Christian vs. Humanist Morality
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-02-2017, 12:17 PM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(03-02-2017 11:43 AM)Naielis Wrote:  
(03-02-2017 11:41 AM)jennybee Wrote:  No thank you. FSM disapproves of this message Wink And I for one, do not want to be boiled for my sins in a pasta cooker. So away with your blasphemy of the noodley spirit!

May the Noodle be forever upon you.

I thought I already addressed this. The flying spaghetti monster isn't coherent. The first cause can't be material.

And an invisible genie who lives in a mansion in the clouds is coherent?

"Let the waters settle and you will see the moon and stars mirrored in your own being." -Rumi
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like jennybee's post
03-02-2017, 12:21 PM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
At work.

(03-02-2017 12:17 PM)jennybee Wrote:  
(03-02-2017 11:43 AM)Naielis Wrote:  I thought I already addressed this. The flying spaghetti monster isn't coherent. The first cause can't be material.

And an invisible genie who lives in a mansion in the clouds is coherent?

No..... I think Naielis was saying a Genie in a cloud castle was immaterial, hence should not matter.

Wink

Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-02-2017, 12:32 PM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
When it gets right down to it, I find all philosophical arguments for gods utterly unbelievable. If such an entity exists, I want something more accessible and testable -- actual physical evidence that points directly to the god itself and to no other possibilities.

Until and unless such a thing shows up, I have no reason to entertain believers' hypotheses in that regard. None. I will treat such arguments as a de facto admission that there is no physical evidence to be had, and that their deity is thereby functionally indistinguishable from a flight of the imagination. Quite frankly, if I ever had to believe in an imaginary being it would be simpler to just grab a sheet of paper and invent one of my own, which would be much more satisfying than adopting someone else's imaginary friend.

I'm sorry, but your beliefs are much too silly to take seriously. Got anything else we can discuss?
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 8 users Like Astreja's post
03-02-2017, 12:47 PM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(03-02-2017 11:38 AM)Naielis Wrote:  If you're unwilling to change your mind, why are you here?

Perhaps you should be asking the same question of yourself. Just a suggestion.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Heath_Tierney's post
03-02-2017, 12:48 PM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(03-02-2017 12:32 PM)Astreja Wrote:  When it gets right down to it, I find all philosophical arguments for gods utterly unbelievable. If such an entity exists, I want something more accessible and testable -- actual physical evidence that points directly to the god itself and to no other possibilities.

Until and unless such a thing shows up, I have no reason to entertain believers' hypotheses in that regard. None. I will treat such arguments as a de facto admission that there is no physical evidence to be had, and that their deity is thereby functionally indistinguishable from a flight of the imagination.

Brilliant. Wish I'd said it.

Bowing
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-02-2017, 01:33 PM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(03-02-2017 12:32 PM)Astreja Wrote:  When it gets right down to it, I find all philosophical arguments for gods utterly unbelievable. If such an entity exists, I want something more accessible and testable -- actual physical evidence that points directly to the god itself and to no other possibilities.

Until and unless such a thing shows up, I have no reason to entertain believers' hypotheses in that regard. None. I will treat such arguments as a de facto admission that there is no physical evidence to be had, and that their deity is thereby functionally indistinguishable from a flight of the imagination. Quite frankly, if I ever had to believe in an imaginary being it would be simpler to just grab a sheet of paper and invent one of my own, which would be much more satisfying than adopting someone else's imaginary friend.

Why I rarely argue with theists. There is nothing to argue.

"If you don't have a seat at the table, you're probably on the menu."

[Image: parodia-michal-aniol-flying-spaghetti-monster.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes ShadowProject's post
03-02-2017, 01:36 PM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(03-02-2017 11:38 AM)Naielis Wrote:  
(03-02-2017 11:15 AM)kemo boy Wrote:  I don't know about Banjo, but where, exactly, are you trying to get to? We've heard these arguments for years (for many, decades). They're nothing new. Do you expect to hear, "Wow, we've never looked at it this way - you may be right!". Not gonna happen. Most of us have been exposed to these weak arguments for at least as long as you've been alive.

If you're unwilling to change your mind, why are you here?

To see the amazing amount of effort some people put into tying to justify their emotional beliefs, of course!

I'm willing to change my mind. But you have nothing that would make me consider it. But you seem unwilling to even admit you might be wrong.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes kemo boy's post
03-02-2017, 01:47 PM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(03-02-2017 12:17 PM)jennybee Wrote:  
(03-02-2017 11:43 AM)Naielis Wrote:  I thought I already addressed this. The flying spaghetti monster isn't coherent. The first cause can't be material.

And an invisible genie who lives in a mansion in the clouds is coherent?

When did I mention an invisible genie? Or a mansion? Or clouds?

"I think part of the appeal of mathematical logic is that the formulas look mysterious - you write backward Es!" - Hilary Putnam
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-02-2017, 01:49 PM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(03-02-2017 01:36 PM)kemo boy Wrote:  
(03-02-2017 11:38 AM)Naielis Wrote:  If you're unwilling to change your mind, why are you here?

To see the amazing amount of effort some people put into tying to justify their emotional beliefs, of course!

I'm willing to change my mind. But you have nothing that would make me consider it. But you seem unwilling to even admit you might be wrong.

Of course I could be wrong. I'm an agnostic theist. What do you mean I'm unwilling to admit it? That issue never came up.

"I think part of the appeal of mathematical logic is that the formulas look mysterious - you write backward Es!" - Hilary Putnam
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-02-2017, 01:54 PM
RE: Christian vs. Humanist Morality
(03-02-2017 12:47 PM)Heath_Tierney Wrote:  
(03-02-2017 11:38 AM)Naielis Wrote:  If you're unwilling to change your mind, why are you here?

Perhaps you should be asking the same question of yourself. Just a suggestion.

What do you mean? I'm perfectly willing to change my mind. The fact that I'm willing to have a discussion convinces you that I'm not willing to change my mind?

"I think part of the appeal of mathematical logic is that the formulas look mysterious - you write backward Es!" - Hilary Putnam
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: