Intercessory prayer is pointless
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
11-09-2017, 02:42 PM
RE: Intercessory prayer is pointless
(11-09-2017 01:44 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(11-09-2017 11:58 AM)Thoreauvian Wrote:  For a summary of scientific studies showing how intuitions are unreliable, see:

Monty Hall Problem fucks with a lot of people's intuitions too.

A lot of that one is I think most people miss how important it is that the host will always open a door with a goat before offering the switch (and that he knows what's behind each). Taking that into account, it's a lot easier to explain to people why switching is preferable 2/3 times.

Basically, you only has a 1/3 chance to get it right the first time. Once he reveals one of the two goats, staying still yields a 1/3 chance of being right, whereas switching increases your odds to 2/3. But yeah, if you miss the importance of that detail, everyone assumes it's 50-50.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like RobbyPants's post
11-09-2017, 04:27 PM
RE: Intercessory prayer is pointless
(10-09-2017 02:15 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(10-09-2017 01:52 PM)SYZ Wrote:  I also accept—absolutely—the tenets of science, ...

I don't. As a trained scientist, I was taught not to. We refine and create new methodologies all the time. The only real tenets of science are "Is there a plausible theory to support the observations?" and "Are the observations repeatable under this theory using accepted methodologies?" And in medical science, the repeatability is often more important than the theory. (Do we completely understand the mechanism of even aspirin yet?)

Unfortunately(?) I have to accept the current tenets of science as I read them—rightly or wrongly—simply because I have absolutely no training or qualifications in that arena.

I absolutely accept the scientists' theory of gravity for example, but at the same time I also accept that they've yet to adequately explain just how it "works", even though its effects are 100% replicable.

I'm a creationist... I believe that man created God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-09-2017, 04:38 PM
RE: Intercessory prayer is pointless
Hi Nose.

I saw you do not understand what reality means.

Definitions are easy to find while using a search engine.

[ree-al-i-tee]

noun, plural realities for 3, 5–7.
1.
the state or quality of being real.
2.
resemblance to what is real.
3.
a real thing or fact.
4.
real things, facts, or events taken as a whole; state of affairs:
the reality of the business world; vacationing to escape reality.
5.
Philosophy.
something that exists independently of ideas concerning it.
something that exists independently of all other things and from which all other things derive.
6.
something that is real.
7.
something that constitutes a real or actual thing, as distinguished from something that is merely apparent.
adjective
8.
noting or pertaining to a TV program or film that portrays nonactors interacting or competing with each other in real but contrived situations, allegedly without a script:
a popular reality show; reality TV.
Idioms
9.
in reality, in fact or truth; actually:

IHTH.

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Banjo's post
11-09-2017, 05:07 PM
RE: Intercessory prayer is pointless
(11-09-2017 04:38 PM)Banjo Wrote:  Hi Nose.

I saw you do not understand what reality means.

5.
Philosophy.
a) something that exists independently of ideas concerning it.
b) something that exists independently of all other things and from which all other things derive.

I think the FuzzyNasal is discussing mainly 5b. The other NailThis dude was discussing more of 5a. Both seem interesting to me. At least that's my read. The FurryNose dude don't come across as particularly arrogant to me while the kid does.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like GirlyMan's post
11-09-2017, 11:19 PM (This post was last modified: 11-09-2017 11:39 PM by Robvalue.)
RE: Intercessory prayer is pointless
(11-09-2017 06:48 AM)nosferatu323 Wrote:  
(11-09-2017 05:59 AM)Robvalue Wrote:  What if there's no shadow and I'm insane/asleep/non-existent? Well... you can't lose what you never had to begin with.
I think your points are interesting.

You can't lose anything, but what if, in your analogy, we would wake up when we realize there were no shadows to begin with?

I assume you mean this by the shadow analogy:
Quote:I used the analogy that we're only ever looking at a shadow of reality, and can never look directly at it. A big part of science is about predicting how that shadow will behave in the future. We can do this very successfully, without having to know anything about the thing that is making the shadow.

If we wake up, then we address whatever reality we now inhabit as best we can, just as we have done before. Maybe something similar to the scientific method will work; maybe it won't and we need something new. Either way, the scientific method has been the best way of dealing with this reality thus far. Sitting around refusing to address any particular reality in case it turns out to be temporary can only hamstring you.

I only tend to define "real" in relative terms, when it comes down to it. I'm an absurdist, and a pragmatist. My current view is, "Things are as real to any particular observer as they appear to be". If an experience is happening, that's some form of reality to whatever is experiencing it. Trying to define things any more concretely than that always seems to involve circular definitions/assumptions. When talking informally, I use "real" to mean the overlap between our shared realities, as it relates to some sort of hypothetical objective reality.

And thanks, I'm glad you like how I view science Smile Sure, some people do overplay their hand I'm sure when it comes to what science can achieve. But until a better method is discovered, those limits are something we just have to accept.

