Jaster Mereel said:
Oh yes, because you kow my thoughts better than I. Forgive me.
I forgive you my son/daughter/indeterminate.
I didn't say it should be respected more than any other area of human activity, only that it should be accorded the same level of respect.
No, you didn't. You clearly implied that religion had special dispensation,
especially religion...
Whoa. Don't you understand the definition of supernatural? I'll give you one:
Supernatural \Su`per*nat"u*ral\, a. [Pref. super- + natural: cf.
OF. supernaturel, F. surnaturel.]
Being beyond, or exceeding, the power or laws of nature;
miraculous.
[1913 Webster]
There you go.
Why, I had no idea. Thank you.
The very nature of the belief places it beyond empirical observation,
Then let's all go have some tea and crumpets.
and you people continually insist that empirical observation be the standard by which such claims are judged.
*cough*
closet theist *cough*
That's what I'm talking about. You don't seem to understand the nature of the belief before you start ridiculing and deriding anyone who professes it.
More fucking mind readers. Can you just
believe the gall of some people...?
I understand perfectly well that theists attribute all
kinds of
actual phenomena to their god(s) without one shred of convincing evidence.
It makes you look either, A) Impatient, and/or uninterested in having an honest intellectual discussion, or B) Unwilling to reconsider your initial understanding on the terminology that an individual uses, which makes you stubborn and prideful. By no means am I singling you out, I am generalizing.
No. The discussions have been had (for me) over the last 20+ years, and resolved.
1) The testimony of individuals is worthless (if you don't believe me, ask a scientist)
2) Stubborn? Pot calling something some non-reflective lack of color?
3) I have honest intellectual discussions with theists, but not about the reality of their claims, which are 100% baseless in reality. I am quite interested in the psychological phenomenon of religious delusion. Fascinating stuff the mind is made of, fascinating indeed.
4) I will, like any honest person, reconsider my position on anything, anytime, given sufficient reason to do so.
There is a fundamental difference between the claims of religious people and people who claim to have seen UFOs or experienced ESP.
Obviously I disagree.
Religious people claim that what they experience is supernatural, as I have said above. People who claim to have seen UFOs or experienced ESP do not.
You should research things a bit more, or be less rash before stating absurdities. Many, many UFO and ESP
enthusiasts attribute these phenomena to supernatural entities and forces.
They claim that what they have seen or experienced is here, now, and observable,
As do almost all theists, regarding their living or omnipresent god.
...which is why they call their field of study a science.
They do? Good for them. Tom Cruise is a
scientologist.
They are labeled as pseudosciences because they have been found to have little or no evidence in support of their claims, even though their position has always been that evidence can be found to support their position.
Hmmm...
Seriously religious people have never claimed that, to my knowledge.
What?!? Would some serious theist here please enlighten this gentle poster? That your god is real and the evidence of His exsistence is all around us? In the form and beauty of every living and non-living thing?
It seems that those who are hostile to religion on this message board refuse to discuss religion from the standpoint that, hypothetically, there is a supernatural realm.
That would be pretty intellectually bankrupt, unless you are proposing treating the theists here like six year olds and humoring them?
They don't believe in the supernatural (understandably), but instead of admitting that there is no common ground with which to argue with theists, they lambaste their position until the person they are arguing with gives up. Now, you can say that claiming their experience to be supernatural in nature is a copout (and I would agree), but that becomes the end of the argument.
Agreed. Hence I very rarely post in the religion forums anymore. It really is utterly useless to argue the issue since resolution of a position based on the the absurd idea that your belief is beyond objective testing by any human means, is clearly impossible.
No, they do not claim that God himself is subjective, but they do claim that God can only be experienced, not found through empirical observation, or logical deduction.
Which is at the heart of the intellectual depths to which adherents of religion have subjugated themselves. Translation: That's just fucking stupid. Provably so.
It is intrinsic to religious belief. Call it silly, or a copout, or illogical, or unreasonable all you want...
Or just fucking stupid. See response above.
..., but the point is that you cannot debate the existence of God with a religious person by using the tools of science, as I have said, because the very nature of the concept places God outside of the range of those tools.
Which places it squarely in the realm of delusion. I completely agree.
Perhaps this is the reason why so many totally ardent atheists on this message board think that religious people are stupid, and can't understand the simple logic of the atheist position? Consider it for a moment, before bashing my post, if you will.
Oops. Too late.
In any event, I for one have never ascribed generic stupidity to theists. I know what it is. It's one of my favorite psychological tricks that the mind does - dichotomous thinking. The awesome compartmentalization of reasoning and knowledge to accommodate two wildly differing world views in the same head. It's what allows some people to be good lawyers or scientists, observing the rules of evidence on one hand, and theists, disregarding the fantasy nature of their belief on the other.
For the most part, but I also recognize that religious belief is not arbitrary, nor is it primitive or stupid. Call it a feeling, but it seems to have a very important function in the human psyche, so I do treat it with respect.
Of course it's not arbitrary. It's completely culturally deterministic within a tiny tolerance. It is certainly primitive as it has it's roots in the complete lack of understanding and fear of the natural world in our common prehistory. And stupid? No, it's dichotomous, and the reasons for it are probably as varied as the people who subscribe to it. It is however, highly irrational I'm sure you'll agree?
Thanks for the ad-hominem,
My pleasure.
I do appreciate a good psychological dissection of myself, especially when it's off the mark.
Keep a positive outlook. Remember, we're all here for entertainment anyway. Either gods or each others. It's a cosmic stand-up routine.
I actually only find myself in this position on Sciforums, funny enough. It must have something to do with all the very humble, respectful, and reasoned debate I find in this place, no doubt.
Now
that was funny!
)
