Is belief in the unseen irrational?

[Agnostic Shane]

(20-03-2016 07:46 PM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  

(20-03-2016 07:36 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  I am not gainfully employed.
I am the employer.
I run a profitable construction company with over 25 workers.
We do masonry, carpentry, joinery, electricals, plumbing, roofing, tiling, ceiling, painting, landscaping & general property maintenance.
I am versed in all aspects of the above trades.
I am married 10 years now with 3 kids. The oldest being 14, the youngest 6 months old.
Some consider this successful.
Maybe I am a fluke of nature if my belief system shouldn't allow me to be successful.
I have always made decisions based on my gut feeling without giving it much thought. It's instinctive. Maybe this is to blame for my current status in life.

I don't think our cognitive rationalization is that important to our survival & our success. It's our instinctive rationalization based on our genetetics, evolution, personal experiences & epigenomes that control us I think.
I believe cognitive rationalization is just an after thought that helps our base instincts make decisions for us.

I have already said we are an instinctive species, even though we choose to believe otherwise.

I maintain the fact that I could be wrong.

This does nothing to actually address or allay my questions or thoughts.

Employer >< Employee. Tomato >< TOmato

You make plans for the future of your employment which must be based on... nothing... Simply nothing.

Your stated position on life is... impossible.

You seem to have no way of knowing even if the Earth will continue to rotate on its axis. Or even what the Earth or the Sun are.

Unless... every rotation upon your return to consciousness (I have no idea how you manage to actually relinquish your grip on consciousness... Since you have not way of knowing if consciousness will ever return to you.) you literally look down... then walk outside and look up.

Really?

When others have called you a 'Solipsist' which you then go on to vehemently deny..... Only to return to posting such strange comments about not knowing things....



I am completely at a loss as to how your posting matches your reality.

When something hot accidentally touches you do you rationalize it before you pull away?
Have you ever made a decision against your better judgement?

It's been "proven" that we make reflex decisions before we are even aware a decision in needed.
Is it possible this also applies to rational decision making?

Have a read:
http://www.nature.com/news/2008/080411/f...8.751.html
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3746176/

[Unbeliever]

(20-03-2016 05:06 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Even if I did personally observe it I would only be certain something exists and I interacted with it, for the most part consciously.

Yes. And, by any meaningful definition of "dog", the certain something that exists and that you interacted with was a dog.

"An external reality exists, and objects within this external reality meet the definition of X, but these objects are not necessarily X" is not a coherent position.

(20-03-2016 07:38 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  It's quite ppssible I was already a part of reality before I was able to perceive it.

No, it isn't. Unless you are merely referring to your early existence as a zygote, which comes down to your definition of "you". In any other sense, you were not a part of reality before you could perceive it.

You are just playing silly word games with loose definitions and pretending that it is a valid philosophical stance.

I do not have much patience for word games.

[Peebothuhul]

(20-03-2016 08:01 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  When something hot accidentally touches you do you rationalize it before you pull away?

Um.. do you even biology?

(20-03-2016 08:01 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Have you ever made a decision against your better judgement?

Riiiiight.. and that there's been other information floating around in my thoughts/brain in regards to my decisions... Which are based on learning things previously about reality (Seen, unseen, tested and untested and MOST of all remembered) factors into your strange comment... how?

(20-03-2016 08:01 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  It's been "proven" that we make reflex decisions before we are even aware a decision in needed.

But.. you can't know this based on the things you've posted before.

For such to be viable (In my reality) then you must have both (A) Read this and (B) Experienced this and then put both pieces of information together within your mind.

Leaving aside all the babble you generally post about how you know what you know about what you're reading/looking at etc.

(20-03-2016 08:01 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Is it possible this also applies to rational decision making?

Dafaq? Really? Again, do you even biology?

Nerve/muscle control reflex and thought control reflex are two different things. You're conflating(?) Confusing(?) Mistaking(?) the two to make your.... strange point...



EDIT: Whoah! I just noticed your switch there!

THIS=> "It's been "proven" that we make reflex decisions..."

In no way, shape or form resembles,

THIS=> "When something hot accidentally touches you do you rationalize it before you pull away..."

Not at all.

(20-03-2016 08:01 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Have a read:
http://www.nature.com/news/2008/080411/f...8.751.html
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3746176/

And again... we're slaloming off along a different conversation.......

[Agnostic Shane]

(20-03-2016 08:09 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  

(20-03-2016 05:06 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Even if I did personally observe it I would only be certain something exists and I interacted with it, for the most part consciously.

Yes. And, by any meaningful definition of "dog", the certain something that exists and that you interacted with was a dog.

"An external reality exists, and objects within this external reality meet the definition of X, but these objects are not necessarily X" is not a coherent position.

(20-03-2016 07:38 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  It's quite ppssible I was already a part of reality before I was able to perceive it.

No, it isn't. Unless you are merely referring to your early existence as a zygote, which comes down to your definition of "you". In any other sense, you were not a part of reality before you could perceive it.

You are just playing silly word games with loose definitions and pretending that it is a valid philosophical stance.

I do not have much patience for word games.

How do you know the world is not inverted? How do you know the color blue isn't really red? How do you know the universe isnt something much more complicated than what we think it is? How are you certain of what you perceive to be in a certain way actually exists in that same way you perceive it? Who gets the privilege to say what something exists as? Animals don't see the world as we do. We don't have a sample of dark matter but we know something exists out there.
What good reason should I believe in the existence of anything other than the belief that it exists based on my interaction with it? Why should I conclude a certain thing only exists in a certain way. Conclusions are not my thing.
It is quite possible there are things that exist that we may never be able to prove exist. It is quite possible a Theist may experience something that I may never experience & is therefore justified in believing something exists that there is no physical evidence for.

It is quite possible our belief system does not come due to our cognitive rationalization and awareness of the evidence, but rather an instinctive rationalization brought about by years of evolution and personal experiences.

[Agnostic Shane]

(20-03-2016 08:17 PM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  

(20-03-2016 08:01 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  When something hot accidentally touches you do you rationalize it before you pull away?

Um.. do you even biology?

(20-03-2016 08:01 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Have you ever made a decision against your better judgement?

Riiiiight.. and that there's been other information floating around in my thoughts/brain in regards to my decisions... Which are based on learning things previously about reality (Seen, unseen, tested and untested and MOST of all remembered) factors into your strange comment... how?

(20-03-2016 08:01 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  It's been "proven" that we make reflex decisions before we are even aware a decision in needed.

But.. you can't know this based on the things you've posted before.

For such to be viable (In my reality) then you must have both (A) Read this and (B) Experienced this and then put both pieces of information together within your mind.

Leaving aside all the babble you generally post about how you know what you know about what you're reading/looking at etc.

(20-03-2016 08:01 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Is it possible this also applies to rational decision making?

Dafaq? Really? Again, do you even biology?

Nerve/muscle control reflex and thought control reflex are two different things. You're conflating(?) Confusing(?) Mistaking(?) the two to make your.... strange point...



EDIT: Whoah! I just noticed your switch there!

THIS=> "It's been "proven" that we make reflex decisions..."

In no way, shape or form resembles,

THIS=> "When something hot accidentally touches you do you rationalize it before you pull away..."

Not at all.

(20-03-2016 08:01 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Have a read:
http://www.nature.com/news/2008/080411/f...8.751.html
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3746176/

And again... we're slaloming off along a different conversation.......

I am not saying the same process is involved when making rational decisions, but I am not ruling out the possibility that could be. There is no confirmed evidence that we make rational decisions only after becoming aware of it. I could be wrong but I have never seen it.
Did you miss the part where I made a distinction between instinctive rationalization and cognitive rationalization?
Did you miss the part where I said cognitive rationalization could simply bean afterthought that helps the process of instinctive rationalization?
It is quite possible our minds have both instinctive rationalization and cognitive rationalization to contend with when making decisions. It is also possible our instinctive rational overpowers cognitive rationalization in most instances, and in the few instances it doesn't, it still eats away at our mind.
Did you even read the articles? They are very relevant to the points I just made.

[Banjo]

The boy stood on the burning deck
Picking his nose like mad,
He rolled it into little balls
And flicked it at his dad.

[Agnostic Shane]

(20-03-2016 08:35 PM)Banjo Wrote:  The boy stood on the burning deck
Picking his nose like mad,
He rolled it into little balls
And flicked it at his dad.

Duly noted,

[Peebothuhul]

Note: And the reply to Unbeliever is exactly what I raised a few posts ago about Ag-Shane's world view... which they then slalomed away from.....

(20-03-2016 08:26 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  How do you know the world is not inverted?

Inverted? Inverted how? Inverted to what?

(20-03-2016 08:26 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  How do you know the color blue isn't really red?

Really? REALLY? We're going to fall down the hole of 'What colour is an Orange in the dark'?

(20-03-2016 08:26 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  How do you know the universe isn't something much more complicated than what we think it is?

But... the universe/reality is more complicated than we think. That's why people do science.

(20-03-2016 08:26 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  How are you certain of what you perceive to be in a certain way actually exists in that same way you perceive it?

Because if it wasn't..... I'd possibly walk under a bus? See the post about 'reality' below...

(20-03-2016 08:26 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Who gets the privilege to say what something exists as?

At a base level? Reality is the arbiter of what does and does not exist. Unless you're hovering at your desk.. and not other-wise sitting in a chair?

(20-03-2016 08:26 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Animals don't see the world as we do.

Again... do you even biology? Yes, yes they actually DO see the world the way we see it (*Note: Caveat upon using visual organs to see If you bring up Nagel's "What it is to be a bat" I will be so vexed) It's the neurons, their amount, bundling etc which determines everything else.

See the equivocation in the above?

(20-03-2016 08:26 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  We don't have a sample of dark matter but we know something exists out there.

No, we actually don't know about dark matter/energy. That's WHY it's called 'Dark what's its'.....

(20-03-2016 08:26 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  What good reason should I believe in the existence of anything other than the belief that it exists based on my interaction with it?

Again, see my previous post about simply surviving in a day in your reality. As in "How do you suffer going to seep at night"?

(20-03-2016 08:26 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Why should I conclude a certain thing only exists in a certain way.

There's a really long series of Youtube clips and other reading about things like this.

(20-03-2016 08:26 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Conclusions are not my thing.

HOW do you function within life?

(20-03-2016 08:26 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  It is quite possible there are things that exist that we may never be able to prove exist.

yes, yes there might be. I've actually posted something about this as well many posts ago.....

(20-03-2016 08:26 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  It is quite possible a Theist may experience something that I may never experience & is therefore justified in believing something exists that there is no physical evidence for.

No... just because some one has said they experienced something does not make it real. Come ON! We've been over this.

(20-03-2016 08:26 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  It is quite possible our belief system does not come due to our cognitive rationalization and awareness of the evidence, but rather an instinctive rationalization brought about by years of evolution and personal experiences.

These words above...? They make no sense... please re-post in a different format?

[Banjo]

(20-03-2016 08:38 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Duly noted,

Duly noted.

See the > . ?

[Agnostic Shane]

(20-03-2016 08:44 PM)Banjo Wrote:  

(20-03-2016 08:38 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Duly noted,

Duly noted.

See the > . ?

Do you?