The problem with atheism – No rational connection between the methodology and object

[Enmos]

that you are either talking nonsense or have acquired the ability to determine social opinion in ant communities.
I will give you a chance to respond before I make up my mind.

I don't believe I have ever made an assertion about ant opinion. Kindly point out where.. ?

 

[lightgigantic]

I don't believe I have ever made an assertion about ant opinion. Kindly point out where.. ?

ok there is a third option
you have Alzheimer's

 

[Enmos]

ok there is a third option
you have Alzheimer's

There's forth: you have poor reading abilities.

What I said was: "Probably that they are evil motherfuckers."
How is that a statement about ant opinion ?

Probably means:
- In all likelyhood, or
- Presumed or taken for granted; reasonable as a supposition.

That doesn't sound as though I have determined social opinion in ant communities, does it ?

And lastly, I hope you are just being facetious in pursuing this. Because I was obviously not being serious

 

[Raithere]

lightgigantic,

You seem to be missing the point. Your argument, that we cannot measure something we cannot control or experience directly, is demonstrably incorrect.

But even if we accept this argument you're left with an epistemological problem you have yet to resolve; how knowledge may be obtained of something we cannot measure. You merely give us the bald assertion that spirituality provides us with an alternate method of obtaining knowledge. I don't know of any argument or evidence that supports this assertion therefore you will need to provide it.

~Raithere

 

[Raithere]

Knowledge of what? What knowledge can I establish using the standard empirical approach? Does the standard empirical approach help me to find true happiness or a worthy meaning of life? So far it has failed completely. The things that are the most important to me, traditional Western science barely addresses.

That's because you're looking in the wrong place. Instead look to philosophy which addresses these issues very deeply, far more deftly, and more earnestly than most religions. For one, it's not encumbered with authoritative assertions and political accretion. Of course, one must loosen one's hold on the presumption of knowledge.

~Raithere

 

[Myles]

There's forth: you have poor reading abilities.

What I said was: "Probably that they are evil motherfuckers."
How is that a statement about ant opinion ?

Probably means:
- In all likelyhood, or
- Presumed or taken for granted; reasonable as a supposition.

That doesn't sound as though I have determined social opinion in ant communities, does it ?

And lastly, I hope you are just being facetious in pursuing this. Because I was obviously not being serious

LG doesn't recognize humour because ther are no jokes in the Bhahavad Gita.

 

[greenberg]

That's because you're looking in the wrong place. Instead look to philosophy which addresses these issues very deeply, far more deftly, and more earnestly than most religions.

I have, and have been deeply disappointed.

It is because Western Philosophy has disappointed me so deeply (and continues to do so) that I started looking elsewhere.

 

[Myles]

Knowledge of what? What knowledge can I establish using the standard empirical approach? Does the standard empirical approach help me to find true happiness or a worthy meaning of life? So far it has failed completely.

The things that are the most important to me, traditional Western science barely addresses.

Then go elsewhere till you find what suits you.

To my mind, the pursuit of knowledge is for its own sake. One cannot lay down conditions in advance.



It depends on what knowledge it is that one seeks.


You are not talking about knowledge in the sense that a philosopher would use that word; you are seeking an information comfort blanket of the kind available in self-help books, mysticism and so on.

If one seeks knowledge about how to find true happiness or a worthy meaning of life, for example, then some religious practices are more successful than anything else, as one can attest by witnessing advanced practitioners.

The success or otherwise depends on the disposition of the practitioner; hence the fact that there are so many varieties of religion. So why not simply find something with which you feel comfortable ?

 

[greenberg]

Knowledge of what? What knowledge can I establish using the standard empirical approach? Does the standard empirical approach help me to find true happiness or a worthy meaning of life? So far it has failed completely.
The things that are the most important to me, traditional Western science barely addresses.

Then go elsewhere till you find what suits you.

To my mind, the pursuit of knowledge is for its own sake. One cannot lay down conditions in advance.



It depends on what knowledge it is that one seeks.


You are not talking about knowledge in the sense that a philosopher would use that word; you are seeking an information comfort blanket of the kind available in self-help books, mysticism and so on.

If one seeks knowledge about how to find true happiness or a worthy meaning of life, for example, then some religious practices are more successful than anything else, as one can attest by witnessing advanced practitioners.

The success or otherwise depends on the disposition of the practitioner; hence the fact that there are so many varieties of religion. So why not simply find something with which you feel comfortable ?

Myles,

Are you trying to argue with me?

 

[Myles]

Myles,

Are you trying to argue with me?

What gave you that idea, How about an exchange of views ?

 

[greenberg]

What gave you that idea, How about an exchange of views ?

An "exchange of views", Myles? When you continually send me away from this forum, telling me to "find my own way" and such?

:bugeye:

 

[Myles]

An "exchange of views", Myles? When you continually send me away from this forum, telling me to "find my own way" and such?

:bugeye:

I am exchangibg my view with your previously expressed view, he, he

There is no basis for duscussion unless one can agree on some common ground. So here goes:

When I talk of knowledge I am referring to the search for some understanding of the universe in which we find ourselves and what it means to be part of it. This boils dfown to following the question where it leads as opposed to setting a goal and then seeking knowledge which will enable us to arrive there. This approach inevitably involves ignoring or rationalising that which does not fit in with our programme.

I have found no purpose in life other than that which I choose to give it. My life has value because I am part of a loving family, enjoy music, literature and so on. I am comfortable with this.

There is not the slighest shred of what I would regard as evidence to support the notion of a deity. That is why I am an atheist.

I do not deny the role of religion in helping some people get through life but I regard believers as deluded. The only evidence they can adduce is based on personal experience and hearsay, i.e., what they have been told. In my experience, theists take their beliefs for granted. Thinking is not part of their make-up.

I should clarify this by saying that I do not regard Bible scholarship and suchlike as anything more that elucidating what people are predisposed to believe in the first instance.

In general, I view religion as an escape from reality. It represents a submission to superstitious beliefs which cannot be supported by empirical evidence. I have no quarrel withy the religious who quietly get on with their lives. I do have a quarrel with proseltyzers who would have me accept their beliefs which, in the final analysis, they cannot support in a manner which I regard as satisfactory.

I have set out my core beliefs which I have arrived at, not by wishful thinking ,but by observation and reason. Am I wrong ? Probably ,in some respects. as it is human to err. But I make no claims to profound insights of the kind one finds in religious literature.

I have no urge to convert others to my way of thinking but, if a discussion arises, I will defend my beliefs.

That's it !

 

[Raithere]

I have, and have been deeply disappointed.

It is because Western Philosophy has disappointed me so deeply (and continues to do so) that I started looking elsewhere.

That seems quite strange to me since Philosophy incorporates views from all religions. Nor does it prescribe anything specifically, one is free to operate freely within the full spectrum of views. Why the disappointment?

~Raithere

 

[lightgigantic]

Raithere

lightgigantic,

You seem to be missing the point. Your argument, that we cannot measure something we cannot control or experience directly, is demonstrably incorrect.

how?
The only things you indicate that we can control are objects that are physically and/or cognitively inferior to us

But even if we accept this argument you're left with an epistemological problem you have yet to resolve; how knowledge may be obtained of something we cannot measure.

by cognitive reciprocation ... thats what the whole issue of the graduate application was about

You merely give us the bald assertion that spirituality provides us with an alternate method of obtaining knowledge. I don't know of any argument or evidence that supports this assertion therefore you will need to provide it.

well suppose you have a tiny tumor in your intestine (ie something that is beyond your cognitive and physical powers to investigate ... assuming you are not a doctor).
How do you propose to investigate it without cognitive reciprocation?
If you want to see a doctor and tell him he is speaking BS every step of the way, not only will your bill be very expensive (if he charges by the hour) but he also might just simply tell you to go on your merry way .....

 

[lightgigantic]

That's because you're looking in the wrong place. Instead look to philosophy which addresses these issues very deeply, far more deftly, and more earnestly than most religions. For one, it's not encumbered with authoritative assertions and political accretion. Of course, one must loosen one's hold on the presumption of knowledge.

That seems quite strange to me since Philosophy incorporates views from all religions. Nor does it prescribe anything specifically, one is free to operate freely within the full spectrum of views. Why the disappointment?

aka "moral relativism"
practical for legal issues I guess ...

 

[ashura]

lightgigantic: Sorry for the delay in my response, I've been a little busy.

unless you studied something that you already knew, the simple act of placing your backside on a certain seat in a certain building or opening a book and sticking your nose in it certainly wasn't what made you get straight A's

It was a behavior that started from kindergarten and continued through till now. That's where the foundation was laid, and that eventually led to the more complex topics learned in higher education. I can't think of anything that I'm missing. The only external consideration that comes to mind is the quality of the professor, but even then if the Prof. was bad I always had the book to rely on.

well thats a bibliography but what about the content?
I mean I'm sure you could mention a few issues of comprehension from your lecture hall days

I'm not sure how to answer the question to be honest. I'm still in my lecture hall days and applying your question to my current classes such as Music Theory or Psychology, I'm still left clueless. Would you mind rephrasing or elaborating? (I suppose this would qualify as an issue of comprehension? )

so how does praying "work"?

Er, I'm not too sure on how to answer this further without just pointing you right back to my last post. It's a form of worship to Allah, and the duah at the end is where you ask for forgiveness and blessings. Whether or not the duah comes true or not depends on your character as a Muslim, and Allah's whim. Perhaps one of the Muslims on these boards can clarify?

1. Mental preparation that enables succesful learning
2. Adapting facts to one's abilities
3. Studying the material
4. Memorizing key facts
5. Showing that one knows
6. Assessing how one has learned

I'm sorry, but this list seems like an exercise in redundancy. I mentioned reading, which I thought automatically includes 1, 3 and 4. 5 and 6 are shown through tests, papers and grades as a result of the reading and placing my backside in class. I'm not sure what you mean by 2.

 

[Raithere]

The only things you indicate that we can control are objects that are physically and/or cognitively inferior to us

This is your judgment and assertion, not mine.

by cognitive reciprocation

Cognitive reciprocation? That's an odd term. But I'd be happy to sit down with God and have a conversation with him if you can arrange one.

well suppose you have a tiny tumor in your intestine (ie something that is beyond your cognitive and physical powers to investigate ... assuming you are not a doctor). How do you propose to investigate it without cognitive reciprocation?

Typically I would ask to see the test results, radiographs, ultrasound... whatever it is that lead the Dr. to come to the conclusion that I have a tumor. If they fail to produce any such evidence, I would indeed tell them they are full of shit.

~Raithere

 

[greenberg]

I'm sorry, but this list seems like an exercise in redundancy. I mentioned reading, which I thought automatically includes 1, 3 and 4.

No, it does not ... But -

5 and 6 are shown through tests, papers and grades as a result of the reading and placing my backside in class. I'm not sure what you mean by 2.

I would suggest you read at the sites I've linked to. Apparently you are not aware of what it actually takes to be a good student. Many students are not, both those with good grades and those with bad grades.
And since you study psychology, ask your teacher to discuss with you or suggest to you some reading on learning styles, student productivity and related topics.
You will see that there is a lot more to succeeding at school than just going to lectures and reading.
Similarly, there is a lot more than just "going with your intuition and imitating others" to succeeding in spiritual practice, or in any kind of work or practice, for that matter.

 

[greenberg]

That seems quite strange to me since Philosophy incorporates views from all religions. Nor does it prescribe anything specifically, one is free to operate freely within the full spectrum of views. Why the disappointment?

Why the disappointment?
Primarily the moral and general cognitive relativism espoused by Western Philosophy as a whole. I will not accept such relativism and its consequences, I hold it is immoral, decadent.
Secondly, Western Philosphy promises very little - it doesn't promise Enlightenment, it doesn't promise Liberation from suffering. Any worldview, philosophy, doctrine, teaching that promises less than Enlightenment or Liberation from suffering is not good enough for me.
Thirdly, Western Philosophy directly or indirectly operates on the premise that this one lifetime of about 70 years is all there is to human life. Western Philosophy requires unquestionable faith in death. I've lost that faith long ago.

 

[phlogistician]

“ Phlogistician


Even science uses allegory when presenting issues with persons who can’t/won’t accept concise statements eg “the earth is like an orange and the moon is like a ping pong ball and when it orbits the earth it ….. blah blah blah”

That's analogy, not allegory.

Unless you have been busy deleting your 4000+ posts on sci, your claims on the subject are quite apparent

Find a post to back up your claim if there are so many to choose from.

…. and lo and behold, part of that enlightening gesture involves clearly explaining how god does not exist

Quit stuffing that straw man.

…. people who have never considered the existance of god are atheists”

Yet you spend your time on a religious forum to make this point clear?
seriously?
Give me a break ....

You don't seem to understand the terms of the debate, and prefer to argue loaded terms. I'm just trying to keep you honest.