Burdon of proof HOPEFULLY once and for all!
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-11-2010, 12:48 PM
 
RE: Burdon of proof HOPEFULLY once and for all!
Frodo

just curious

Are you saying the god of the bible and jesus are real, but the interpretations of the bible from organized religions is false?
Quote this message in a reply
23-11-2010, 01:02 PM (This post was last modified: 23-11-2010 01:18 PM by fr0d0.)
RE: Burdon of proof HOPEFULLY once and for all!
(23-11-2010 12:31 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  I didn't say that you need to prove your beliefs to anyone. If you believe something that is irrational, that's fine. Just don't try to pretend that it's rational.
I don't think it's possible to believe anything irrational. I don't think our brains are wired that way.

(23-11-2010 12:31 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  fr0d0 is arguing that his personal beliefs are rational. They aren't. It's up to him to prove that they are.
You only say they aren't. You haven't proved it. We believe what we must, and to change your beliefs requires you to be presented with new evidence. I've tried very hard to challenge my beliefs. I am constantly trying. Nothing so far is coming any where near to a challenge. Certainly not you saying "No" over and over, and quoting a list of fallacies without saying how they apply. I'm persuaded you're a mindless moron, but I'm trying to give you more credit.

And what I'm actually doing is defending the correct interpretation of my belief system, which people are mostly ignorant of. Still I know that people will deny what's in front of their face. I have no respect for that position. I do have a lot of respect for rational atheists, and I do know a few.
(23-11-2010 12:48 PM)Hauser Wrote:  Frodo

just curious

Are you saying the god of the bible and jesus are real, but the interpretations of the bible from organized religions is false?
Hi Hauser

We're talking Christianity right... the mainstream interpretation I agree fully with. I adhere in my beliefs with a mainstream denomination. I've taken part in the largest cross denominational festival in my country for several years and can agree with all denominations represented there. People seem to think the vocal minority represent the majority. Fundamentalism is an easy target and I can see why most atheists aim at it. As skeptics we stand on the same side firing the same arrows.

God and Jesus being 'real' sounds odd. I get the impression that for some atheists this is the question when it clearly isn't. Knowledge isn't an option. Knowledge though faith > belief is the only option. But I take it you knew that already.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-11-2010, 01:52 PM
RE: Burdon of proof HOPEFULLY once and for all!
(23-11-2010 01:02 PM)fr0d0 Wrote:  
(23-11-2010 12:31 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  I didn't say that you need to prove your beliefs to anyone. If you believe something that is irrational, that's fine. Just don't try to pretend that it's rational.
I don't think it's possible to believe anything irrational. I don't think our brains are wired that way.

So you think that belief in the Tarot is rational? Belief in reptilian overlords is rational? Belief in Moon-landing hoaxes, 9/11 conspiracies, the Illuminati, Zionist overlords, Holocaust denial, anti-vaccination nuttery, ancient astronauts, ghosts, Ouija board sessions, witches, wizards, hexes, visitors from alternate dimensions, young-Earth creationism, faith healing, astrology, chakra, energy matrix reconfiguration, werewolves, feng shui, and so on are all rational beliefs?

If so, then you're nuts. If not, then you either agree that it is possible to believe in irrational things or simply reject that anyone believes those things - which wouldn't really surprise me, seeing as you're still denying that NephilimFree claims he has scientific proof of God even though I gave you the quote.

Quote:
(23-11-2010 12:31 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  fr0d0 is arguing that his personal beliefs are rational. They aren't. It's up to him to prove that they are.
You only say they aren't. You haven't proved it.

Obviously, I think differently. But here's the crux of the matter: you have not responded to my objections. There is absolutely no reason for anyone here to believe you over me, because I, at least, make the attempt to justify what I say.

So here it is again:

You claim that religion is never about knowledge, but belief. This is demonstrably untrue, as many branches of religion claim that one can know that God exists. Gnostic Christianity, for example.

You claim that the Bible has not been falsified. When presented with evidence contradicting that claim, you say that those parts of the Bible aren't meant to be taken literally. However, this is the Texas sharpshooter fallacy - post hoc alterations - and is invalid reasoning. There is no reason to believe that any of the things that the Bible says are meant to be taken any way other than literally. The Bible certainly never says that they shouldn't be taken literally. You're simply attempting to hand-wave away objections.

Your version of Christianity includes the belief that salvation resides on faith, not proof, and that there can never be any evidence of God without contradicting this principle. This is irrational for several reasons, the first of them being that God does not exist if there can never be evidence of him. The second is that the Bible does make claims about reality, and that, whether or not you like it, those claims can be falsified or proven. For example, the historicity of Jesus. Thirdly, whether or not you think that you should attempt to establish your beliefs as true is irrelevant. Unless you do, they are irrational; pointing to the "don't try to prove them" clause doesn't do anything to alter that, and it doesn't make your position more rational.

Go ahead and believe in irrational stuff if you want to. Just don't try to pretend that it's rational.

Quote:We believe what we must, and to change your beliefs requires you to be presented with new evidence.

Or to realize that there is no evidence supporting your current beliefs.

Quote:I've tried very hard to challenge my beliefs. I am constantly trying. Nothing so far is coming any where near to a challenge. Certainly not you saying "No" over and over, and quoting a list of fallacies without saying how they apply.

I've linked to a description of the fallacies, and I have explained how they apply. If you have any questions, ask. What specific fallacy do you not understand?

Quote:I'm persuaded you're a mindless moron, but I'm trying to give you more credit.

Well, I feel the same way about you, so fair enough.

Quote:And what I'm actually doing is defending the correct interpretation of my belief system, which people are mostly ignorant of.

You haven't proven that it's correct.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-11-2010, 01:58 PM
RE: Burdon of proof HOPEFULLY once and for all!
Quote: Quote:And what I'm actually doing is defending the correct interpretation of my belief system, which people are mostly ignorant of.


You haven't proven that it's correct.

Actually, I've provided some information that shows it's not the correct interpretation. Or, maybe more accurately, that it's certainly not the "mainstream" interpretation.

UB - I like the "Texas Sharpshooter" analogy. I've never heard that one before. Nice. I'm going to use that one in the future. It will now be second to "Poof, there's a vagina" in my normal use of catch phrases.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-11-2010, 03:07 PM
RE: Burdon of proof HOPEFULLY once and for all!
(23-11-2010 01:58 PM)BnW Wrote:  UB - I like the "Texas Sharpshooter" analogy. I've never heard that one before. Nice. I'm going to use that one in the future. It will now be second to "Poof, there's a vagina" in my normal use of catch phrases.

It's certainly much easier to say "Texas sharpshooter fallacy" than "post hoc rationalizations without justification".

And it is a funny mental picture, isn't it?

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-11-2010, 03:35 PM
RE: Burdon of proof HOPEFULLY once and for all!
(23-11-2010 01:52 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  So you think that belief in the Tarot is rational? Belief in reptilian overlords is rational? Belief in Moon-landing hoaxes, 9/11 conspiracies, the Illuminati, Zionist overlords, Holocaust denial, anti-vaccination nuttery, ancient astronauts, ghosts, Ouija board sessions, witches, wizards, hexes, visitors from alternate dimensions, young-Earth creationism, faith healing, astrology, chakra, energy matrix reconfiguration, werewolves, feng shui, and so on are all rational beliefs?
If a person is convinced of any of those things, then that's true to them. they can't go against what they rationalise. Of course there are some ridiculous examples there... but let me take your atheist position: to me it's illogical and it seems that you're unable to defend it - therefore I conclude that you draw irrational conclusions. We weigh up the evidence and make our choice. You should face up the the reality of that, otherwise it'll be another notch on the loony pole for you.

(23-11-2010 01:52 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  as you're still denying that NephilimFree claims he has scientific proof of God even though I gave you the quote.
You did? Where? I'm sorry I must've missed it. I asked you to link it after you linked videos on a couple of other subjects. Nothing since then???

(23-11-2010 01:52 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  Obviously, I think differently. But here's the crux of the matter: you have not responded to my objections. There is absolutely no reason for anyone here to believe you over me, because I, at least, make the attempt to justify what I say.
You have justified nothing. you've tried to address your own misunderstanding - which is quite pathetic actually - you'd think someone that made outlandish claims against something would make the first effort to understand the most basic facts about what they were objecting to.

Yet again you prove the worthlessness of talking to you.

(23-11-2010 01:52 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  So here it is again:

You claim that religion is never about knowledge, but belief. This is demonstrably untrue, as many branches of religion claim that one can know that God exists. Gnostic Christianity, for example.
Gnostic Christianity is not mainstream Christianity. I've taken great pains to prevent you building such unrelated and irrelevant arguments.

(23-11-2010 01:52 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  You claim that the Bible has not been falsified. When presented with evidence contradicting that claim, you say that those parts of the Bible aren't meant to be taken literally. However, this is the Texas sharpshooter fallacy - post hoc alterations - and is invalid reasoning. There is no reason to believe that any of the things that the Bible says are meant to be taken any way other than literally. The Bible certainly never says that they shouldn't be taken literally. You're simply attempting to hand-wave away objections.
And you are making a straw man by over simplifying it so you can shoot it down. The reality is very different, but I wouldn't expect such a closed minded 'rational' such as yourself to ever bother themselves with facts.

(23-11-2010 01:52 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  Your version of Christianity includes the belief that salvation resides on faith, not proof, and that there can never be any evidence of God without contradicting this principle. This is irrational for several reasons, the first of them being that God does not exist if there can never be evidence of him.
You don't understand so you call "irrational". Me I'd just say that I didn't understand.

(23-11-2010 01:52 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  The second is that the Bible does make claims about reality, and that, whether or not you like it, those claims can be falsified or proven. For example, the historicity of Jesus. Thirdly, whether or not you think that you should attempt to establish your beliefs as true is irrelevant. Unless you do, they are irrational; pointing to the "don't try to prove them" clause doesn't do anything to alter that, and it doesn't make your position more rational.
2. not proven
3. How can I establish beliefs that have to be a choice? Are you brain dead?

(23-11-2010 01:52 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  Go ahead and believe in irrational stuff if you want to. Just don't try to pretend that it's rational.
Sure. you have no reason to call it irrational, therefore it must be irrational. Kushtie.

I can argue every single point is rational - not that you're at all interested. You won't let yourself start to consider it. Are you afraid that your wrong? Why not consider it then?

(23-11-2010 01:52 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
Quote:We believe what we must, and to change your beliefs requires you to be presented with new evidence.
Or to realize that there is no evidence supporting your current beliefs.
I realise that there is evidence. I know it. I act upon it.

You dismiss it without wanting to think about it. That's your prerogative but don't blame me for calling you on your ignorance, because thet's all it is. Wilful ignorance.

(23-11-2010 01:52 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
Quote:I've tried very hard to challenge my beliefs. I am constantly trying. Nothing so far is coming any where near to a challenge. Certainly not you saying "No" over and over, and quoting a list of fallacies without saying how they apply.
I've linked to a description of the fallacies, and I have explained how they apply. If you have any questions, ask. What specific fallacy do you not understand?
I understand all the fallacies perfectly well. I have done for a very long time. What I keep challenging you on, and what you regularly fail to respond to... is for you to relate the fallacy to the subject at hand. I take you failure to respond as your inability to do so.

(23-11-2010 01:52 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
Quote:And what I'm actually doing is defending the correct interpretation of my belief system, which people are mostly ignorant of.
You haven't proven that it's correct.
I have no interest in proving it correct. I've just explained the illogicality of such a request in my previous post, but you repeat the same inane question.

Seriously, I'm done with your vomit. Save it for the other children you must love bullying. I want sensible discussion with adults, and not your purile masturbation.

Thanks
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-11-2010, 04:28 PM
RE: Burdon of proof HOPEFULLY once and for all!
(23-11-2010 03:35 PM)fr0d0 Wrote:  
(23-11-2010 01:52 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  So you think that belief in the Tarot is rational? Belief in reptilian overlords is rational? Belief in Moon-landing hoaxes, 9/11 conspiracies, the Illuminati, Zionist overlords, Holocaust denial, anti-vaccination nuttery, ancient astronauts, ghosts, Ouija board sessions, witches, wizards, hexes, visitors from alternate dimensions, young-Earth creationism, faith healing, astrology, chakra, energy matrix reconfiguration, werewolves, feng shui, and so on are all rational beliefs?
If a person is convinced of any of those things, then that's true to them. they can't go against what they rationalise. Of course there are some ridiculous examples there...

Yes, that's the point. People believe irrational things. They may believe that they aren't irrational, but they are just the same. If these people are asked to provide reasons for why their beliefs are not irrational, they should be able to do so or admit that they are.

Quote:but let me take your atheist position: to me it's illogical and it seems that you're unable to defend it - therefore I conclude that you draw irrational conclusions.

You haven't attempted to attack my "atheist position", so you really have no basis for concluding that.

Quote:We weigh up the evidence and make our choice. You should face up the the reality of that, otherwise it'll be another notch on the loony pole for you.

I have faced up to that. What makes you think that I haven't?

Quote:
(23-11-2010 01:52 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  as you're still denying that NephilimFree claims he has scientific proof of God even though I gave you the quote.
You did? Where? I'm sorry I must've missed it. I asked you to link it after you linked videos on a couple of other subjects. Nothing since then???

Pay attention.

I have linked to two things: NephilimFree's channel and one - count 'em, ONE - of his videos. I have also quoted this YouTube comment of his:

Quote:DNA is proof of design and Special creation. As for God, the evidence is overwhelming. His written Word posesses properties only a supernatural intelligence and power could have given it, the personal experiences, including miricles, of so many millions of people, the fact that science supports His Word completely, hundreds of specific fulfilled prophecies. The Bible alone proves God is who He says He is.

Quote:
(23-11-2010 01:52 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  Obviously, I think differently. But here's the crux of the matter: you have not responded to my objections. There is absolutely no reason for anyone here to believe you over me, because I, at least, make the attempt to justify what I say.
You have justified nothing.

THEN SHOW HOW MY OBJECTIONS DON'T APPLY. Saying "nuh-uh" does nothing.

Quote:you've tried to address your own misunderstanding

THEN SHOW HOW I STRAWMANNED YOU. Either back up your bullshit or stop lying about me.

Quote:
(23-11-2010 01:52 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  So here it is again:

You claim that religion is never about knowledge, but belief. This is demonstrably untrue, as many branches of religion claim that one can know that God exists. Gnostic Christianity, for example.
Gnostic Christianity is not mainstream Christianity.

WHICH. IS. NOT. RELEVANT.

You said that religion - NOT mainstream Christianity (and even your definition of "mainstream Christianity" is questionable, as BnW has shown), but RELIGION - is not about knowledge.

You'd think that you'd at least be able to keep your own arguments straight.

Quote:
(23-11-2010 01:52 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  You claim that the Bible has not been falsified. When presented with evidence contradicting that claim, you say that those parts of the Bible aren't meant to be taken literally. However, this is the Texas sharpshooter fallacy - post hoc alterations - and is invalid reasoning. There is no reason to believe that any of the things that the Bible says are meant to be taken any way other than literally. The Bible certainly never says that they shouldn't be taken literally. You're simply attempting to hand-wave away objections.
And you are making a straw man by over simplifying it so you can shoot it down. The reality is very different, but I wouldn't expect such a closed minded 'rational' such as yourself to ever bother themselves with facts.

Prove it. Back up your bullshit or leave, because I'm getting very tired of you attempting to hand-wave away everything that anyone says and acting as if we're too stupid to notice how paper-thin and pathetic your argument is.

Quote:
(23-11-2010 01:52 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  Your version of Christianity includes the belief that salvation resides on faith, not proof, and that there can never be any evidence of God without contradicting this principle. This is irrational for several reasons, the first of them being that God does not exist if there can never be evidence of him.
You don't understand so you call "irrational". Me I'd just say that I didn't understand.