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
[+] 3 users Like Robvalue's post
12-09-2017, 01:44 AM
RE: Intercessory prayer is pointless
The problem with people who either dont know (or cant agree with anyone else) what reality is, is: You cant have a meaningful discussion with them, at all. Because assuming a reality (a common shared one is of course preferable) is necessary as the very first step of anything else.

If they cant discern reality form our models of reality, its a similar problem. Conversation is factually impossible. Thats why i think and i would give this to Nosferatu as a honest advice: They need to go back into their basement, think even harder and come up with an idea of reality that makes sense to share with someone else.

That nonsense about "science proposes an unfalisifyable reality" (and therefore suggesting that maybe reality doesnt exist or cant be shared between us) is useless, because at the point where you are discussing this idea with someone else you admit that basically someone else (being part of a greater reality) exists, and you are acting against your own suggestion.

This is much like Briggencate and his "brain in a vat" argument. If you are suggesting that you are a brain in a vat, what are you doing here (in a supposed to be virtual, non-existing reality) posting?

We are stuck with what we perceive as reality and our model(s) of it, derived with tools like the scientific method. We cant be 100% sure if our models of reality match actual reality (see quantum world), but go ahead and offer something better (not wishful thinking better, but demonstrably better). if you can.

Ceterum censeo, religionem delendam esse
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Deesse23's post
12-09-2017, 06:07 AM (This post was last modified: 12-09-2017 06:39 AM by Thoreauvian.)
RE: Intercessory prayer is pointless
(12-09-2017 01:44 AM)Deesse23 Wrote:  This is much like Briggencate and his "brain in a vat" argument. If you are suggesting that you are a brain in a vat, what are you doing here (in a supposed to be virtual, non-existing reality) posting?

As I understand it from philosophy, people who make claims contrary to appearances have the burden of proof. That includes anyone who thinks perceived realities are false, that we are really brains in vats, that the Earth is flat, that God is the only reality, that Trump's lies are true, or whatever other contrarian idea they are pushing.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Thoreauvian's post
12-09-2017, 07:22 AM (This post was last modified: 12-09-2017 07:28 AM by Deesse23.)
RE: Intercessory prayer is pointless
(12-09-2017 06:07 AM)Thoreauvian Wrote:  
(12-09-2017 01:44 AM)Deesse23 Wrote:  This is much like Briggencate and his "brain in a vat" argument. If you are suggesting that you are a brain in a vat, what are you doing here (in a supposed to be virtual, non-existing reality) posting?

As I understand it from philosophy, people who make claims contrary to appearances have the burden of proof. That includes anyone who thinks perceived realities are false, that we are really brains in vats, that the Earth is flat, that God is the only reality, that Trump's lies are true, or whatever other contrarian idea they are pushing.

Correct, and that is why they are either trying to dishonestly ignore that burden of proof or shift it, as Bruggencate tries to do by attacking your view of reality.

Thats why i attacked Nosferatu for doing the very same (i cant speak for his intentions though but consider my rant being a wake up call in case he was honest). Claiming or showing the limitaitons of science or whatever has absolutely no effect on the validity of his own argument, which usually, and as in nosferatus case, has absolutely no data to support it at all.

The strategy of such woo peddling is always the same:
Tear down your world entirely, make it meaningless and then present his own utterly meaningless *theory* and pretend they are on the same level, which they are not, because the *standard* view of reality is embedded in a complex web of mutually supporting theories and observations, and the woo pedder has nothing but an idea supported by his own delusions of either grandeur or a Galileo-like persecution complex.

Edit: i consider these ideas as worth considering if and when they have some merit based on observation etc.
for example i listened to Joe Rogans podcast with Sean Carroll, in which Caroll mentioned that our everyday perception of reality is basically totally wrong if you consider the quantum world (in its scale!). Why is Carolls statement worth considering and not Nosferatus? Because Carroll has the experiments and data and math and compelte theory (quantum theory) to back up his claim. He also states btw. that this only applies to the quantum scales, unlike woo peddlers like Chopra who apply this to the macro world (and iirc lately there was such an woo peddler here as well, arguing witht he quantum state of the whole moon Facepalm )

Ceterum censeo, religionem delendam esse
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Deesse23's post
12-09-2017, 05:05 PM
RE: Intercessory prayer is pointless
I can't fucking stand solipsists.

When valour preys on reason, it eats the sword it fights with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like WhiskeyDebates's post
12-09-2017, 07:24 PM (This post was last modified: 12-09-2017 07:49 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Intercessory prayer is pointless
(12-09-2017 01:44 AM)Deesse23 Wrote:  This is much like Briggencate and his "brain in a vat" argument. If you are suggesting that you are a brain in a vat, what are you doing here (in a supposed to be virtual, non-existing reality) posting?

Don't know who this Briggencate character is, but BIV is an exceedingly difficult hypothesis to refute. Putnam's disjunctive argument is generally accepted as refutation against all but the most radical skeptical formulations of BIV, but even following it is rather involved and requires some level of sophistication and effort.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: