EPISTEMOLOGY: The Key to Everything

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
421

[quote]Cortes wrote:

Right now we are talking about what can be known for certain. You, me, anybody. No, please define faith in this context. [/quote]

You can’t know anything for certain except that your thoughts exist. We can really go back to what Descartes talked about here.

At the very basic level:

Faith: What all human knowledge and rationality is dependent upon.

[quote]Cortes wrote:

And I often think you have a pretty confused view of the Christian position. So I guess that makes us even.
[/quote]

I’m not completely sure why you think this. However, it is difficult to completely pin down Christian beliefs since there are so many sects and deviations.

A few weeks ago I was told by one poster here that the 10 commandments do not apply to Christians and therefore the example I used was false.

422

[quote]therajraj wrote:[quote]Cortes wrote:And I often think you have a pretty confused view of the Christian position. So I guess that makes us even. [/quote]I’m not completely sure why you think this. However, it is difficult to completely pin down Christian beliefs since there are so many sects and deviations.

A few weeks ago I was told by one poster here that the 10 commandments do not apply to Christians and therefore the example I used was false.[/quote]I’m hoping that this isn’t what Cortes means. I don’t think it is. I have no more time for now. I need like six more hours in a day. Everybody on this page has stuff I’d love to respond to. TT is still owed one though. I can’t keep him hangin. I need to get him first later tonight. Raj and Neuromancer here are so very very wrong about so much that they’re so very very right about. Just like Elder Forlife.

423

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:[quote]Cortes wrote:And I often think you have a pretty confused view of the Christian position. So I guess that makes us even. [/quote]I’m not completely sure why you think this. However, it is difficult to completely pin down Christian beliefs since there are so many sects and deviations.

A few weeks ago I was told by one poster here that the 10 commandments do not apply to Christians and therefore the example I used was false.[/quote]I’m hoping that this isn’t what Cortes means. I don’t think it is. I have no more time for now. I need like six more hours in a day. Everybody on this page has stuff I’d love to respond to. TT is still owed one though. I can’t keep him hangin. I need to get him first later tonight. Raj and Neuromancer here are so very very wrong about so much that they’re so very very right about. Just like Elder Forlife.
[/quote]

I’ve read your posts on here for a number of years.You come across as a nice guy. But damn, you’re condescending. It doesn’t really match your professed humility.
You may want to reconsider that aspect of your online persona.Use the observation…or don’t. I await your response regardless.

424

I am a dogmatist. I am not open or broad minded in any way. I state my convictions from a standpoint of unwavering certainty. It may sound that way at times, but I do not intend to condescend to you. I got in very late… again. I apologize. I got a short post done for TigerTime and I MUST get some sleep.

425

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]squating_bear wrote:

[quote]squating_bear wrote:
So - what do you base your logic on, if not faith?

If I were to (lie and) tell you that I don’t believe in logic - and asked you to prove logic for me - what could you do?[/quote]
You can define it however you want as you answer this - or not - but I’m not interested in a semantics debate here. [/quote]

I would tell you, you would have to have faith. That’s what you wanted to here?
[/quote]Nope - this crazy nonexistent version of me would have to reject that.

However, his natural response goes -

define faith

426

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:
scientific evidence
[/quote]

What do you consider scientific evidence?[/quote]

Anything demonstrable. If you believe god intervenes in the physical world demonstrate that he does. If you think god answers prayers in a meaningful amount then demonstrate it. [/quote]

I’m going to point out that seems to be a limited view of the term scientific evidence.

Another thing, using your definition of the terms it is an impossibility. The science you speak of is limited to the material universe. God being pure spirit, or in pagan philosopher speak, that which you can think of nothing higher.

So, I’d have to answer: no, it doesn’t bother me like it doesn’t bother me that temperature gauge doesn’t tell me how fast I’m going.

427

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I am a dogmatist. I am not open or broad minded in any way. I state my convictions from a standpoint of unwavering certainty. It may sound that way at times, but I do not intend to condescend to you. I got in very late… again. I apologize. I got a short post done for TigerTime and I MUST get some sleep.[/quote]

Interesting, I am dogmatic, as well. Though I do have broad mind, with my filter turned to skeptic.

428

Thanks Cortes but I’m no heavyweight philosopher

429

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

I’m going to point out that seems to be a limited view of the term scientific evidence. [/quote]

No it’s not. Everything in science that is considered a fact is demonstrable in some form.

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

Another thing, using your definition of the terms it is an impossibility. The science you speak of is limited to the material universe. God being pure spirit, or in pagan philosopher speak, that which you can think of nothing higher.

So, I’d have to answer: no, it doesn’t bother me like it doesn’t bother me that temperature gauge doesn’t tell me how fast I’m going.

[/quote]

How do you even know a spirit world exists?

430

[quote]therajraj wrote:
How do you even know a spirit world exists?[/quote]

I saw it in Avatar when Aang saw Roku

431

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I am a dogmatist. I am not open or broad minded in any way. I state my convictions from a standpoint of unwavering certainty. It may sound that way at times, but I do not intend to condescend to you. I got in very late… again. I apologize. I got a short post done for TigerTime and I MUST get some sleep.[/quote]

Unwavering personal certainty, perhaps.No more , no less. And being dogmatic is one thing. One can be exceedingly dogmatic without being condescending. You tend to come across as the latter, precisely because of your agenda. Which is fine.I understand the why.

Hope you get a good rest and find some time in the next couple of days to catch up.

432

[quote]therajraj wrote:
I mean I think if a god does exist he/she/it was responsible for the singularity and hasn’t intervened in our lives, at least not in any meaningful way. There are literally hundreds of habitable planets with a high probability of life in our galaxy alone. Why would be special in gods eyes when we are nothing but speck of dust in the universe?
[/quote]I see now how Tirib could equate disbelief with idolatry - as if they were one and the same. I’m still not sure that they are in all cases, but I see it now.

You pretty much accuse people of heresy when they believe in things that lie outside of your “holy book” of science and testable hypothesis. You would NEVER use these terms to describe it - I’m sure - but your arguments show your deeper viewpoint.

When people believe things that you don’t you deem them fools because they believe in stupid things “for no good reason”. When people don’t believe the things you do you deem them fools because they are in denial and can’t question there own beliefs. It’s kinda funny, but I’ve noticed before that you agnostic/atheists are often more viscous in your accusations of heresy than the Christians I’ve dealt with - it’s just never compared like that

I’m pretty sure Cortes and others detected something similar to this as well, they just didn’t try to speak on it as directly. Your use of the word “if” has no bearing. When you say you’ll believe in God when there is testable scientific proof - in that instant you are taking science as your religious philosophy. If you’re a real atheist (as in no belief system) you don’t bring in the one and only true belief system into a religious debate. I wasn’t lying when I told you I wasn’t happy with you giving in to the term “faith”. I wanted you to define it. I wanted you to own it. Then you would know that you never really were what you consider an atheist to be

433

[quote]squating_bear wrote:

You pretty much accuse people of heresy when they believe in things that lie outside of your “holy book” of science and testable hypothesis. You would NEVER use these terms to describe it - I’m sure - but your arguments show your deeper viewpoint.[/quote]

You need an accurate way of discerning the truth. The scientific method is the best tool humans have.

[quote]squating_bear wrote:

When people believe things that you don’t you deem them fools because they believe in stupid things “for no good reason”. When people don’t believe the things you do you deem them fools because they are in denial and can’t question there own beliefs. It’s kinda funny, but I’ve noticed before that you agnostic/atheists are often more viscous in your accusations of heresy than the Christians I’ve dealt with - it’s just never compared like that [/quote]

I don’t deem anyone fools based on having religious beliefs.

[quote]squating_bear wrote:

I’m pretty sure Cortes and others detected something similar to this as well, they just didn’t try to speak on it as directly. Your use of the word “if” has no bearing. [/quote]

I’m NOT claiming any knowledge on whether god does or doesn’t exist. You guys are the one who are absolutely certain god does exist. I was just discussing the topic assuming a god does exist.

[quote]squating_bear wrote:

When you say you’ll believe in God when there is testable scientific proof - in that instant you are taking science as your religious philosophy. [/quote]

My “religious” philosophy is based on reality. See that thing in front of you that you’re typing on? That’s my “religious” philosophy in action.

[quote]squating_bear wrote:

If you’re a real atheist (as in no belief system) you don’t bring in the one and only true belief system into a religious debate. [/quote]

An atheist is merely someone who doesn’t hold a belief in a god. Nothing more. I believe in many things.

[quote]squating_bear wrote:

I wasn’t lying when I told you I wasn’t happy with you giving in to the term “faith”. I wanted you to define it. I wanted you to own it. Then you would know that you never really were what you consider an atheist to be [/quote]

Um no, I know I am an atheist. It is you who do not understand what the label agnostic atheist even means.
.

434

I grew up in a Hindu family and was taught from a young age it was wrong to eat beef.

Even though I know there is nothing wrong with eating beef, I wasn’t able to consume it even after a couple of years of being an atheist had passed. I eventually did muster up the courage and ate a piece of beef a little while later. It was funny, I actually spit out the first piece i put on my tongue, felt like I was putting poison into mouth.

My point here is that I didn’t become “smarter” once I was able to eat beef, and I wasn’t a fool before for believing consuming it was wrong. S

Even today though, I rarely eat beef. If given the chance, I will almost always avoid it and go with something else.

So no, I don’t consider you or any others on this site a fool for believing and I understand when you are taught something is sacred at a young age, it can build into a hangup.

435

[quote]therajraj wrote:<<< The scientific method is the best tool humans have. >>>[/quote]On what sir, do you predicate this? I believe in the validity of the scientific method btw. I have very good reasons for doing so. What are yours?

436

[quote]therajraj wrote:
No it’s not. Everything in science that is considered a fact is demonstrable in some form.
[/quote]

Yes, I agree. But you only explained it in the mechanistic-cum-mathematical concept of science. Science is much broader than that.

[quote]How do you even know a spirit world exists?
[/quote]

Science. Science being a body of knowledge.

437

the existence of spirit world is way easier to prove than the existence of the physical world.

We all have a direct, immediate experience of “spirit”.
Our experience of “matter” is actually indirect and “mediate”.

438

reading some of this stuff is like reading stuff from a Zen Master. " what is the sound of one hand clapping?"
lol

Just wondering how many have actually studied Philosophy at the college or university level?

439

[quote]silee wrote:
reading some of this stuff is like reading stuff from a Zen Master. " what is the sound of one hand clapping?"
lol

Just wondering how many have actually studied Philosophy at the college or university level? [/quote]

If a tree fell in the woods and there was no one there to perceive it…would it make a sound?

What do you consider college or university levels?

440

[quote]kamui wrote:
the existence of spirit world is way easier to prove than the existence of the physical world.

We all have a direct, immediate experience of “spirit”.
Our experience of “matter” is actually indirect and “mediate”. [/quote]

Your body radiates heat. Is this heat evidence of anything other than your physical ability to produce heat?

Consciousness, and by extension of that; ‘self’, is a result of a functioning human brain.

That is all it’s evidence of, not “spiritworlds” or anything else.