Show how I don't understand. Don't just assert.

Quote:
(23-11-2010 01:52 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  The second is that the Bible does make claims about reality, and that, whether or not you like it, those claims can be falsified or proven. For example, the historicity of Jesus. Thirdly, whether or not you think that you should attempt to establish your beliefs as true is irrelevant. Unless you do, they are irrational; pointing to the "don't try to prove them" clause doesn't do anything to alter that, and it doesn't make your position more rational.
2. not proven

Yes, proven. That's what the burden of proof says.

Quote:3. How can I establish beliefs that have to be a choice? Are you brain dead?

No. Are you?

Read my post again. You can't. That's the point. Your world view is irrational because you think that you can't establish your beliefs as true, not in spite of it.

Read for comprehension. Don't just respond to what you want me to have said.

Quote:
(23-11-2010 01:52 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  Go ahead and believe in irrational stuff if you want to. Just don't try to pretend that it's rational.
Sure. you have no reason to call it irrational, therefore it must be irrational. Kushtie.

Straw man. I have every reason to call it irrational. It fails to meet the burden of proof. Therefore, believing it is irrational. That is the definition of irrational.

Quote:I can argue every single point is rational

You haven't so far.

Quote:not that you're at all interested.

On the contrary. If you have any arguments that are anything other than "nuh-uh", I'd love to hear them. I honestly enjoy discussions like this, as long as the other party isn't simply denying facts and insulting baselessly.

Quote:You won't let yourself start to consider it.

Straw man.

Quote:Are you afraid that your wrong?

No.

Quote:Why not consider it then?

I have. I just discarded it because it was irrational.

Quote:
(23-11-2010 01:52 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
Quote:We believe what we must, and to change your beliefs requires you to be presented with new evidence.
Or to realize that there is no evidence supporting your current beliefs.
I realise that there is evidence. I know it. I act upon it.

Then present it.

Quote:You dismiss it without wanting to think about it.

You haven't given me any evidence to dismiss. The only thing that you have presented as "evidence" is the Bible, and, as I have demonstrated, that is circular logic. If you want me to consider your evidence, tell me what it is.

Quote:That's your prerogative but don't blame me for calling you on your ignorance, because thet's all it is. Wilful ignorance.

No, sorry.

Quote:
(23-11-2010 01:52 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
Quote:I've tried very hard to challenge my beliefs. I am constantly trying. Nothing so far is coming any where near to a challenge. Certainly not you saying "No" over and over, and quoting a list of fallacies without saying how they apply.
I've linked to a description of the fallacies, and I have explained how they apply. If you have any questions, ask. What specific fallacy do you not understand?
I understand all the fallacies perfectly well. I have done for a very long time. What I keep challenging you on, and what you regularly fail to respond to... is for you to relate the fallacy to the subject at hand. I take you failure to respond as your inability to do so.

I have related each one to your argument. What relationship do you not understand?

Quote:
(23-11-2010 01:52 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
Quote:And what I'm actually doing is defending the correct interpretation of my belief system, which people are mostly ignorant of.
You haven't proven that it's correct.
I have no interest in proving it correct. I've just explained the illogicality of such a request in my previous post, but you repeat the same inane question.

On the contrary. It's far from inane. "The illogicality of such a request" is exactly what I am talking about. The fact that such a question is illogical within your world view is proof that your world view is irrational. What about this do you not understand?

Quote:Seriously, I'm done with your vomit. Save it for the other children you must love bullying. I want sensible discussion with adults, and not your purile masturbation.

Insults get you nowhere, fr0d0, especially when it's painfully obvious to everyone here that your position is bunk.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-11-2010, 05:03 PM
 
RE: Burdon of proof HOPEFULLY once and for all!
(23-11-2010 01:02 PM)fr0d0 Wrote:  Hi Hauser

We're talking Christianity right... the mainstream interpretation I agree fully with. I adhere in my beliefs with a mainstream denomination. I've taken part in the largest cross denominational festival in my country for several years and can agree with all denominations represented there. People seem to think the vocal minority represent the majority. Fundamentalism is an easy target and I can see why most atheists aim at it. As skeptics we stand on the same side firing the same arrows.

God and Jesus being 'real' sounds odd. I get the impression that for some atheists this is the question when it clearly isn't. Knowledge isn't an option. Knowledge though faith > belief is the only option. But I take it you knew that already.


ok...gonna give you an excerpt from an email debate/argument/discussion ive been having..just wanna see what you..with that position...thinks of it. Im not saying who said this. it may or may not have been me.


Quote:http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInter.../mat11.pdf
verses 20-24

this passage shows that even if he's real, Jesus is neither worthy of respect nor faith when you contrast that passage with this one..

http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInter...f/mat5.pdf
verses 43-48

simply put..who in their right mind would have faith in a hypocrite?


like i said. i dont really have any goal here..just curious as always.
Quote this message in a reply
24-11-2010, 01:03 AM (This post was last modified: 24-11-2010 01:16 AM by fr0d0.)
RE: Burdon of proof HOPEFULLY once and for all!
Hi Unbeliever.

I've never met an atheist young earth creationist before. No atheist has ever defended a strict literal translation of the bible as you have, against overwhelming evidence to the contrary. I linked someone here a recent book that convinces even staunch YECs that they're wrong. It's extremely well researched and impeccably backed up with solid cross reference. Please take a look and tell me what you think : http://tinyurl.com/3ykrwwg

No I think the human brain is incapable of irrationality. Take drink driving - the person could rationalise the act with reasons of speed and convenience. The chances of getting caught are favourable if they can appear to be normal, so the risk is justified. The person would never take a risk if the odds were overwhelming. I don't knock the atheist position as I can understand the justifications. I have dis-proven those justifications myself. You presented several bible stories... now a brief google will return reasonable explanation. Serious study would cement that view. But you don't want to take that view. The balance of logic is not in your favour (as serious study would confirm). Me I'd be happy to state that there are opposing views. You seem hell bent on pushing beyond reason your own pet agenda.
(23-11-2010 05:03 PM)Hauser Wrote:  ok...gonna give you an excerpt from an email debate/argument/discussion ive been having..just wanna see what you..with that position...thinks of it. Im not saying who said this. it may or may not have been me.

Quote:http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInter.../mat11.pdf
verses 20-24

this passage shows that even if he's real, Jesus is neither worthy of respect nor faith when you contrast that passage with this one..

http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInter...f/mat5.pdf
verses 43-48

simply put..who in their right mind would have faith in a hypocrite?


like i said. i dont really have any goal here..just curious as always.
Ok. Dunno what this has to do with the BOP tho'

So in #1, Jesus/ God exacting justice - where people are deliberately evil they get the rewards of that - is wrong?!?

And in #2, Shows that even the worst offender is loved no matter what they've done.

What here do you find hypocritical and hateworthy?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-11-2010, 07:39 AM
RE: Burdon of proof HOPEFULLY once and for all!
Quote:I linked someone here a recent book that convinces even staunch YECs that they're wrong.

Care to wager on this? I'll bet you can't find one YEC that is convinced they are wrong due to this book.

Quote:No I think the human brain is incapable of irrationality.

And, you base that on what, exactly? They're are probably millions of examples of people acting irrationally. The fact that someone thinks they are rational does not make it so. I've got an uncle who is suffering from several medical problems that cause him all kinds of symptoms, including headaches. He refuses to take anything for the headaches because "it's not a cure". He doesn't care if it makes the headaches go away because he won't take it if it's not a cure. Now, is that rational?

Is hatred of people based on their color rational? We've got plenty of racists in the world.

Is belief Elvis is still alive rational? No shortage of people holding onto that pipe dream.

How about clinical depression and suicide. Is suicide rational? People kill themselves because they are depressed every year. Hell, people blow themselves and others up because they believe "god" wants them to? Is any of that rational?

Your consistent claim that human beings are incapable of irrational thought despite all the clinical proof to the contrary is probably the most irrational thing I've seen stated on this forum to date.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: