"Jane, you ignorant slut!"
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
01-10-2013, 09:53 AM
RE: "Jane, you ignorant slut!"
(27-09-2013 11:19 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Truth can be approached using reason, logic, and evidence but may never be perfectly known to be truth.

This is why I still love that quote by Gould where he says that "I suppose it might be possible for apples to start to rise tomorrow. But the idea does not warrant equal time in a physics classroom."

He is admitting that everything we know about gravity could very well be incorrect, but there is no evidence to support that and no evidence to support any opinion contrary to it. As such, it is as close to truth in practice as we may ever be able to achieve.

This was more a response to PJ than Chas by the way.

Are feelings and intuitions properly addressed by physics or even neurology? By the way, I completely agree with that sentiment about gravity because we see/feel its effects without understanding/knowing/perceiving its root cause. The argument for it is teleological in nature.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-10-2013, 10:36 AM
RE: "Jane, you ignorant slut!"
(01-10-2013 09:53 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
(27-09-2013 11:19 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Truth can be approached using reason, logic, and evidence but may never be perfectly known to be truth.

This is why I still love that quote by Gould where he says that "I suppose it might be possible for apples to start to rise tomorrow. But the idea does not warrant equal time in a physics classroom."

He is admitting that everything we know about gravity could very well be incorrect, but there is no evidence to support that and no evidence to support any opinion contrary to it. As such, it is as close to truth in practice as we may ever be able to achieve.

This was more a response to PJ than Chas by the way.

Are feelings and intuitions properly addressed by physics or even neurology? By the way, I completely agree with that sentiment about gravity because we see/feel its effects without understanding/knowing/perceiving its root cause. The argument for it is teleological in nature.

"Are feelings and intuitions properly addressed by physics or even neurology?"

Yes, it's chemistry which is essentially nothing more than applied physics at the molecular level.

"By the way, I completely agree with that sentiment about gravity because we see/feel its effects without understanding/knowing/perceiving its root cause. The argument for it is teleological in nature."

Higgs Boson.

It isn't telelogical.

“Science is simply common sense at its best, that is, rigidly accurate in observation, and merciless to fallacy in logic.”
—Thomas Henry Huxley
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like TheBeardedDude's post
01-10-2013, 02:17 PM
RE: "Jane, you ignorant slut!"
(01-10-2013 10:36 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(01-10-2013 09:53 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Are feelings and intuitions properly addressed by physics or even neurology? By the way, I completely agree with that sentiment about gravity because we see/feel its effects without understanding/knowing/perceiving its root cause. The argument for it is teleological in nature.

"Are feelings and intuitions properly addressed by physics or even neurology?"

Yes, it's chemistry which is essentially nothing more than applied physics at the molecular level.

"By the way, I completely agree with that sentiment about gravity because we see/feel its effects without understanding/knowing/perceiving its root cause. The argument for it is teleological in nature."

Higgs Boson.

It isn't telelogical.

a) Then someone should make an intuition enhancer and bottle it. Intuition has to do with foretelling events. That's chemical now? Interesting. Weeping

b) You are stretching and ducking with Higgs Boson:

http://profmattstrassler.com/2012/10/15/...unrelated/
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-10-2013, 02:20 PM
RE: "Jane, you ignorant slut!"
(01-10-2013 02:17 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Intuition has to do with foretelling events. That's chemical now? Interesting. Weeping

Wrong again, Pooh-for-Brains
https://www.google.com/search?q=inuition...&source=hp

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-10-2013, 02:20 PM
RE: "Jane, you ignorant slut!"
(26-09-2013 03:28 PM)Slowminded Wrote:  
(26-09-2013 02:46 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  I clicked on your link and came up to my post:

"Aseptic, you are a very, very discerning person. So why did I do this thread? Your second-to-last paragraph is rather close to what I'm driving at, and you're almost there! Keep thinking..."

Yes, I should be banned soon. I agree.

As for intellectual dishonesty, you can call it omniscient dishonesty. I KNEW no one would be able to prove they existed online, and called you to the mat for asking Christians to prove God exists online. Remember? Yes? No?

Did it ever occur to you that asking somebody to prove that they exist is evidence enough that they do exist, at least from your perspective ? If they didn't exist, who are u asking? For you to be able to ask me to prove my existence , you have to acknowledge my existence in the first place.

There you go. I proved it.

Your turn.

As I can guess where u gonna try to go with this, I have to remind you that atheist don't ask god to prove his existence to us , we ask believers to prove his existence.

Providing PJ delivers on his promise of proving god, derailing one thread is no biggie?

Actually, my solipsism procedes from my devout skepticism that anyone other than me exists. Any freethinker who hasn't had a solipsism moment is not as skeptical as I... Cool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-10-2013, 02:22 PM
RE: "Jane, you ignorant slut!"
(26-09-2013 03:42 PM)morondog Wrote:  PJ we're plenty able to prove we exist.

It's the proving it *to you* that is impossible. And I'm OK with that.

The difference between this and Christians being asked to prove (or even supply a tiny bit of evidence for) God, is that we don't give a shit if you don't believe we exist, whereas you seem to have some kinda major problem if we don't believe God exists. If you *want* us to believe in God, it's up to you to convince us. That's where the "Oh yeah, prove it" comes in.

I don't have a major problem if atheists postulate god's nonexistence. There are people who likewise don't know how cool I am, but I'm still Cool cool.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-10-2013, 02:23 PM
RE: "Jane, you ignorant slut!"
(01-10-2013 02:20 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(01-10-2013 02:17 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Intuition has to do with foretelling events. That's chemical now? Interesting. Weeping

Wrong again, Pooh-for-Brains
https://www.google.com/search?q=inuition...&source=hp

Do you use intuition, then?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-10-2013, 02:26 PM
RE: "Jane, you ignorant slut!"
(26-09-2013 03:50 PM)Airyaman Wrote:  Not that chestnut..."prove you exist". Well, someone seems to be on the other side of the Internet, typing messages, and claiming to be the person in question. That is much more than we ever get from any gods. If some god started communicating with me (other than in my head, I might just be having an episode), at least I'd have something to build upon. As it stands, the only evidence we have that any gods existed is the words of other human beings.

You mean:

*you cannot see them but see trace evidence they post?

*you cannot communicate with them face-to-face but can read their documents?

*you cannot see them but can ask them questions and receive answers, some of which you want to hear and some of which you don't?

*you accept the words of other human beings that they are who they are on the 'Net even when they hide behind pseudonyms and won't even tell you their first name (BB!) but you won't accept the word of ANY human being, ever, who says they've had an encounter with an alien intelligence?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-10-2013, 02:28 PM
RE: "Jane, you ignorant slut!"
(26-09-2013 04:04 PM)Chopdoc Wrote:  This thread reminds me of a saying I used to hear when I was a teacher:
“Arguing with a teenager is like wrestling with a pig. You both get dirty and only the pig enjoys it.” I apologize for the ad hominem toward pigs…
To borrow from Daniel Dennett, religion is a brilliantly constructed con developed by very clever people. It makes ridiculous knowledge claims without supporting evidence, commands unconditional adherence to them, and then says that to question these tenets is not allowed. The bible calls wisdom foolishness and skepticism sinful. The last thing Jesus supposedly commanded before ascending to heaven is to spread this fallacious nonsense to “all the world.”
Christians are taught from early Sunday school lessons through adulthood that they can expect their efforts to be met with mockery and derision by this fallen world, which is controlled by Satan. Genius!. In the messed up Christian worldview, negative attention = positive reinforcement.
The church attracts a certain masochistic type of person who relishes negative reinforcement. The individual who began this thread seems to be one of those, and Phil comes closest to the underlying issue here. I identify with his puzzlement as to why some people stir controversy, and can only assume that PJ doesn’t get enough negative attention in his daily life—so he logs onto a clearly non-religious forum and uses language in his posts that is designed to draw attacks from “the gang” as he puts it. To respond to him only reinforces his pathology. It also stirs up hostility among the community, as we have seen here. I, for one, am tired of feeding the neuroses of the sick and twisted by giving them attention.
Cool

True Christians:

*question and test everything, as the Bible tells them to do so

*ignore negativity and press on with a half-full glass

And, if you read this forum as much (little?) as I do you'd be asking whether all the freethinkers aren't the ones looking for negative responses...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-10-2013, 02:30 PM
RE: "Jane, you ignorant slut!"
(26-09-2013 04:48 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(26-09-2013 04:04 PM)Chopdoc Wrote:  “Arguing with a teenager is like wrestling with a pig. You both get dirty and only the pig enjoys it.” I apologize for the ad hominem toward pigs…

^ This. I don't argue with PleaseBeJesus because they have not demonstrated the basic skills necessary for proper argumentation. No biggie. Those skills are easily acquired by anyone willing to pursue them. Not only wouldn't it be a fair fight between PleaseBeJesus and MyOwnPersonalJesus, it wouldn't be a fight at all. And somebody's gonna get hurt and it ain't gonna be Girly. PleaseBeJesus needs a lot more training before I will even enter the dohyō with them. And they need to learn to follow the fundamental message of The Word: "Don't be a dick." ... As do some of the rest of us.





Girly'll give some love to PleaseForTheLoveOfGodBeJesus just 'cause it feels like they need it, not 'cause they've earned it.

Perhaps I'm wrong, but I read your lack of engagement with me as fear. I'll go easy on you if you debate me. BB seems highly regarded around here as a deep intellectual with a vast breadth of knowledge--from which he usually disintegrates into ad hom nonsense after one of my gentlest responses to his posts.

After all, that's what this thread is about--I don't respond in kind to attacks and threats (usually!).
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: