I fully apologise for implying such a thing ever. It is impossible for evidence to be the cause of the truth or falsity of a thing. Right?
Now. Without evidence for a thing, does the concept only exist in your imagination?
Please answer if you can.
To know there is no god?
- Thread starter superluminal
- Start date
- Status
Now. Without evidence for a thing, does the concept only exist in your imagination?
Please answer if you can.
Prove it.
The point is that the uninitiated can still experience electrons. They are real.
The concept exist as the reality of things, the actual truth, if it is true, if it is false then it exist as something just in your imagination....no evidence for nor against a claim has nothing to do with it....
What?
Do you believe in the as-yet undiscovered species of arthropod living under the martian soil.
A simple yes or no will do.
then it gets back to the question what can a person who lacks the necessary prerequisites of theory, practice and values make of any body of knowledge?
there's nothing esoteric about it - thats why I used the eg of physics - I could also use the knowledge base of car mechanics too
in terms of receiving knowledge (car mechanics, physics - anything actually) there are two essential prerequisites - one is a qualified teacher and the other is a qualified student - unless these two criteria are met, no aspect of knowledge (from esoteria to car mechnaics) can be transmitted
basically the more complex the knowledge is, the more difficult it is to argue that knowledge can be received with out meeting certain prerequisites
how so?
On what body of knowledge do you make this absolute statement?
On what body of knowledge do you make this absolute statement?
I think there are severe problems with your above premises
if there is no claim of direct perception, nor a process to arrive at the point of direct perception, it can be soundly rejected
What the fuck? A qualified student? You have built a wall of intellectual impenetrability around yourself and your religion that no other human endeavor shares. I'm an electrical engineer, and I can make even the most esoteric concepts of my field understandable to anyone, even you. Even you are a "qualified" student.
I'm not speaking with you anymore. I find myself sinking into whatever mental impairment makes you spout the same statements over and over, ad nauseum. Be cozy behind your mental blockade. Bye.
Thats not the actual question, the actual question is "is something thats true, true regardless of if there's evidence or not?", thats the question.
As for your question, I neither believe nor disbelieve in the species of arthropod....
Fuck me.
So, if I claim a process of percieveing gnomes, and I claim to percieve them directly, that makes them real?
qualified in the sense of being in possession of qualities (and not the rubber stamp of 'qualifications')
not if I call you a string of insulting names at every moment you try to teach me anything
this is the same mental impasse that an unqualified student establishes that maintains them in their position
Metaphysically meaningless, wouldn't you say? If god is real, then he exists whether I believe or not, right? What does that have to do with our knowledge of the truth?
So, you neither believe nor disbelieve in god then? Good. You're an atheist/agnostic.
at the very last it brings the process you are advocating for scrutiny - this is actually how one can initially investigate theistic claims - one examines the process advocated
???
???
???
But I've been a seeker. I was qualified. I've studied with qualified teachers. There is no god as currently proposed. Right?
Did it. They are wrong and misguided. All of them. There is no one who ever directly percieved a god. They have all been shown to have an agenda, or a brain malfunction.
not everyone who goes to university gets a degree and not all people who get a degree end up practicing in t he field and not all people practicing in the field are at the point of establishing (or re- establishing, in the case of empiricism) the knowledge base the field relies on
another absolute statement eh?
once again - sever problems with your premises
atheists just love absolutism it seems
Whats metaphysical about this? Is something true regardless of if there's evidence for or against it? The truth is the truth, reality works the same way regardless, etc....
No, I believe in God, you know based on personal experiences, personal thoughts, etc...just as how a physicist may believe in the many-worlds theory even though there's no evidence for nor against it...superluminal said:
- Status