FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB Philosophical Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 05:55 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 08-15-2002, 03:32 PM   #111
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 247
Post

Malcolm_MacDohmnall:
Quote:
Some may say they believed in God but you might assume that the God that was professed was not the God that you held to be true.

Hence would you consider someone who believed in the wrong God to be a true believer, atheist or an agnostic?
The belief in any god is theism. If a person had a belief in any god that person would be a theist and necessarily could not be an atheist.

Quote:
What if there was a scientific explanation.

Would that be God or applicably agnostic?
A scientific explanation for what? I'm at a loss as to your reasoning and questioning.

[ August 15, 2002: Message edited by: Hans ]</p>
Hans is offline  
Old 08-16-2002, 12:48 AM   #112
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Edinburgh. Scotland
Posts: 2,532
Post

Phil TK

Where do you stand on the subject of leprechauns?

After all I'm not aware that anyone has proved they don't exist. OK there's no evidence they exist but we can't prove absolutely that they don't.

Maybe belief in Leprechauns and disbelief in Leprechauns are equally unwarranted faith positions. Maybe we should be agnostic on the subject until we know more.

Er... no.

Because believing something doesn't exist when there's no evidence it exists is a whole lot more reasonable than believing something does exist when there's no evidence it exists.
seanie is offline  
Old 08-16-2002, 04:18 AM   #113
WJ
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 812
Thumbs down

S-Existential claims are seperate from any philosophies-all they require is for something to exist.
W- Isn't existentialism a philosophy? To that end explain, oh Dr. Spock, your logical existence? What is the essence of your existenc?


S-I'm familiar enough with it to know when it isn't being used. And you, Walrus, aren't using it.
W- Mmmm, please explain your statement former statement that "Man is logical" then.

s-Induction is when you reach a general conclusion based on available facts and deduction through reasoning.

w- Once again, why is the cosmological argument an argument?

S- The child psychologist?
W- Doc, you're dancing again! Spock has no feelings. Have you read any William James? Why were religious feelings invented?

WJ is offline  
Old 08-16-2002, 07:19 AM   #114
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Yes, I have dyslexia. Sue me.
Posts: 6,508
Question

What the hell are you talking about, WJ?

Are you drunk on the blood of your ficticious savior again? Eat some more of his body and sober up so you can post a coherent, intelligent argument.

I swear to you, I'll believe in your god if you can, because the only way I can even imagine it ever happening would be as a result of the omnipotentence of a supernatural being.
Koyaanisqatsi is offline  
Old 08-16-2002, 07:32 AM   #115
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Edinburgh. Scotland
Posts: 2,532
Post

Phil TK

I see from another thread you've already been posed the Leprechaun question.

So if you are going to clarify your position on this Doubting Didymus has priority.
seanie is offline  
Old 08-16-2002, 07:53 AM   #116
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 106
Post

(W) Isn't existentialism a philosophy?
(S) Yes it is. But we are dealing with an existential claim not existentialism. Haven't you been paying any attention at all? Existential claims have nothing to do with nihilism or with pessimism. They have a simple yes or no answer. Something either exists or it does not. If you claim that something exists then it is incumbent upon you to produce evidence of it's existence.
You seem to be getting very upset because I don't want to hear snappy patter and flim-flam where only a simple clear answer will do.
(W) To that end explain, oh Dr. Spock, your logical existence?
(S) Why do you keep calling me that? Dr Spock was a great man but he passed away years ago.
(W) What is the essence of your existenc?
(S) Green #27 is the essence of my existence. (Ask a silly question, you'll get…)

(W)- Mmmm, please explain your statement former statement that "Man is logical" then.
(S) Logic is a thought process. It's the way sane people's brains work. Present company excepted, of course.

(w)- Once again, why is the cosmological argument an argument?
(S) Because there are some people who are so afraid of life itself that they argue that it isn't what it is. They invent pretend answers instead of searching for the real ones. The cosmological argument exists due to cowardliness and deceit.

(W)- Doc, you're dancing again! Spock has no feelings.
(S) OH! HA, ha, ha…not only don't you watch the Science channel on TV, but you don't watch the Sci Fi channel either. That's MISTER Spock, bright eyes. Dr Spock was a world famous children's doctor. You really don't know fictional characters from historic ones.

(W) Why were religious feelings invented?
(S) There's no such thing as "religious feelings". Just as there is no such thing as "art feelings", "music feelings" or "piles of horse shit feelings". There are just "feelings" and the topics that they are applied to are separate, external matters.
Feelings were not invented, they are an extension of our biological make up. And if you don't believe that try having a conversation with someone going through adolescence.
Dr S is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:49 AM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.