Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Lógos Sokratikós · 08-01-2006, 03:16 PM

That's quite interesting, Nuwanda.

Now, I'd like to understand how belief in something like your religion is rational? Please explain, I'm all ears (eyes, actually) and eager to know since I got on this thread.

Sheshbazzar · 08-01-2006, 03:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lógos Sokratikós

That's all fun and joy, Shesh, but going back to the OP, is there any evidence of what you affirm?

My response was only to posts #12 which I quoted in full, and to the misunderstanding expressed in #25

Other pressing obligations preclude me from immediately providing you with a reply addressing the various contents of the OP, and your request for evidence of what I affirm.

Lógos Sokratikós · 08-01-2006, 04:06 PM

That's fair. I've had to stop debating on occasions for pressing obligations, and feared people would think I was just giving an excuse. But it isn't. We don't live in the web, we have real lives to get taken care of.

Which reminds me...

Nuwanda · 08-01-2006, 08:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lógos Sokratikós

That's quite interesting, Nuwanda.

Now, I'd like to understand how belief in something like your religion is rational? Please explain, I'm all ears (eyes, actually) and eager to know since I got on this thread.

Oh, I don't know, how bout the old clique one. Which is more logical: to believe that the infinate complexity of a single cell was created or that life was self generated from nonliving matter and then began to evolve by random chance? I find the notion of nonliving matter self generating into living matter to be 1000x more illogical than believing in a Creator God.

Leaving worn down arguments out of it, here's something to ruin the logic/reason junkies out there - your logic is based on an organ in your body that only functions at about 8% capacity. Yet we are to believe that reason is the "only" avenue to understanding. If that's true then we are missing out on a crap load of life.

By the way, when is the last time you put tires on your car that were only 8% functional? Or flew in an airplane that was only 8% functional? 8% is good if it's your interest on your savings account but not if it's your capacity for understanding.

voodoomage · 08-01-2006, 08:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nuwanda

Oh, I don't know, how bout the old clique one. Which is more logical: to believe that the infinate complexity of a single cell was created or that life was self generated from nonliving matter and then began to evolve by random chance? I find the notion of nonliving matter self generating into living matter to be 1000x more illogical than believing in a Creator God.

Leaving worn down arguments out of it, here's something to ruin the logic/reason junkies out there - your logic is based on an organ in your body that only functions at about 8% capacity. Yet we are to believe that reason is the "only" avenue to understanding. If that's true then we are missing out on a crap load of life.

By the way, when is the last time you put tires on your car that were only 8% functional? Or flew in an airplane that was only 8% functional? 8% is good if it's your interest on your savings account but not if it's your capacity for understanding.

Where did you get the 8% figure from? What does it mean physiologically (8% of all axions, neurons, or dendrites are EVER used? used at one time? used a majority of the time?), and how does percentage of brain use translate to percentage of understanding.

2+2 = 4

Do you understand that completely, or only 8%?

First, back up your figure, and second, don't attack the brain use percentage strawman.

Amaleq13 · 08-01-2006, 08:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nuwanda

Are these rational conclusions to your post?

Yes

Quote:

1) You are a believer in absolute truth, "Rational thought is the only reliable source of understanding."

Sorry to disappoint you but the "only" was relative to your proposed alternative. A more comprehensive description would be "only known", I suppose.

Quote:

2) That you thoroughly know all forms of understanding, or your statement is merely opinion.

Of course it is my opinion. Don't be ridiculous. OTOH, it is an opinion I would have no problem supporting by comparing which of the two approaches is demonstrably more reliable. Do you really want to compare how reliably rational thought and "spiritual discernment" obtain correct conclusions with known issues? I'll put my house, car, and all future earnings on rational thought. :rolling:

Quote:

3) That you have thorough first hand knowledge of faith, "Nothing can be understood through faith," which is a contradiction. The statement demands 1st hand experience with faith, an experience which thought you that nothing can be understood through it.

No, it only requires an understanding of the meaning of "faith".

Quote:

4) You use the term "rational thought," ironically, as a sheild from thinking.

No, it is an alternative to simply believing.

Quote:

It is not rational to condemn all the people ingaged in faith in a god as irrational.

Since I haven't done this, I don't see how this is relevant.

The rest of your response is as incoherent as "spiritual discernment". :wave:

GenesisNemesis · 08-01-2006, 09:28 PM

Do not tell the Evolutionist what he believes. Let me ask you something: why do atheists live? If there is no God, then certainly there can be no reason to live, right? Wrong. What would you do without God? Would you kill yourself? That would surely be the most irrational thing to do, because even atheists don't kill themselves.

Evolution is supported by evidence. Have you ever said "Gravity-it's only a theory"? Of course not! You accept Gravity, which you yourself haven't seen in action, (and you never can). When we see a ball fall to the ground, we're seeing only the effects of Gravity. We're not seeing Gravity itself. When we look at fossils, primairily transitional ones, we are seeing the effects of evolution. Tell me, could a Being of such Supremity create 50 Billion stars and galaxies, and then rejoice in the smell of burning goat flesh?

Amaleq13 · 08-01-2006, 10:41 PM

Discussions about evolution belong in the E/C forum.

Amaleq13, BC&H moderator

Kosh · 08-01-2006, 11:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nuwanda

I find the notion of nonliving matter self generating into living matter to be 1000x more illogical than believing in a Creator God.

At the risk of perpetuating a discussion which belongs in E/C...

A argument from incredulity is not a logical argument, it is a logical fallacy! Please look it up!

Katastrophikus · 08-02-2006, 12:03 AM

And I would like to that, unlike "Creator God," "living matter self generating into living matter" actually has left some evidence that we can test and work with.

08-01-2006, 09:28 PM	#37
GenesisNemesis Contributor Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: A pale blue oblate spheroid. Posts: 20,351	Nuwanda, Do not tell the Evolutionist what he believes. Let me ask you something: why do atheists live? If there is no God, then certainly there can be no reason to live, right? Wrong. What would you do without God? Would you kill yourself? That would surely be the most irrational thing to do, because even atheists don't kill themselves. Evolution is supported by evidence. Have you ever said "Gravity-it's only a theory"? Of course not! You accept Gravity, which you yourself haven't seen in action, (and you never can). When we see a ball fall to the ground, we're seeing only the effects of Gravity. We're not seeing Gravity itself. When we look at fossils, primairily transitional ones, we are seeing the effects of evolution. Tell me, could a Being of such Supremity create 50 Billion stars and galaxies, and then rejoice in the smell of burning goat flesh?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-01-2006, 03:16 PM	#31
Lógos Sokratikós Contributor Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Virtually right here where you are Posts: 11,138	That's quite interesting, Nuwanda. Now, I'd like to understand how belief in something like your religion is rational? Please explain, I'm all ears (eyes, actually) and eager to know since I got on this thread.

08-01-2006, 04:06 PM	#33
Lógos Sokratikós Contributor Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Virtually right here where you are Posts: 11,138	That's fair. I've had to stop debating on occasions for pressing obligations, and feared people would think I was just giving an excuse. But it isn't. We don't live in the web, we have real lives to get taken care of. Which reminds me...

08-01-2006, 10:41 PM	#38
Amaleq13 Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Eagle River, Alaska Posts: 7,816	Discussions about evolution belong in the E/C forum. Amaleq13, BC&H moderator

08-02-2006, 12:03 AM	#40
Katastrophikus Regular Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: PE, South Africa Posts: 499	And I would like to that, unlike "Creator God," "living matter self generating into living matter" actually has left some evidence that we can test and work with.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.