3 ms·

creation-myths, souls etc.

by stopmi 16y ago

mckoss 16y ago
It's funny, though.
rosser 16y ago
(You rewrote your comment while I was drafting mine, so it looks like I'm replying to something I'm not.) I don't have to believe anything's inexplicable; in point of fact, I don't. That's not to say I think our puny little monkey brains are (presently) capable of understanding everything, but that's a completely different claim than that those things are inexplicable. As for assertions, I'm not the party making one. You asserted that religious/spiritual folk "have to believe some phenomena are inexplicable". That's a universal claim, which can be refuted by any existential quantifier to the contrary. In simple predicate logic: ∀: All believers hold that some phenomena are inexplicable. ∃: I don't. ∴: Not all believers believe so. As for specific examples, name any old thing you'd think a believer would hold as inexplicable. That. I believe it's explicable. Granted, I believe that because I believe the divine wants us to understand our world — to the extent we can anthropomorphize and attribute intent to it, of course. Indeed, it's one of my highest moral duties, according to my beliefs, to learn and understand as much as I possibly can. To do anything less with the incredible, indescribably precious gift of having a mind is to piss it away. So, net, in a lot of ways, we probably actually agree. I decry ignorance and superstition and the like pretty strongly, too. What I don't do is condescend, or paint with a brush broad enough to cover everyone in a class of humanity I seem not to have taken the time or effort to understand.
- stopmi 16y ago
  sorry, decided to give examples instead. *i had originally asked for examples of phenomena i don't think i need predicate logic notation to get that :D the reason i said phenomena-inexplicable was because there are a lot of claims made by religions that were later found to be from other natural causes. ex. in christianity: - diseases were supposed to be curses and punishments till the germ theory was discovered - creation story does not hold with modern evidence - there are contradictions between biblical incidents and historic records(bethlehem census, great flood, etc.) - the nature of heaven, hell, souls are supposed to be unanalysable - without an understanding of astronomy, there are implications that heaven was located above the clouds(angels with wings, looking down from heaven, etc.) - jesus had conducted exorcisms in the bible, they are considered silly now so, professing to be religious and accept scientific discoveries at the same time seems difficult.. "What I don't do is condescend, or paint with a brush broad enough to cover everyone in a class of humanity I seem not to have taken the time or effort to understand." there is a reason the debate _has_ to happen: - accepting religious opinions as respectable has led to a majority of americans to consider evolution as untrue. - education policies are being influenced to paint evolution as just-a-theory with undertones that it is a fringe group with a political agenda - religious people who believe in and look forward to an armageddon have been in charge of a massive number of nuclear warheads - stem cell research has been set back by almost a decade - abortion clinic doctors have been shot - the representative of god on earth has said 'child-molestation is bad, condoms are worse' - the catholic church has systematically protected child-molesters under them - the islamic world has become more extremised because the clever american government thought it would be a machiavelli move against the ussr. we know how that turned out if the result is that people think atheists are condescending, small price to pay if we can get fewer people to blow each other up because their imaginary friend says so.

creation-myths, souls etc.

by stopmi 16y ago

creation-myths, souls etc.

mckoss 16y ago

It's funny, though.

rosser 16y ago

(You rewrote your comment while I was drafting mine, so it looks like I'm replying to something I'm not.) I don't have to believe anything's inexplicable; in point of fact, I don't. That's not to say I think our puny little monkey brains are (presently) capable of understanding everything, but that's a completely different claim than that those things are inexplicable. As for assertions, I'm not the party making one. You asserted that religious/spiritual folk "have to believe some phenomena are inexplicable". That's a universal claim, which can be refuted by any existential quantifier to the contrary. In simple predicate logic: ∀: All believers hold that some phenomena are inexplicable. ∃: I don't. ∴: Not all believers believe so. As for specific examples, name any old thing you'd think a believer would hold as inexplicable. That. I believe it's explicable. Granted, I believe that because I believe the divine wants us to understand our world — to the extent we can anthropomorphize and attribute intent to it, of course. Indeed, it's one of my highest moral duties, according to my beliefs, to learn and understand as much as I possibly can. To do anything less with the incredible, indescribably precious gift of having a mind is to piss it away. So, net, in a lot of ways, we probably actually agree. I decry ignorance and superstition and the like pretty strongly, too. What I don't do is condescend, or paint with a brush broad enough to cover everyone in a class of humanity I seem not to have taken the time or effort to understand.

stopmi 16y ago
sorry, decided to give examples instead. *i had originally asked for examples of phenomena i don't think i need predicate logic notation to get that :D the reason i said phenomena-inexplicable was because there are a lot of claims made by religions that were later found to be from other natural causes. ex. in christianity: - diseases were supposed to be curses and punishments till the germ theory was discovered - creation story does not hold with modern evidence - there are contradictions between biblical incidents and historic records(bethlehem census, great flood, etc.) - the nature of heaven, hell, souls are supposed to be unanalysable - without an understanding of astronomy, there are implications that heaven was located above the clouds(angels with wings, looking down from heaven, etc.) - jesus had conducted exorcisms in the bible, they are considered silly now so, professing to be religious and accept scientific discoveries at the same time seems difficult.. "What I don't do is condescend, or paint with a brush broad enough to cover everyone in a class of humanity I seem not to have taken the time or effort to understand." there is a reason the debate _has_ to happen: - accepting religious opinions as respectable has led to a majority of americans to consider evolution as untrue. - education policies are being influenced to paint evolution as just-a-theory with undertones that it is a fringe group with a political agenda - religious people who believe in and look forward to an armageddon have been in charge of a massive number of nuclear warheads - stem cell research has been set back by almost a decade - abortion clinic doctors have been shot - the representative of god on earth has said 'child-molestation is bad, condoms are worse' - the catholic church has systematically protected child-molesters under them - the islamic world has become more extremised because the clever american government thought it would be a machiavelli move against the ussr. we know how that turned out if the result is that people think atheists are condescending, small price to pay if we can get fewer people to blow each other up because their imaginary friend says so.