Had I'd known...
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
17-05-2017, 07:51 PM
RE: Had I'd known...
(17-05-2017 10:47 AM)Shai Hulud Wrote:  
(17-05-2017 10:24 AM)adey67 Wrote:  Woof woof, am I going to catholic hell now ? Consider

Depends on which Catholic you're asking. I struggle with the idea of Hell for good people (something the current Pope seems to as well). If you ask CC, I'm guessing the answer would be a resounding yes. Then again, first as a Baptist and now as a Catholic, I don't understand why people can be so happy to condemn others to Hell and seem so damn cheery about it (not saying CC is, just that it's sadly common). Why would anyone lack basic empathy and rejoice in the eternal torment of another?

Hell or not, I assume that those in the "correct" religion receive a better afterlife than those in the "wrong" ones, along with the irreligious. I find this to be a resoundingly unfair system, and such a God unworthy of worship. This of course goes for almost all religions, not just Christianity. Considering most people adopt the religion they are born into, it's a lottery of geography.

I have a website here which discusses the issues and terminology surrounding religion and atheism. It's hopefully user friendly to all.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Robvalue's post
17-05-2017, 07:57 PM
RE: Had I'd known...
(17-05-2017 07:22 PM)jennybee Wrote:  I only read CC's intro thread. I had no idea any of this was going on Hobo, I feel so out of the loop Wink Oh well, here's a gif for you CC. May your travels be light or your journey be light...or however the fuck it goes...

[Image: tenor.gif]

Me too! Apparently it doesn't take much for the whole community to be stereotyped based on a handful of responses.

I have a website here which discusses the issues and terminology surrounding religion and atheism. It's hopefully user friendly to all.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Robvalue's post
17-05-2017, 08:04 PM
RE: Had I'd known...
I've barely been on here but I can relate (in a DIFFERENT SENSE I DONT KNOW THIS COMMUNITY AT ALL) what your feeling. I've been on other communities like that but with fundamentalist anti-Catholic Christians. I couldn't take it so I left. If you can't take it then you go my lad/gal. No harm in that.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes SuperD's post
17-05-2017, 08:06 PM
RE: Had I'd known...
(17-05-2017 07:57 PM)Robvalue Wrote:  
(17-05-2017 07:22 PM)jennybee Wrote:  I only read CC's intro thread. I had no idea any of this was going on Hobo, I feel so out of the loop Wink Oh well, here's a gif for you CC. May your travels be light or your journey be light...or however the fuck it goes...

[Image: tenor.gif]

Me too! Apparently it doesn't take much for the whole community to be stereotyped based on a handful of responses.

[Image: giphy.gif]

"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
[+] 2 users Like jennybee's post
17-05-2017, 08:54 PM
RE: Had I'd known...
So I pulled my copy of Feser's book off my shelf.
I had forgotten how many "no", and "nopes" I had scrawled in it.

One of the things that he's famous for, is his "triangle" argument, (for realism), and claims no one has been able to refute it. On page 42, he is giving his version of arguments for realism, and gives his "one over many" argument :

"Triangularity", "redness", "humanness" etc. are not reducible to any particular triangle, red thing, human being, nor to any collection of triangles, red things, or human beings. For any particular triangle, red thing, or human being, or even the whole collection of these things, could go out of existence, and yet triangularity, redness, and humanness could come to be exemplified once again. They also could be, and often are, exemplified, even when no human mind is aware of this fact. Hence triangularity, redness, humanness, and other universals are neither material things nor collections of material things, nor dependent on human minds for their existence."

Facepalm

So what's wrong here ? Among them, are :

1. Of course they are not material things. But the perceptions of them, are the product of (physical) brain processes. Redness (if he knew any physics) is obvious, and "humanness" is too undefined to even attempt to deal with. His conclusion that they are "immaterial and not dependent on human minds for their existence" is demonstrably false, and he has not one example where they exist in the absence of human minds. It's also a fact, that damaged human brains, (by injury or disease) are unable to correctly name what they perceive. If all humans were color-blind, there would be no "redness". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visible_spectrum
Light in that spectrum would still exist, but humans would not have learned to name it "red". Redness, as an idea, exists nowhere except in human brains that have learned to name it that.

2. All human (usually infant-toddler) brains learn, by trial and error, and ultimately by positive reinforcement, what to name a form that it sees, that resembles a "triangle". If humans had chosen to name three-sided forms "dim-wits", then the toddler would LEARN to call three sided forms a "dim-wit". If there were no three sided forms in the environment of the toddlers in question, (and there were not for hundreds of thousands of years in human evolution), then not only would there be no "dim-wits", but they would have no clue what someone was talking about, when that term was used. If a human brain has no learned experience with the concept, it is oblivious of a dim-wit. The "idea" of a dim-wit exists nowhere, except in the brains of those who have learned to correctly name the object. There is no "triangularity" apart from human brain processing. There are 3 sided objects, but apart from those who have learned and agreed to call them by a certain name, "triangularity" does not exist. It's a LEARNED (sometimes correctly, sometimes not), human naming convention.

