Interesting trends in the Gulch
I have been following with (not very) amused intrest how a lot of the conversations here in the Gulch go from their topic subject to either a heated debate about Religion, or, less frequently, a heated debate about Sexuality and Sex. It does wonders to boost a topic's point and post count... but really stinks when you see a good, timely, and interesting topic, go to add or comment, and it's now a theological or psychosexual discussion.
While I do know that Humanity tends to shy away from mental work, and instead default to the base and easy, I was surprised to see this becoming a rising trend here in the Gulch, and rising exponentially over the past 30-60 days.
While I do know that Humanity tends to shy away from mental work, and instead default to the base and easy, I was surprised to see this becoming a rising trend here in the Gulch, and rising exponentially over the past 30-60 days.
Previous comments... You are currently on page 3.
They don't.
As for the rest of your post: You've convinced me. I believe your color is ambiguous. I believe your gender is ambiguous too (so confusing for your boyfriends - not to mention your medical doctors who I'm sure have run many tests trying to figure out your sex and are still stumped). And I agree that it's most probable that if someone wrote to the schools you claim to have attended, the registrars would write back saying your attendance "could not be verified".
Happy now?
Bambi, I am convinced you would not accept any definitive proof of God even if you saw Him with your own, physical eyes. Revelations predicts such unfortunate events. For example, the last Miracle is the one in which there are multitudes of dead people and on the 4th day, they are brought back to life. Most unbelievers will be convinced at that moment that God exists and they will be saved. However, not everyone will believe. Will you be among them? Would that be enough to convince you? Or would you rationalize it away?
Truth is, they're whackos because they believe in the whole god/satan fable in the same way that people who believe in fairies and leprechauns are whacked. It's fine for kids under 8, but by the time you're 18, you should have grown out of it.
First you say it's not abandonment of reason, then you imply that reason is not involved?
You claim that "faith" isn't an axiomatic assumption - that empirical evidence can be the foundation… yet you offer NONE.
Sorry, but you're just waving your hands and making mewling noises. Try facts.
I don't claim to know what "Objectivists" accept, but only a moron (or someone lacking knowledge of physics as derived over the past 100 years) would think that systems are entirely deterministic. They can be chaotic. Random. Sort of like your last statement. Irrelevant too!
Faugh!
How the hell would YOU know what **I** do? I might capitalize State for emphasis. I might even capitAlize it to give you SOME sort of counter-argument. I mean, anyone who has to argue from a fictional movie about fictional dinosaur interaction is already at a loss.
I'll simply point out that Americans have already overthrown their government once… and there's no reason to believe it could not happen again.
So far as I know, that has nothing to do with christianity. PKB <=> non sequitur.
I don't know what "objectivists" do, but I like your argument.
So let me use the SAME argument with regard to the christian god.
In the beginning was god. Only god. Everything was created by god. god was perfect. he created the angels. They were perfect. A perfect god doesn't create imperfection. And yet, under the christian doctrine, that's precisely what god did. Lucifer turned against god. Now either Lucifer was created flawed (and god is the author of imperfection) or Lucifer was created perfect, and rebellion against god is the act of a perfect being. And don't try the "free will" weasel escape. Lucifer's "free will" would have to be perfect too, else he wasn't perfect.
So which is it? God created imperfection (sin)? Or perfect beings can commit sin (and so why should anyone think the christian god "perfect")?
Either way, god created imperfection. And if you believe in omniscience, then god knew he was creating imperfection when he did it.
So if your god is a god of sin - where does that leave the whole "jesus died for your sins" fable?
Horse pucky. It's about the same things all other religions are about - an attempt to pave over lack of understanding and within the hierarchy, a means to control others. That's why for centuries the christian services were in Latin. That's why there's a heaven and a hell.
Your "first god, second god" comment is generally incorrect. Usually the second god is parents. Once weak willed people realize their parents aren't all knowing, all-powerful, can't protect them, they need a new god - so they invent one. Sometimes they pray to the god of thunder. Sometimes to the god of war. Sometimes to some other made-up god - but it's all just parent replacement.
I reiterate - there is NO RATIONAL REASON TO BELIEVE IN ANY PARTICULAR GOD. Pick a god, any god - most people alive, most people who have ever lived, would say you are wrong. What evidence do you have to contradict them? None. Nothing but a "feeling" or a wild-ass guess (what some people call "faith").
Creation is an act of love? So every guy who builds a bomb does it out of love?
Need to tighten up the logic. The shotgun approach to defending your illusion isn't working.
Except Objectivists interpret any intellectual challenge to their ideas as an unprovoked initiation of force by non-Objectivists. That's why Rand, Peikoff, Binswanger, et al., never publicly debated anyone.
O.A.
Wrong. It's the realization that reason is a specific tool of human consciousness for survival; it's not the only tool. And like any tool, it is *specific*, and therefore limited.
>It is accepting axiomatically that god exists - without the slightest shred of evidence.
It needn't be axiomatic; it can be based on good empirical evidence.
In any case, Objectivists are generally philosophical materialists who accept axiomatically that nothing but matter and energy exist, and that all effects in the universe can be explained deterministically by material causes — all without the slightest shred of evidence.
Load more comments...