Materialist Bias?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-01-2014, 08:11 AM
RE: Materialist Bias?
(06-01-2014 04:48 PM)alpha male Wrote:  I agree. That's not my position. Automatically rejecting observations of the supernatural is biased and a potential source of error. So is rejecting the mundane observations or reports of someone because they do not similarly make a knee-jerk rejection of the supernatural.

Why should you or I take the supernatural assertions of the Bible seriously? Why should you or I not take the supernatural assertions of the Koran seriously? Why should you or I not take the supernatural assertions of The Book of Mormon seriously?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like RobbyPants's post
07-01-2014, 09:34 AM
RE: Materialist Bias?
Has anyone else noticed that everything alpha has said in this thread amounts to a poor attempt at equivocation?

[Image: GrumpyCat_01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like EvolutionKills's post
07-01-2014, 09:41 AM (This post was last modified: 07-01-2014 10:08 AM by WillHopp.)
RE: Materialist Bias?
(07-01-2014 07:30 AM)alpha male Wrote:  My bad - I said "I didn't mention Darwin at all" a few posts above, but his name is in the Dawkins quote, so that's incorrect.

Yep, I had the agenda, of proving you wrong. Smile

Do I still need to show you he was in fact religious and even considered going into the clergy, or since you admitted to mentioning him are you also acquiescing the point of his religious struggle?

Check out my atheism blog. It's just a blog, no ads, no revenue, no gods.
----
Atheism promotes critical thinking; theism promotes hypocritical thinking. -- Me
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-01-2014, 10:04 AM
RE: Materialist Bias?
(07-01-2014 07:39 AM)RobbyPants Wrote:  
(07-01-2014 07:27 AM)alpha male Wrote:  The problem is that there's no way to know if someting is preternatural or supernatural. As your link says, it's a presumption, and that would be affected by our biases.

I'll reply to you with yourself:

(06-01-2014 05:27 PM)alpha male Wrote:  I agree. I use supernatural because others do, but I don't find it very useful. If Jesus can explain the mechanics of how he healed someone, then it's really natural, but unexplained from our POV.

Can Jesus/God explain it? Presumably, if it can be done in this universe, then it is natural. We just don't know how he did it.
Yes, that's my presumption, but I can't speak for others, can I?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-01-2014, 10:25 AM
RE: Materialist Bias?
(07-01-2014 05:51 AM)alpha male Wrote:  Interesting - let's see the inscriptions and quotes.

The Histories by Publius Cornelius Tacitus

Book 5
On Herod's death, one Simon, without waiting for the approbation of the Emperor, usurped the title of king. He was punished by Quintilius Varus then governor of Syria, and the nation, with its liberties curtailed, was divided into three provinces under the sons of Herod.

This shows Varus was governor of Syria when Herod died, not Quirinius. That's corroborating evidence from two disinterested sources that show who was (or wasn't) governor of Syria at the time.

Check out my atheism blog. It's just a blog, no ads, no revenue, no gods.
----
Atheism promotes critical thinking; theism promotes hypocritical thinking. -- Me
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-01-2014, 10:26 AM
RE: Materialist Bias?
(07-01-2014 08:11 AM)RobbyPants Wrote:  Why should you or I take the supernatural assertions of the Bible seriously? Why should you or I not take the supernatural assertions of the Koran seriously? Why should you or I not take the supernatural assertions of The Book of Mormon seriously?
I discussed some of the differentiators pages ago, but you ignored it:
http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...#pid458170
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-01-2014, 10:57 AM
RE: Materialist Bias?
(07-01-2014 10:26 AM)alpha male Wrote:  I discussed some of the differentiators pages ago, but you ignored it:
http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...#pid458170

It was talking about the OTF, so I didn't read it. Thanks for the link.


(04-01-2014 02:15 PM)alpha male Wrote:  Another criterion is extraordinary evidence. When someone makes the extraordinary claim that they're speaking for god, it's reasonable to expect extraordinary evidence to back it up. The earliest Christian writings include the extraordinary. John even has Jesus using the principle himself - if you don't believe my arguments, at least believe the signs I do. However, with Islam, when Mohamed was asked for extraordinary evidence, he merely presented the Koran - completely circular.

The only claims of these extraordinary powers of Jesus are contained in the Bible. What exactly will you point to as evidence of these signs? The Bible? It sounds equally circular.


(04-01-2014 02:15 PM)alpha male Wrote:  Some religions claim to be based on previously established religions. One can assess which are more or less compatible with the previous religions.

What does this have to do with anything? Christianity is based on Judaism.


(04-01-2014 02:15 PM)alpha male Wrote:  The motivations of the originators can also be assessed. We generally accept the word of a person who has little to gain or something to lose for their testimony, over that of someone who stands to gain from their testimony. For example, Jesus was crucified and Paul suffered in numerous ways, but Mohamed increased his worldly position.

Do we have evidence that Jesus was crucified or that Paul suffered other than from the Bible?


(04-01-2014 02:15 PM)alpha male Wrote:  As I said in another thread, finding differentiators between religious claims isn't difficult. It's laziness and bias to just lump them all together as equal in worth.

All of the differences you point out between the religions are taken from you assuming the accounts of the Bible are accurate.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like RobbyPants's post
07-01-2014, 12:01 PM
RE: Materialist Bias?
(07-01-2014 05:40 AM)alpha male Wrote:  Yes, you'd bet along your materialist bias.

You would have to first establish that he has a "materialist bias" before asserting that such a bias was influencing his opinion. That goes for each and every one of us.

Of course, you would first have to give a mutually acceptable definition of "materialist bias", which is what this thread was supposed to be about in the first place.

It's Special Pleadings all the way down!


Magic Talking Snakes STFU -- revenantx77


You can't have your special pleading and eat it too. -- WillHop
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-01-2014, 12:01 PM
RE: Materialist Bias?
(07-01-2014 09:41 AM)WillHopp Wrote:  Do I still need to show you he was in fact religious and even considered going into the clergy, or since you admitted to mentioning him are you also acquiescing the point of his religious struggle?
I looked into it myself, and found this from his autobiography: "Thus disbelief crept over me at a very slow rate, but was at last complete. The rate was so slow that I felt no distress, and have never since doubted even for a single second that my conclusion was correct."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-01-2014, 12:06 PM
RE: Materialist Bias?
(07-01-2014 10:25 AM)WillHopp Wrote:  The Histories by Publius Cornelius Tacitus

Book 5
On Herod's death, one Simon, without waiting for the approbation of the Emperor, usurped the title of king. He was punished by Quintilius Varus then governor of Syria, and the nation, with its liberties curtailed, was divided into three provinces under the sons of Herod.

This shows Varus was governor of Syria when Herod died, not Quirinius. That's corroborating evidence from two disinterested sources that show who was (or wasn't) governor of Syria at the time.
You said had Tacitus quotes showing that "Quirinius didn't become governor until 6 CE, ten years after the death of Herod." The above just says that Varus was governor several years after the birth of Jesus.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: