:56 AM   #2091
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 14,288
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
Yes, that link, was meant for critical assessment from competent people in that science here. If such competent people refute that with equanimity & A&F, I have to endorse it. About his capability of competence, religion, yes, science, to check.
We aren't talking about whether we're right to refute it. We're talking about whether he was right to write it in the first place. Please stop trying to talk about everything except the one person I'm asking about.
JayUtah 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 Today, 11:40 AM   #2092
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 29,593
Originally Posted by fagin View Post
Being rude to someone who has been patient and helpful is nasty.

Is that part of your religion, or did you fail at that too?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...1#post12078421
__________________
"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 Today, 11:44 AM   #2093
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
 
MRC_Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 20,371
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
My signature.
OK, and since humans know of nothing absolute and final, you have no area of expertise, and according to yourself cannot comment on anything. Well, I can only agree. Bye, then.

Hans
__________________
If you love life, you must accept the traces it leaves.
MRC_Hans 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 Today, 04:40 PM   #2094
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 14,288
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
I gave you a common google search link, but you have not cared that in your ego or laziness.
Well, let's see, since I posted my comprehensive refutation of Bhagchandra, you've posted only two links, neither of which is a "google search link." One of them, here
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJY07dWomTo

See live. Senstivity in plants.
was addressed in this post. The other, here in part
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
You may read it:
25 TYPES OF WRONG BELIEFS (MITHYATVA){in Jainism)
http://jainworld.com/jainbooks/image...ONG_BELIEF.htm
Its relevance to my refutation was not made apparent. If anything, as your other critics have amply noted, it outlines just how poorly you yourself obey Jain codes of conduct. As I tried to draw you back to answering the refutation, you threw a tantrum and told me you wouldn't be paying any further attention to me. So you can effectively stuff your insults above, where you suggest I didn't respond to that link because of laziness or ego.

It wasn't until much later that you told us the second link was relevant in explaining why you could not respond to my refutation of Bhagchandra without apparently violating your religious principles. My answer to that now remains the same as it was before: it doesn't matter what excuse you want to give for not addressing your critics. Regardless of reason, you still don't get to reap the benefits you would have gained by addressed them. If, for whatever reason, you decline to continue the debate, then the refutation stands unanswered and you don't get credit for what you claim you would have been able to do, but didn't.

Further, I simply don't believe you on that point. Twice now in this debate you've broached a subject and then, when it went badly for you, you tried to backpedal away from it, citing some circumstance beyond your control. I have a hard time believing that all these externalities are to blame for you being unable to finish what you start.
JayUtah 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 Today, 06:26 PM   #2095
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 13,869
Originally Posted by MRC_Hans View Post
OK, and since humans know of nothing absolute and final, you have no area of expertise, and according to yourself cannot comment on anything. Well, I can only agree. Bye, then.

Hans
Simply accept all sides are not A&F so all sides do not have perfect expertise, so just discuss in these considerations.
__________________
To try reach to Absolute & Final(A&F) is my honest desire. Let the things be A&F or die in themselves, if odd. Just Logical & Equanimious Discussions, No commitments.
Kumar 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 Today, 07:08 PM   #2096
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 13,869
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
Well, let's see, since I posted my comprehensive refutation of Bhagchandra, you've posted only two links, neither of which is a "google search link." One of them, herewas addressed in this post. The other, here in partIts relevance to my refutation was not made apparent. If anything, as your other critics have amply noted, it outlines just how poorly you yourself obey Jain codes of conduct. As I tried to draw you back to answering the refutation, you threw a tantrum and told me you wouldn't be paying any further attention to me. So you can effectively stuff your insults above, where you suggest I didn't respond to that link because of laziness or ego.

It wasn't until much later that you told us the second link was relevant in explaining why you could not respond to my refutation of Bhagchandra without apparently violating your religious principles. My answer to that now remains the same as it was before: it doesn't matter what excuse you want to give for not addressing your critics. Regardless of reason, you still don't get to reap the benefits you would have gained by addressed them. If, for whatever reason, you decline to continue the debate, then the refutation stands unanswered and you don't get credit for what you claim you would have been able to do, but didn't.

Further, I simply don't believe you on that point. Twice now in this debate you've broached a subject and then, when it went badly for you, you tried to backpedal away from it, citing some circumstance beyond your control. I have a hard time believing that all these externalities are to blame for you being unable to finish what you start.

Simply Bhagchandra posted gross interpretation of science relevance with Jainism and you just gross refutation in irrational skepticism. Being religious & believer, I done my duty to present religion & belief but being science person you have not done your duty to present, also positive scientific side of Jainism. Nothing can be with nil science in your superiority or preception. Being yet not A&F, Yet known or unknown is different angle. Rational Skepticism and bringing facts to A&F level can not suggest one sidedness. Hence just do you duty as scientist and present positive scientific side of Jainsism. For this intention, I posted various links on Jainism because it is new to you. One point, I clarified but anyway it was avoided by you.

Life like humans in plants do not mean, plants are like humans, but they just have life as humans have being beings. Jainism clearly differentiated different type of beings from one sense to five sense whereas plants are one sensed whereas humans are five sensed. Unless you acquire equanimious & rational unbiased attitude, I shall not get initiation to take your post very seriously. Moreover, as in my reply to MR hans, first accept by heart this truth that, no side is yet A&F and so no side can have A&F expertise in anything. We can just discuss by considering these in an true effort to get something better or A&F.
__________________
To try reach to Absolute & Final(A&F) is my honest desire. Let the things be A&F or die in themselves, if odd. Just Logical & Equanimious Discussions, No commitments.
Kumar 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 Today, 07:11 PM   #2097
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 13,869
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
We aren't talking about whether we're right to refute it. We're talking about whether he was right to write it in the first place. Please stop trying to talk about everything except the one person I'm asking about.
As per my last post. We can limit be consolidating all posts in one post for not to get overloaded, get confused, miss posts and ignore other posters.
__________________
To try reach to Absolute & Final(A&F) is my honest desire. Let the things be A&F or die in themselves, if odd. Just Logical & Equanimious Discussions, No commitments.
Kumar 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 Today, 07:13 PM   #2098
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 13,869
Originally Posted by fagin View Post
Being rude to someone who has been patient and helpful is nasty.

Is that part of your religion, or did you fail at that too?
That was just rhetoric reply.
__________________
To try reach to Absolute & Final(A&F) is my honest desire. Let the things be A&F or die in themselves, if odd. Just Logical & Equanimious Discussions, No commitments.
Kumar 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 Today, 07:18 PM   #2099
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 13,869
Originally Posted by bruto View Post
By the way, not 100 percent relevant to the current discussion, but I was reading today a little biographical information about the great logician George Boole (on whose logical principles much of computer science relies), and I found it particularly ironic that he was killed by homeopathy.
In irrational ego, preceptions & self interests, even irrational one can be counted as abnormal whereas 50 as normal and rightful. Fault of prevailing current environment.
__________________
To try reach to Absolute & Final(A&F) is my honest desire. Let the things be A&F or die in themselves, if odd. Just Logical & Equanimious Discussions, No commitments.
Kumar 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 Today, 08:49 PM   #2100
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 13,869
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
Now, "Deception" relevance: suppose you grow some flowers and vegetable plants at your home or at your farm for some pre-decided purpose. You nurse them, love them, and be happy on looking their good growth. On a day, when they are at full bloom or vegetable, suddenly you pluck them. By doing it, you discontinue their growth, pollination, seed forming, seed ripening etc., means destroying them and their next generations. What will you call it? A favor to them or a deception? Like, it all other domestication & farming.
In above, we can add beings taken in natural way without deception i.e. picking fruits, dead and superfluous parts, nectar, smell, beauty, honey drops, wild silk, cotton etc. i.e without undue violence esp generation violence.

Above "Deception" is relevant towards botanical side, now also towards zoological side : When we purposefully domesticate,cage or farm animal for any personal ultimate benefits in mind, nurse & protect them or also love them, enjoy looking growing them but suddenly on any black day slaughter them or use for any other violence purpose, will it not be a "Deception" i.e. first present yourself to them alike parent, god father, guardian or companion but ultimately suddenly create a most BLACK DAY for them? There may not be a deception involved in taking milk or other dead and superfluous things of them, as well in natural hunting but in former it may be. ??
__________________
To try reach to Absolute & Final(A&F) is my honest desire. Let the things be A&F or die in themselves, if odd. Just Logical & Equanimious Discussions, No commitments.
Kumar 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 Today, 09:09 PM   #2101
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 13,869
Food for skepticism:

Right/Rational Knowledge, Right/Rational faith and Right/Rational conduct as per Jainism is very well interpreted here:

Quote:
Right knowledge[edit]

Jain texts mention that knowledge is of five kinds – sensory knowledge, scriptural knowledge, clairvoyance, telepathy, and omniscience.[7] Out of these, sensory knowledge, scriptural knowledge and clairvoyance may also be erroneous knowledge.[8] Most of our knowledge is sensory-based (mati) and based on recorded knowledge developed by our ancestors in the form of books, articles, papers and other medium (sruta). Jain philosophers also include knowledge acquired directly without any medium. This is achieved by removing the karmic veil on the soul.
A person who sees objects illuminated by coloured light may not be able to judge the true colour of the objects. However, the same person viewing these objects illuminated by sunlight will see the true nature of their colours, without difficulty. Similarly, proper knowledge is essential to provide the right guidance to the soul in its journey towards spiritual uplifting.
The Jain theory of knowledge is a highly developed one based on comprehensive apprehension of reality in multitude of view points and relativity.[6]
Anekantavada, which literally means search of truth from different points of view, is the application of the principle of equality of souls in the sphere of thought. It is a jain philosophical standpoint just as there is the Advaitic standpoint of Sankara and the standpoint of the Middle Path of the Buddhists.[9] This search leads to understanding and toleration of different and even conflicting views. When this happens, prejudices subside and the tendency to accommodate increases. The theory of Anekanta is therefore a unique experiment of non-violence at the root.[5]
A derivation of this principle is the doctrine of Syadvada which highlights that every view is relative to its view point. For example, an object may seem heavy when carried on planet earth, yet lightweight when carried on the moon, where gravity is different. It is a matter of our daily experience that the same object which gives pleasure to us under certain circumstances becomes boring under different situations. Nonetheless relative truth is undoubtedly useful as it is a stepping stone to the ultimate realisation of reality. The theory of Syadvada is based on the premise that every proposition is only relatively true. It all depends on the particular aspect from which we approach that proposition. Jains therefore developed a logic that encompasses sevenfold predication so as to assist in the construction of proper judgement about any proposition.
Syadvada provides Jainas with a systematic methodology to explore the real nature of reality and consider the problem in a non-violent way from different perspectives. This process ensures that each statement is expressed from seven different conditional and relative viewpoints or propositions, and thus it is known as theory of conditioned predication. These seven propositions are described as follows:
1.Syād-asti — "in some ways it is"
2.Syād-nāsti — "in some ways it is not"
3.Syād-asti-nāsti — "in some ways it is and it is not"
4.Syād-asti-avaktavya — "in some ways it is and it is indescribable"
5.Syād-nāsti-avaktavya — "in some ways it is not and it is indescribable"
6.Syād-asti-nāsti-avaktavya — "in some ways it is, it is not and it is indescribable"
7.Syād-avaktavya — "in some ways it is indescribable"

This means, no model of reality is absolute including religious/spiritual/philosophical concepts. However, each model provides insight into the working of the universe that are useful within the bounds of its framework and therefore useful under certain conditions.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ratnatraya
Just to add one: "in some ways it is and it is not A&F"

Do we commonly use above in our discussions?
__________________
To try reach to Absolute & Final(A&F) is my honest desire. Let the things be A&F or die in themselves, if odd. Just Logical & Equanimious Discussions, No commitments.

Last edited by Kumar; Today at 09:12 PM. Reason: correct & add
Kumar 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 Today, 09:20 PM   #2102
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 14,288
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
Simply Bhagchandra posted gross interpretation of science relevance with Jainism and you just gross refutation in irrational skepticism.
You haven't shown it's irrational. You were invited several times to answer the refutation, but you refused.

Quote:
...but being science person you have not done your duty to present, also positive scientific side of Jainism.
Why would it be my duty to prove your case for you? You're the one claiming Jainism is a scientific religion. I don't believe it is. You presented an article from a scholar attempting to show that it is. I showed what's wrong with the article.

Quote:
...facts to A&F level can not suggest one sidedness.
No, there's no guarantee the facts won't all lie on one side of a question. You seem to think the right answer to your religion-versus-science dilemma must lie somewhere in the middle. There's no rational reason to think that.

Quote:
...duty as scientist and present positive scientific side of Jainsism.
Science has a duty to discover the truth. It has no duty to support your religion.

Quote:
...but they just have life as humans have being beings.
That's not what Bhagchandra claimed. Nor is it what he claimed Chandra Bose had confirmed. The claim was that plants have emotional responses the same as humans. That is neither true nor is it anything Bhagchandra's named source discovered. Bhagchandra misrepresented his source.

Quote:
...rational unbiased attitude, I shall not get initiation to take your post very seriously.
You're not asking for rational, unbiased commentary. You're literally asking me, as a scientist, to help prove your religion true from a scientific perspective. I don't believe your religion is based on fact. I cannot, in good conscience as a scientist, endorse your religion.

This is a debate. Your position has been stated, and it is being challenged. You seem to have no interest in addressing that challenge, and you seem to believe your critics have some duty to relax their position and adopt yours. That's really delusional.
JayUtah 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 Today, 09:25 PM   #2103
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 14,288
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
Do we commonly use above in our discussions?
There is no reason for skeptics to embrace religious modes of developing knowledge. If your argument requires us to accept the Jain religion as a premise to your point, then your argument fails.
JayUtah 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 Today, 09:43 PM   #2104
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 13,869
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
You haven't shown it's irrational. You were invited several times to answer the refutation, but you refused.
Continued avoidance.



Quote:
Why would it be my duty to prove your case for you? You're the one claiming Jainism is a scientific religion. I don't believe it is. You presented an article from a scholar attempting to show that it is. I showed what's wrong with the article.
Science has a duty to discover the truth. It has no duty to support your religion.




No, there's no guarantee the facts won't all lie on one side of a question. You seem to think the right answer to your religion-versus-science dilemma must lie somewhere in the middle. There's no rational reason to think that.







That's not what Bhagchandra claimed. Nor is it what he claimed Chandra Bose had confirmed. The claim was that plants have emotional responses the same as humans. That is neither true nor is it anything Bhagchandra's named source discovered. Bhagchandra misrepresented his source.



You're not asking for rational, unbiased commentary. You're literally asking me, as a scientist, to help prove your religion true from a scientific perspective. I don't believe your religion is based on fact. I cannot, in good conscience as a scientist, endorse your religion.

This is a debate. Your position has been stated, and it is being challenged. You seem to have no interest in addressing that challenge, and you seem to believe your critics have some duty to relax their position and adopt yours. That's really delusional.
It is basic duty of science person to tell both positives & negatives in anything. Govt has allotted major public money & means for it meant for public interests. Alike a doctor has prime duty/ethic to treat a sick person, may he be his enemy. Moreover it is a debate witch should be with equanimity to get and give knowledge. One sided debate in perception, ego or self interests can never be maintainable. Anytime, I may post a topic on "Rational Skepticism and Belief". These should be meant to add belief not to deduct or destruct it. Placebo effect is must for all and more the belief more should be the placebo self healing reward expectation dopamine release in brain, motivational affect.
__________________
To try reach to Absolute & Final(A&F) is my honest desire. Let the things be A&F or die in themselves, if odd. Just Logical & Equanimious Discussions, No commitments.
Kumar 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 Today, 09:53 PM   #2105
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 14,288
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
Continued avoidance.
On your part, yes. I've presented my rebuttal of Bhagchandra. You keep making excuses for not addressing it.

Quote:
It is basic duty of science person to tell both positives & negatives in anything.
No, it is a scientist's duty to uphold the truth. You beg the question that your religion is true. And since you're not a scientist, I wonder by what authority you claim to say what scientists' duties are. You have demonstrated you have no clue what science is or what scientists actually do.

Quote:
One sided debate in perception, ego or self interests can never be maintainable.
First, debates are not required to remain in the middle ground. You seem to maintain the delusion that your claims have any merit at all. Second, you are the one clearly arguing from ego and personal perception. You admitted yourself that you filter facts based on whether they agree with your religion. Don't project your own egregious faults onto your critics.

None of your response addresses what I wrote. This is a chronic problem for you. You pontificate at length without actually paying any attention to what was said to you.

Last edited by JayUtah; Today at 09:54 PM.
JayUtah 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
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 09:55 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
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.