CALLED DAWKIN'S BLUFF!

Page 4 of 6 [ 96 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

calandale
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 9 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,439

14 Aug 2007, 12:52 pm

Awesomelyglorious wrote:

Certainly a law in good logic. The denial of this rule is illogical as it is one of the most basic premises and fundamentally true. I would argue that to deny this rule you must first disprove it as it is merely common sense and seen as an axiom.

So, an electron is either in one location,
or it's not? You should reveal this proof
to physicists. I'm sure that they'd be
interested.

Sopho
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Apr 2007
Gender: Female
Posts: 10,859

14 Aug 2007, 12:56 pm

Ragtime wrote:

Sopho wrote:

I don't know if you do or not.

Thank you. That's all I was saying.

LOL Way to go, editing my post to make it look like that was me saying something I wasn't. :lol:

Ragtime
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Nov 2006
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,927
Location: Dallas, Texas

14 Aug 2007, 12:56 pm

Look, I don't know if you exist, and you don't know if I exist, and it would be the same thing if we were standing in front of each other, although the latter would be a greater knowledge than the former. Therefore, there are different levels of knowing. What I'm claiming is that, as much as I'd "know" you exist if you were standing in front of me in person -- which is a functional knowledge I can use with predictable results -- I know God more than that.

Again, just say you don't believe me, and we can end this argument.

The point is I have a working knowledge of God -- a knowledge that can be put into practice with a predictable range of results.

_________________
Christianity is different than Judaism only in people's minds -- not in the Bible.

Last edited by Ragtime on 14 Aug 2007, 12:58 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Hadron
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 Aug 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 957
Location: IntensitySquared or Zomg

14 Aug 2007, 12:57 pm

calandale wrote:

Awesomelyglorious wrote:

So, an electron is either in one location,
or it's not? You should reveal this proof
to physicists. I'm sure that they'd be
interested.

Now we are getting into good old wave particle duality...

Sopho
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Apr 2007
Gender: Female
Posts: 10,859

14 Aug 2007, 12:59 pm

Ragtime wrote:

there are different levels of knowing.

O RLY?

I always thought you either know something, or you don't.

Ragtime
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Nov 2006
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,927
Location: Dallas, Texas

14 Aug 2007, 12:59 pm

Sopho wrote:

spdjeanne wrote:

IMO, It is arrogant of our small species to think that we can perceive everything that exists, that our perception is the point of reference by which existence is measured.

But if our perception is all we have, we can't claim to know of anything which can only be recognised with more than what our perception allows.

But we demonstrate working knowledge every day. That's what I have of God. A knowledge that functions.

_________________
Christianity is different than Judaism only in people's minds -- not in the Bible.

Ragtime
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Nov 2006
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,927
Location: Dallas, Texas

14 Aug 2007, 1:03 pm

Sopho wrote:

Ragtime wrote:

gwenevyn wrote:

Ragtime wrote:

It's not with only me. Several people I know personally claim to know the same God, and visibly act out the same spiritual doctrines in their lives.

And a lot of people claim to know other gods or spiritual matters.

That's just part of why belief itself cannot rationally be submitted as evidence for the subject of that belief.

Ragtime wrote:

I take you at your word that you don't know God.
Why can't you take me at my word that I do?

Because your belief in her experience does not necessitate the suspension of your beliefs. Whereas, for her to acknowledge your experience as "truth" would contradict her beliefs.

She can choose to ignore my belief; God gave her free will. Why isn't she be comfortable ignoring my belief?

Why aren't you comfortable ignoring my sexuality/gender? You always carry on posting in the gay threads, I will carry on posting in these threads.

I'm quite comfortable ignoring it, but since I respect all parts of truth, I realize that studying your gender issues will benefit my knowledge.