2. No matter what example a toddler, who has learned what to call a three sided form, happens upon, it is never a "perfect dim-wit". They are all objects which can be named a dim-wit, to follow a convention, that is somewhat variable, but with increasingly complex technical tools, no 'perfect' dim-wit would EVER be found. There is no perfect dim-wit. If there were no people on Earth who called a dim-wit a dim-wit, "dim-wits" would NOT exist. There would be many three-sided, (all DIFFERENT) objects, but "dim-wits" are not a "thing" *in themselves* UNTIL a brain who has learned what to call them, ... names one of the objects that resembles a dim-wit, a "dim-wit".

His argument FAILS.
It's an example of the Reification Fallacy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reification_(fallacy)

There is no such *thing* as triangularity that exists apart from human brains who have learned how to use a word. It's a LEARNED naming -convention concept, (as well as a concept in math, that can be defined in many ways, and *could* have been defined in other ways).

Anyway, L'll Eddy's triangle BS is easily refuted.

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
[+] 6 users Like Bucky Ball's post
17-05-2017, 09:01 PM (This post was last modified: 17-05-2017 09:06 PM by RocketSurgeon76.)
RE: Had I'd known...
(17-05-2017 08:54 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  So I pulled my copy of Feser's book off my shelf.
...
Anyway, L'll Eddy's triangle BS is easily refuted.

[Image: Agent-Carter-Surprised-Face-02212016.gif]

Edit to Add: Unless I miss my guess (I refuse to read that drivel), Eddy's point is that we do not invent equilateral (I'm assuming that's what he means by "perfect") triangles, but we can discover that such a construct exists through our analysis of math/geometry. However, it exists in mathematics and geometry because it can be precisely defined using terms that are understood in the real world. I believe the failure of the triangle analogy, even using the "we discover math, we do not invent it" idea upon which he is apparently basing his premise, is that the concept does not work for that which cannot be precisely defined, but only defined in terms relative to something else, such as the infamous "that which is greater than all else" argument, which attempts to extrapolate into the unknown from the known without any basis for doing so other than a superlative. The former (triangles) is a description we attach to something we have discovered and are able to define precisely, using demonstrable principles of geometry, while the latter is an attempt to define something into existence in the first place. Anyone who thinks they are analogues of one another is a moron.

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like RocketSurgeon76's post
17-05-2017, 09:12 PM
RE: Had I'd known...
I've often wondered why they think a superlative wording is enough to constitute philosophy/theology.

"God is defined as an intelligent being which is greater than everything else and which created the universe."

"Dragons are defined as lizards but larger, and with the ability to fly and breathe fire."

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 11 users Like RocketSurgeon76's post
17-05-2017, 09:23 PM
RE: Had I'd known...
Quote:The atheists here were so sensitive I would have chosen my words differently. But see it my way. Who would have thought that " #unthinkingatheist" would hurt the feelings of people who regularly refer to opposing positions as BS. Don't read Feser's book because he insults some atheist writers? True hypocrisy.

I like talking to atheists. There are sites where you can have reasonable debates. This one seems full of bleating sheep who can't seem to follow a simple thread. Weak, uninformed minds who have nothing to post except scoffing, insults and stupid slogans.

Oh. Sorry. I did it again. Insulted you that is. Bye. Laugh out load

Sweeping generalizations aren't part of the scientific method Dr. Comfort...

... Anyways... Popcorn

~ The Universe is under no obligation to make sense to you ~
-Neil Degrasse Tyson
[Image: stairway_to_heaven_by_tomtr.png]
~ 0 ~
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Cosmo's post
17-05-2017, 09:44 PM
RE: Had I'd known...
(17-05-2017 04:03 AM)ColdComfort Wrote:  The atheists here were so sensitive I would have chosen my words differently. But see it my way. Who would have thought that " #unthinkingatheist" would hurt the feelings of people who regularly refer to opposing positions as BS. Don't read Feser's book because he insults some atheist writers? True hypocrisy.

I like talking to atheists. There are sites where you can have reasonable debates. This one seems full of bleating sheep who can't seem to follow a simple thread. Weak, uninformed minds who have nothing to post except scoffing, insults and stupid slogans.

Oh. Sorry. I did it again. Insulted you that is. Bye. Laugh out load

Sorry Charlie.
One can only be insulted by someone who has earned respect.
You have zero. Nada. Zilch. Rein.
"If your brains were dynamite there wouldn't be enough to blow your hat off.”
Laugh out load

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
[+] 3 users Like Bucky Ball's post
18-05-2017, 12:26 AM (This post was last modified: 18-05-2017 12:30 AM by Robvalue.)
RE: Had I'd known...
Edit: never mind Tongue

I have a website here which discusses the issues and terminology surrounding religion and atheism. It's hopefully user friendly to all.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: