"If I am right, I go to heaven, if you are right, you die anyway."

[Jan Ardena]

wynn,

To you, perhaps.

That too.

Not at all.
As usual, you bypass my point.

You would say that, as you are attempting to conceal your position.

Did you get bored again? Did you miss me?

I prefer other compartments of your mind, i'll admit to that.
But i prefer the company of fundie-atheists at the moment.

Gee, there's a surfer boy who tears my heart apart on a daily basis.

Tell him he's wasting his time, it;s a decoy.


jan.

 

[wynn]

You would say that, as you are attempting to conceal your position.

Ooooh.

I prefer other compartments of your mind, i'll admit to that.

Such as?

But i prefer the company of fundie-atheists at the moment.

Oh? Out for an easy catch? Bad Jan!

Tell him he's wasting his time, it;s a decoy.

My heart is a decoy? Now, that's a new one!

 

[Jan Ardena]

wynn,

Ooooh.

Ahhhh.

Such as?

That's simple.
You seem to have a natural flair for philosophy, in that you express it inyour
conversation without it seeming like philosophy. When you are in the right mood, your questions, answers, and observations tend to be nicely balanced, and objective. You're, in my mind, obviously well read, and have a good fund of knowledge and information, and as such can offer some challenging points from any point of view, on alot of subjects that are of a philosophical nature. To say you're not english, and english is not your first language, you have an excellent, and consistent command of it. For me, this is a reflection of your academic prowess, and I think anyone who talks to you would agree with me, if they were being honest. I think your presence here is quite an important one, when you are in a balanced state of mind.

Oh? Out for an easy catch? Bad Jan!

Not really, and definately not in the sense that they are simple, or that I think they are, even though in the heat of the moment it may come across like that.

It's simple for me, because they are definate about their position, and they have points that emphasise their definate-ness.
It makes coming here, above all, enjoyable alot of the time.
Also they make me think about my own position.

My heart is a decoy? Now, that's a new one!

Obviously I don't know you, so it's only based on your cyber character and personality. So I shouldn't read too much into it, unless I'm eerily close, then you'd probably be interested in how I come to be so accurate.


jan.


jan.

 

[wynn]

I think your presence here is quite an important one, when you are in a balanced state of mind.

And you think that now, I am not in a "balanced state of mind"?
Oh dear.

Obviously I don't know you, so it's only based on your cyber character and personality. So I shouldn't read too much into it, unless I'm eerily close, then you'd probably be interested in how I come to be so accurate.

Nah, I thought you were just another theist teaming up with another theist.
There is just one person here at the forums who can break my heart. (And it's not you.) An actual wizard from Oz he is ...

I suppose you think that all this is easy for me, and that my problems with theism and theists are ... just an intellectual pastime. I assure you, they are not.

 

[Jan Ardena]

wynn,

And you think that now, I am not in a "balanced state of mind"?
Oh dear.

That's how it comes across, to me.

Nah, I thought you were just another theist teaming up with another theist.
There is just one person here at the forums who can break my heart. (And it's not you.) An actual wizard from Oz he is ...

Oh!

I'll just f--k-off then, shall I?

:

I suppose you think that all this is easy for me, and that my problems with theism and theists are ... just an intellectual pastime. I assure you, they are not.

I'm more inclined to think that you can use common-sense to work them out.
Why bother get yourself in a huff, if you don't have to?

Or is it just a female thing? To love the drama.


jan.

 

[wynn]

I'm more inclined to think that you can use common-sense to work them out.
Why bother get yourself in a huff, if you don't have to?

Or is it just a female thing? To love the drama.

Things like these make me wonder whether, perhaps, you're actually incredibly shallow, and whether perhaps your theism is shallow, too.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Things like these make me wonder whether, perhaps, you're actually incredibly shallow, and whether perhaps your theism is shallow, too.

Why?

jan.

 

[spidergoat]

Things like these make me wonder whether, perhaps, you're actually incredibly shallow, and whether perhaps your theism is shallow, too.

You don't have to wonder. I've had better conversations with a brick.

 

[Balerion]

You don't have to wonder. I've had better conversations with a brick.

Had many conversations with a brick, have we?

 

[Mr. Hamtastic]

Yep, this is the sort of thing I remember so joyfully, that makes me miss it here so much.

I have no good argument, so you are clearly broken or stupid or whatever. How very original. I assume this gives you some sort of joy or something? Fulfillment?

Well, you enjoy that. Drop me a line if either side wants to bring up some real proof of their position. Objective proof. Otherwise, the argument is completely pointless.

 

[spidergoat]

Back for more Mr. Ham?

 

[Balerion]

Yep, this is the sort of thing I remember so joyfully, that makes me miss it here so much.

I have no good argument, so you are clearly broken or stupid or whatever. How very original. I assume this gives you some sort of joy or something? Fulfillment?

Well, you enjoy that. Drop me a line if either side wants to bring up some real proof of their position. Objective proof. Otherwise, the argument is completely pointless.

I would have to disagree with you as it relates to the conversation having no point without the most stringent proof. For one, it is at the present time impossible to disprove the possibility of a creator, and as of yet no one has provided any credible evidence for one's existence. To refuse to have the discussion until such knock-down evidences can be presented is to in all likelihood shut down the discussion forever. And there are moral and philosophical discussions that can be--need to be, even--had that make no reference to the existence of a god or gods.

Short of that, there is plenty of evidence against the validity of the various faiths, both empirical and circumstantial, and while they not disprove the concept of "God" they certainly can show beyond any reasonable doubt that the gods of the Abrahamic faiths (or God, if you prefer) is the product of human imagination.

 

[spidergoat]

Had many conversations with a brick, have we?

Not too many, but wow.

 

[spidergoat]

And that's my point precisely : the knowing has nothing to do with any empirical models

That's only because what I described were unsupported assumptions. It's still possible that my parents are not my biological ones. I think it's unlikely in my case, but it could happen. I'm sure it's happened before that an adopted child didn't learn about it until much later.

 

[spidergoat]

I am not making a fun baby. You all will go to hale, to the deepest region of hale.

I'm going to kale, much healthier.

 

[spidergoat]

I know I am right: You all will go to hale, all the Muslims, Hindus, Christians, Buddhists, Jews and rest of all except me and my brothers and sisters.

What an interesting coincidence! Your religion happens to teach that you are saved and others are not. This is certainly unique among the world's religions.

 

[lightgigantic]

That's only because what I described were unsupported assumptions. It's still possible that my parents are not my biological ones. I think it's unlikely in my case, but it could happen. I'm sure it's happened before that an adopted child didn't learn about it until much later.

regardless its still clear that you are quite comfortable supporting assertions outside of empirical models ... unless we happen to breach the subject of god

:shrug:

 

[spidergoat]

The difference is I recognize that some assertions are unsupported. I can't think of a decision that depends on my parents being my biological parents beyond a reasonable doubt. Yet there are numerous decisions that religious people make based on the existence of God.

 

[wynn]

I tend to agree with Spidergoat.

Most things that we ordinarily claim certainty of are either not that relevant to our lives, or there is room for us to change our mind about them, or there is already a socially accepted belief and practice in the case that something we had believed to be true turns out to be false.

For example: most scientific theories; whether one's spouse is faithful; fraud in the workplace.

Issues of existence of God, however, are categorically different. The epistemological and other practices that we employ in uncertainty about ordinary things do not apply when it comes to uncertainty about "God."

One can recover after being betrayed by one's spouse, one can seek a new employment, one can sue, one can broaden one's horizons about scientific theories.

But what is one supposed to do when one's doubts about what one has been taught on the topic of "God" reach a critical mass?

 

[wynn]

Things like these make me wonder whether, perhaps, you're actually incredibly shallow, and whether perhaps your theism is shallow, too.

Why?

Because you talk about it in such light manner.