_________________
Christianity is different than Judaism only in people's minds -- not in the Bible.

Ragtime
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Nov 2006
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,927
Location: Dallas, Texas

14 Aug 2007, 1:05 pm

Sopho wrote:

Ragtime wrote:

Sopho wrote:

Ragtime wrote:

Sopho wrote:

calandale wrote:

Wait a minute. This is raggy's subjective God.
I think that the ONLY way that you can feasibly
deny it, is to deny either his existence, or that
he knows his own thoughts better than you do.

This is EXACTLY the same issue as claiming that
someone else is able to change their sexuality or
not.

I'm not denying some 'god' exists in his head. Whether it's a figment of his imagination, or he is actually as crazy as he seems, I don't know. But what he can't know, is the existence of a god which requires more than just a relationship with him.

Why is my personal belief in and relationship with God so important to you?

LOL That's exactly what I'm saying: it's not.

Then why are you taking issue with it in post after post? Just say "I don't believe you", and we'll part ways on the issue. You're the one who jumped on me in the first place for claiming that I actually think my religion is true. After all, isn't that what a religion usually is? Something that you deeply believe is true.

Wow, you're actually using the right words now.

Think? Yes.
Believe? Yes.
Know? No. :wink:

Words are mere approximations of reality. Few if any words in existence are actually fully correct.

_________________
Christianity is different than Judaism only in people's minds -- not in the Bible.

calandale
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 9 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,439

14 Aug 2007, 1:09 pm

gwenevyn wrote:

If you don't believe in any underlying truths at all, this entire argument should seem a bit irrelevant, non?

Sure, but there is a difference between underlying subjective
truths and no truths at all.

Quote:

You mean when objective reality is defined through the lens of our subjective experience?

Why bother even adding an objective reality,
which may just be a model of something purely
subjective in nature?

Quote:

That level of philosophy is too heavy to be included in this particular debate, in my opinion.

I disagree. ANY argument pertaining to that than
which nothing greater can be thought shouldn't be
limited. Here is PRECISELY the issue for which such
debates become necessary.

Quote:

Again, if you choose to believe that no objective reality actually exists, debating whether something is or is not ....is not at all useful. Nor possible.

Nope. Objective reality is merely a consensus of models
based on subjective realities. Or not. But, it doesn't preclude
debate, to deny such a thing.

Quote:

All knowledge is faith, ironically.

And is all faith knowledge?

Quote:

And we all have a certain standard of evidence which must be met before we will consent to believe in any given aspect of that which is known as reality. (Or that which is unreal, as the case may be.)

Holding that standard too low makes us believe in that which is commonly considered fanciful, irrational, or even crazy.

Holding that standard too high leads to equally impaired functioning.

There are many different middle grounds though. I'm not talking about a spectrum
here either, but wildly diverging paths of determining what is a viable standard. So,
an empiricist tends to believe one fancy (observations), while the devout Christian
believes another (perhaps the words he reads in a book). Neither is necessarily more
rigorous as to the evidence that they allow or disallow. Nor, I claim, is either on necessarily
wrong (and certainly not right), as it is clear that the so called classical logic does not seem
to hold, according to our observations. Yet, our empiricists continue to use it, in their
theorizing about the nature of reality.

Quote:

The very fact that we must cope with the constraints of reality as we go about our philosophizing is a piece of evidence pointing toward the existence of something objective.

Nah. But it's a convincing argument that there is SOMETHING,
though not necessarily anything objective.

Ragtime
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Nov 2006
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,927
Location: Dallas, Texas

14 Aug 2007, 1:10 pm

gwenevyn wrote:

Ragtime wrote:

gwenevyn wrote:

Ragtime wrote:

I take you at your word that you don't know God.
Why can't you take me at my word that I do?

Because your belief in her experience does not necessitate the suspension of your beliefs. Whereas, for her to acknowledge your experience as "truth" would contradict her beliefs.

She can choose to ignore my belief; God gave her free will. Why isn't she be comfortable ignoring my belief?

If I'm not mistaken, she just said that she is comfortable ignoring the fact that you believe.

But part of your beliefs is the obligation to evangelize and so you put yourself in the position of debating whether there's any truth to your beliefs.

Correct, which still gives her the "no thanks" out. As a Christian, I have to respect the free will with which God endowed everyone, and thereby, I respect someone's voiced refusal of my continuing to address them directly with the Gospel. Such is Scriptural: Offer the Gospel, then move on if refused.

gwenevyn wrote:

There are many observers here. You can't turn on your heel and pretend you've never invited this sort of discussion.

Oh, I do invite it.

But, just as my hearers aren't required to listen endlessly to me, nor am I required to listen endlessly to them.

_________________
Christianity is different than Judaism only in people's minds -- not in the Bible.

calandale
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 9 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,439

14 Aug 2007, 1:12 pm

Sopho wrote:

Ragtime wrote:

there are different levels of knowing.

O RLY?

I always thought you either know something, or you don't.

You need a standard to define what is meant by
knowledge then. It's pretty clear that the classical
meaning just cannot apply.

Ragtime
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Nov 2006
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,927
Location: Dallas, Texas

14 Aug 2007, 1:12 pm

Sopho wrote:

Ragtime wrote:

Sopho wrote:

I don't know if you do or not.

Thank you. That's all I was saying.

LOL Way to go, editing my post to make it look like that was me saying something I wasn't. :lol:

Um, you said that on page 3. I just checked.

_________________
Christianity is different than Judaism only in people's minds -- not in the Bible.

Ragtime
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Nov 2006
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,927
Location: Dallas, Texas

14 Aug 2007, 1:14 pm

Sopho wrote:

Ragtime wrote:

there are different levels of knowing.

O RLY?

I always thought you either know something, or you don't.

There is knowing, and not knowing, but within knowledge there are various levels of sureness.

_________________
Christianity is different than Judaism only in people's minds -- not in the Bible.

Sopho
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Apr 2007
Gender: Female
Posts: 10,859

14 Aug 2007, 1:15 pm

Ragtime wrote:

Sopho wrote:

Ragtime wrote:

Sopho wrote:

I don't know if you do or not.

Thank you. That's all I was saying.

LOL Way to go, editing my post to make it look like that was me saying something I wasn't. :lol:

Um, you said that on page 3. I just checked.

Yes, and you conveniently edited out what I said before it.

Ragtime
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Nov 2006
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,927
Location: Dallas, Texas

14 Aug 2007, 1:46 pm

Sopho wrote:

Ragtime wrote:

Sopho wrote:

Ragtime wrote:

Sopho wrote:

I don't know if you do or not.

Thank you. That's all I was saying.

LOL Way to go, editing my post to make it look like that was me saying something I wasn't. :lol:

Um, you said that on page 3. I just checked.

Yes, and you conveniently edited out what I said before it.

For clarity. For goodness sake, anyone who wants to can check page 3 as I cited.

_________________
Christianity is different than Judaism only in people's minds -- not in the Bible.

Sopho
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Apr 2007
Gender: Female
Posts: 10,859

14 Aug 2007, 1:56 pm

Ragtime wrote:

Sopho wrote:

Ragtime wrote:

Sopho wrote:

Ragtime wrote:

Sopho wrote:

I don't know if you do or not.

Thank you. That's all I was saying.

LOL Way to go, editing my post to make it look like that was me saying something I wasn't. :lol:

Um, you said that on page 3. I just checked.

Yes, and you conveniently edited out what I said before it.

For clarity. For goodness sake, anyone who wants to can check page 3 as I cited.

You made it look like I was conceding that I can't know that you KNOW this Christian god exists. That's not what I was saying. I was saying that I don't know whether you yourself, have a relationship with some god. In your head. Doesn't mean you then KNOW a Christian god exists.

Page 4 of 6 [ 96 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next

Jump to:

CALLED DAWKIN'S BLUFF! Post Reply New Topic

CALLED DAWKIN'S BLUFF!