Burdon of proof HOPEFULLY once and for all!
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
24-11-2010, 11:52 AM
RE: Burdon of proof HOPEFULLY once and for all!
It's not rational from our overview, but the person has to rationalise it to do it. Have you ever met anyone committing any of those acts that doesn't justify their actions?

I hope we're not disagreeing over interpretation, but I suspect we are.

I quoted that from an X-YEC who found it to be very convincing. He'd already moved away from YEC and was still creationist if I read him correctly. He's the most rational person I've ever met.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-11-2010, 04:20 PM
RE: Burdon of proof HOPEFULLY once and for all!
"Rationalize" is not nearly the same thing as "rational (btw, I just figured out that you're probably a Brit). Whether or something is rational or not is not subjective. Just because you think something you're doing is rational doesn't make it rational. You may be able to rationalize what you're doing, but that does not in any way mean you're acting rational.

What I think you're trying to argue (and tell me if I'm not getting this) is that man can't believe something that is not rational, you believe in God dispute the lack of evidence, but it's rational because you believe it. If that's you're argument, I can't believe I have to tell you how absolutely flawed that is.

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
24-11-2010, 05:55 PM
RE: Burdon of proof HOPEFULLY once and for all!
(24-11-2010 01:03 AM)fr0d0 Wrote:  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.

Wow. Are you really strawmanning that blatantly? Or do you honestly think that I'm defending young-Earth creationism?

You stated that no Christian claimed scientific evidence of God. I proved you wrong. I did not say that his "evidence" actually was scientifically valid, because whether or not it is is irrelevant. The question was whether or not he claimed to have any scientific evidence.

Quote: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.

Correction: they would never take the risk if they believed that the odds were overwhelming.

Actions are irrational or rational independent of one's belief one way or another. Being drunk may impair one's ability to think rationally and consider the risks, thus leading him to believe that he is making a rational choice. This doesn't change the fact that he is, in fact, making an irrational choice.

Quote:I don't knock the atheist position as I can understand the justifications. I have dis-proven those justifications myself.

No, you haven't.

Quote:You presented several bible stories... now a brief google will return reasonable explanation. Serious study would cement that view.

Bare assertion.

Quote:But you don't want to take that view.

Don't presume to think that you understand me or my motives.

Quote:The balance of logic is not in your favour (as serious study would confirm).

You can say it all you want. It doesn't change facts.

Quote:Me I'd be happy to state that there are opposing views.

I never said that there weren't. Stop strawmanning.

Quote:You seem hell bent on pushing beyond reason your own pet agenda.

And what "agenda" would that be?

"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
24-11-2010, 06:04 PM
RE: Burdon of proof HOPEFULLY once and for all!
Hey BnW (you spelled 'rationalise' wrong btw Wink )

Yeah yeh we're splitting hairs here huh? Justified =/= objectively rational no of course.

A personal rationalisation is what I'm talking about here. The justification process that leads you to act the way you have to. You have no choice, you were always going to make it, you're pre programmed to follow your personal history/ there is no such thing as free will: we are free agents to act upon our justifications (given freedom to do so by outside forces).

So...

My belief isn't rational because it's a belief... it's justified because I have reasoned it to be so. A man cannot believe anything he doesn't justify to be true... is what I'm trying to say.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-11-2010, 06:32 PM
RE: Burdon of proof HOPEFULLY once and for all!
Ok, I get it. That doesn't make it either rational or justified, though.

And, I thought God gave us free will. That's why we can chose not to believe in him and chose to ignore his commandments. So, if there is a god, as you claim, how can there not be free will?

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
24-11-2010, 06:59 PM
RE: Burdon of proof HOPEFULLY once and for all!
Hey BnW

It's not rational or justified TO YOU if you don't conclude the same thing, but how could you? You are the result of your own history.

Are you free to choose/ Can you follow what you're pre-programmed to choose? Yes.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-11-2010, 08:01 PM
 
RE: Burdon of proof HOPEFULLY once and for all!
(24-11-2010 06:59 PM)fr0d0 Wrote:  Hey BnW

It's not rational or justified TO YOU if you don't conclude the same thing, but how could you? You are the result of your own history.

Are you free to choose/ Can you follow what you're pre-programmed to choose? Yes.

You're sending conflicting messages here. In your 1st sentence, you argue that BnW's viewpoint is due to his experiences, implying a "nurture" argument (or free will). And in your second sentence, you say that BnW is genetically predisposed to think a certain way, implying a "nature" argument (predestination).

Which one is it?
Quote this message in a reply
24-11-2010, 08:06 PM
RE: Burdon of proof HOPEFULLY once and for all!
(24-11-2010 06:04 PM)fr0d0 Wrote:  My belief isn't rational because it's a belief... it's justified because I have reasoned it to be so. A man cannot believe anything he doesn't justify to be true... is what I'm trying to say.

No one here is disagreeing that you believe that your beliefs are justified and rational. What we are saying is that you are mistaken. Your beliefs are not rational and they are not justified. You think that they are, because you don't understand the opposing arguments, but they aren't.

Now, obviously, you don't agree with the last sentence, but that's what this entire discussion is about.

"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
24-11-2010, 08:17 PM
 
RE: Burdon of proof HOPEFULLY once and for all!
I got an email from someone on this site in regards to this post that I wrote 10 months ago. I logged back on after being away for months and what do I find? Same people making the same stupid arguments! You people can't even figure out something simple like the burden of proof! How do you expect to figure out anything else! fr0d0 good luck with Unbeliever he has no clue about life. Discussing issues on this site is like teaching a pig to sing...all it does is annoy the farmer and frustrate the pig.
Quote this message in a reply
24-11-2010, 09:16 PM
RE: Burdon of proof HOPEFULLY once and for all!
ra·tion·al·ize/ˈraSHənlˌīz/Verb
1. Attempt to explain or justify (one's own or another's behavior or attitude) with logical, plausible reasons, even if these are not true or appropriate: "she couldn't rationalize her urge to return to the cottage".
2. Convert (a function or expression) to a rational form.

Couldn't find any dictionary that spelled it "rationalise". If you're going to be an asshole and correct someones spelling, at least correct something that's been spelled incorrectly. Or better yet, don't bother at all.

So many cats, so few good recipes.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: