Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-03-2016, 06:15 PM
RE: Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
(06-03-2016 06:01 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  
(06-03-2016 05:59 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Tell me what a solipcist is.
A typo?

Once is a typo. 3 times? That's not a typo. You have no idea what solipsism is do you?

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-03-2016, 06:21 PM
RE: Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
(06-03-2016 06:15 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(06-03-2016 06:01 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  A typo?

Once is a typo. 3 times? That's not a typo. You have no idea what solipsism is do you?
My phone has it added to dictionary as the typo version of the word and it autocorrects it, so yes each time i post via my phone it looks like that. If your logic is true why is it that in the "What am I?" thread it was correctly typed on almost 6 occasions? Your logic fails you & for what purpose is the use of correcting a simple reply post spelling error?
It was posted in the "What am I?" thread, but just to patronize you I will repost it.

sol·ip·sism/ˈsälipˌsizəm/
noun
the view or theory that the self is all that can be known to exist.

I fail to meet those requirements on so many levels.
1. I do not make a claim to any absolute realities, not even my own existence.
2. I believe in the existence of things outside of my own existence once I have some personal interaction with it.
3. Everything else I withhold beliefs or judgements.
4. My belief system isn't a form of cognitive rationalization, it's just instinctive for me to think this way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Agnostic Shane's post
06-03-2016, 06:25 PM
RE: Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
(06-03-2016 06:21 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  
(06-03-2016 06:15 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Once is a typo. 3 times? That's not a typo. You have no idea what solipsism is do you?
It was posted in the "What am I?" thread, but just to patronize you I will repost it.

sol·ip·sism/ˈsälipˌsizəm/
noun
the view or theory that the self is all that can be known to exist.

I fail to meet those requirements on so many levels.
1. I do not make a claim to any absolute realities, not even my own existence.

Me too. We are not solipsists. We are something different.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
06-03-2016, 06:44 PM
RE: Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
(06-03-2016 06:25 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(06-03-2016 06:21 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  It was posted in the "What am I?" thread, but just to patronize you I will repost it.

sol·ip·sism/ˈsälipˌsizəm/
noun
the view or theory that the self is all that can be known to exist.

I fail to meet those requirements on so many levels.
1. I do not make a claim to any absolute realities, not even my own existence.

Me too. We are not solipsists. We are something different.
But probably not the same either.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Agnostic Shane's post
06-03-2016, 07:05 PM
RE: Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
(06-03-2016 06:44 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  
(06-03-2016 06:25 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Me too. We are not solipsists. We are something different.
But probably not the same either.

And who knows which is which and who is who. ... And after all we're only ordinary men.




#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-03-2016, 07:39 PM
RE: Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
(06-03-2016 06:14 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  I'm only stating the obvious. This belief system & decision making process you seem to think we are in control of isn't achieved through cognitive rationalization but rather through personal experience that has been etched into our brains via years of evolution & our very own life experiences.

As far as the decision making process is concerned:
It's more of an instinct than a cognitive rationalization. It's been proven that we make these decisions in the brain before we are even aware that a decision was required.
It's only when we try to rationalize personal experience and behavioral patterns that we try to lay claim to truth.
Finding an absolute truth through cognitive rationalization of evidence has never been achieved by science. If anything science only proves that the more we observe is the more questions we end up raising.

I wish it were true that we are cognitively rational beings when it comes to our belief system and our decision making process, but for the most part it's just our primal instinct that controls us. We are all just high functioning animals as far as biology is concerned.

I'm not trying to tell anyone how to find the truth within a claim here (if that's what you were thinking). I'm merely explaining how belief systems & the decision making process works from the scientific perspective.

If I bombard a hardcore atheist with a number of inexplicable spiritual experiences which defy the laws of probability, there is a huge possibility it will result in a life changing epiphany that converts them back to some form of Theism.

In the same manner a Theist that has given their life to God is more likely to convert to Atheism if in their most desperate time of need all their prayers go unanswered & they begin to question if such a God could possibly exist

So you're sure of that too ?
More contradictions to the claimed state of what you say you're sure of.

I have no clue what you think you're responding to. I said nothing about decision making processes, or about being in control of anything. Are you on drugs ?

Quote:I'm merely explaining how belief systems & the decision making process works from the scientific perspective.

According to whom ? So you claim with no references. Let's see both the studies you are speaking of, WHY you accept them in this particular instance, AND your own "test" results you CLAIM you need to see to validate the work of others.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-03-2016, 07:47 PM (This post was last modified: 06-03-2016 07:52 PM by Agnostic Shane.)
RE: Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
(06-03-2016 07:39 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(06-03-2016 06:14 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  I'm only stating the obvious. This belief system & decision making process you seem to think we are in control of isn't achieved through cognitive rationalization but rather through personal experience that has been etched into our brains via years of evolution & our very own life experiences.

As far as the decision making process is concerned:
It's more of an instinct than a cognitive rationalization. It's been proven that we make these decisions in the brain before we are even aware that a decision was required.
It's only when we try to rationalize personal experience and behavioral patterns that we try to lay claim to truth.
Finding an absolute truth through cognitive rationalization of evidence has never been achieved by science. If anything science only proves that the more we observe is the more questions we end up raising.

I wish it were true that we are cognitively rational beings when it comes to our belief system and our decision making process, but for the most part it's just our primal instinct that controls us. We are all just high functioning animals as far as biology is concerned.

I'm not trying to tell anyone how to find the truth within a claim here (if that's what you were thinking). I'm merely explaining how belief systems & the decision making process works from the scientific perspective.

If I bombard a hardcore atheist with a number of inexplicable spiritual experiences which defy the laws of probability, there is a huge possibility it will result in a life changing epiphany that converts them back to some form of Theism.

In the same manner a Theist that has given their life to God is more likely to convert to Atheism if in their most desperate time of need all their prayers go unanswered & they begin to question if such a God could possibly exist

So you're sure of that too ?
More contradictions to to claimed state of what you say you're sure of.

I have no clue what you think you're responding to. I said nothing about decision making processes, or about being in control of anything. Are you on drugs ?

Quote:I'm merely explaining how belief systems & the decision making process works from the scientific perspective.

According to whom ? So you claim with no references. Let's see both the studies you are speaking of, WHY you accept them in this particular instance, AND your own "test" results you CLAIM you need to see to validate the work of others.
I never said I was "sure" of that. Why do you keep jumping to conclusions? I have a disclaimer in my signature just to ensure that everyone knows nothing I say I am absolutely certain about, yet you always seem to think otherwise. Maybe it's due to years of arguing with people that make claims of certainty.
I do not know why I accept them or even that I do accept them, only that I believe it to be an acceptable possibility given all the possibilities I currently know of. Even then I still do not claim that I came to that conclusion by cognitive rationalization.
I can tell you what I am thinking but not why I am thinking it as I do not have that skill that you and so many others here seem to possess.

http://www.nature.com/news/2008/080411/f...8.751.html
http://exploringthemind.com/the-mind/bra...you-decide
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurosci..._free_will
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-03-2016, 07:57 PM
RE: Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
(06-03-2016 07:47 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  
(06-03-2016 07:39 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  So you're sure of that too ?
More contradictions to to claimed state of what you say you're sure of.

I have no clue what you think you're responding to. I said nothing about decision making processes, or about being in control of anything. Are you on drugs ?


According to whom ? So you claim with no references. Let's see both the studies you are speaking of, WHY you accept them in this particular instance, AND your own "test" results you CLAIM you need to see to validate the work of others.
I never said I was "sure" of that. Why do you keep jumping to conclusions? I have a disclaimer in my signature just to ensure that everyone knows nothing I say I am absolutely certain about, yet you always seem to think otherwise. Maybe it's due to years of arguing with people that make claims of certainty.
I do not know why I accept them or even that I do accept them, only that I believe it to be an acceptable possibility given all the possibilities I currently know of. Even then I still do not claim that I came to that conclusion by cognitive rationalization.
I can tell you what I am thinking but not why I am thinking it as I do not have that skill that you and so many others here seem to possess.

So, no studies.
Apparently claiming something to be "scientific" (even though there are no references), because sounding *sciencey* lends weight to an opinion, and this is what ? An exception to the "tests" claimed that need to be done, to accept the work of others, or was the assertion about needing "tests" just all some sort of *exaggeration*.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-03-2016, 08:03 PM (This post was last modified: 06-03-2016 08:06 PM by Agnostic Shane.)
RE: Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
(06-03-2016 07:57 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(06-03-2016 07:47 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  I never said I was "sure" of that. Why do you keep jumping to conclusions? I have a disclaimer in my signature just to ensure that everyone knows nothing I say I am absolutely certain about, yet you always seem to think otherwise. Maybe it's due to years of arguing with people that make claims of certainty.
I do not know why I accept them or even that I do accept them, only that I believe it to be an acceptable possibility given all the possibilities I currently know of. Even then I still do not claim that I came to that conclusion by cognitive rationalization.
I can tell you what I am thinking but not why I am thinking it as I do not have that skill that you and so many others here seem to possess.

So, no studies.
Apparently claiming something to be "scientific" (even though there are no references), because sounding *sciencey* lends weight to an opinion, and this is what ? An exception to the "tests" claimed that need to be done, to accept the work of others, or was the assertion about needing "tests" just all some sort of *exaggeration*.
Once again I never lay claim to certainty, but that does not mean I cannot lean in the direction of a certain belief based on what I have currently experienced thus far.
Also I posted 3 links.
Regardless of that, why do you say "sounding sciencey" lends weight to an opinion? Do you think that's what I'm trying to do? Prove a point by sounding sciencey?
Have I ever made that claim or even alluded to it? This is your opinion is it not?
Is it possible that your own biases against pseudo intellects deems anyone that "sounds intellectual" a pseudo intellect? It would appear that your haste to judge others based on the way they communicate is riddled in a fallacious logic. Maybe you should try targeting what was said instead of who said it and you may find satisfaction in the outcome of the conversation.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-03-2016, 09:25 PM
RE: Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
(06-03-2016 07:47 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  
(06-03-2016 07:39 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  So you're sure of that too ?
More contradictions to to claimed state of what you say you're sure of.

I have no clue what you think you're responding to. I said nothing about decision making processes, or about being in control of anything. Are you on drugs ?


According to whom ? So you claim with no references. Let's see both the studies you are speaking of, WHY you accept them in this particular instance, AND your own "test" results you CLAIM you need to see to validate the work of others.
I never said I was "sure" of that. Why do you keep jumping to conclusions? I have a disclaimer in my signature just to ensure that everyone knows nothing I say I am absolutely certain about, yet you always seem to think otherwise. Maybe it's due to years of arguing with people that make claims of certainty.
I do not know why I accept them or even that I do accept them, only that I believe it to be an acceptable possibility given all the possibilities I currently know of. Even then I still do not claim that I came to that conclusion by cognitive rationalization.
I can tell you what I am thinking but not why I am thinking it as I do not have that skill that you and so many others here seem to possess.

http://www.nature.com/news/2008/080411/f...8.751.html
http://exploringthemind.com/the-mind/bra...you-decide
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurosci..._free_will

The conflict comes from because it keeps coming off completely tactless. I'm sorry but this "disclaimer' doesn't excuse your manner of phrasing.

If you don't think the "if you x" or "theists x" claim you instead could state claims with a manner that lessens certainty at all into the comments. Use passive voice or use more direct honest structure such as I think, maybe, perhaps, etc. If you believe it is just a possibility.. don't be be counter-responsive to someone who doesn't read that out of your phrasing which is in no manner written indicating you just think it's a possibility.

You'd be better served to explicated communicate how you think of it. If you've argued over certainty for years I don't think you deserve a leeway on these points.

You're using certainty basically in three different ways, which isn't suiting your ideas well. Perhaps other words instead or more clearly writing absolute certainty when you mean absolute certainty and not sometimes using certainty to imply absolute certainty would do you better. Since other times you use certainty to mean apart of a degree and other times you mean it to just generic acceptance. Your communication is just far less ideal for your points to be contingent.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: