Who is going to hell? An argument for the Bible, Religion and God. - Page 50 - Nubblies.net Forums

Dent · 08-25-2012, 12:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Repugnant Abomination

One eventually outgrows Dawkins and realizes the errors in his thinking.

Hipster Dawkins hater coming along with some oldschool philosophy! I'm pretty sure you just invented your own debate, nothing you've said attacks his views.
If you think your (yet to be revealed woo-woo) meaning is exempt from nature thats fine, throw yourself off a cliff then.

Have PM'd this link to Blonde and misterfleas (who has already solved the puzzle) but I'd like your critique on it as well, last I heard Descartes' critics are vast, and Kant knowing nothing about space-time? pssh
SpaceandMotion-Philosophy

"Summary: To know the truth about things we need to know how they are necessarily connected. Thus to know the truth about physical reality we need to know how matter exists and moves about in space in a necessarily connected way. If we knew this then we would find that deductions from our theory of reality (logical truths) would match knowledge from our senses / experiments (empirical truths)."

"(postmodernism assumes this is a permanent limitation of science, thus we can never know reality / absolute truths)"
^ Copenhagen interpretation, the most accurate description of reality so far, and we see probabilities, not certainties.

"No. What I'm saying is that science may eventually answer all naturalistic questions, but it cannot ever answer philosophical ones. "
That's because some questions are silly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Repugnant Abomination

So my premise is this: Dawkin's empiricist approach is fantastic for uncovering the mysteries of the natural world, but it becomes flawed when applied to all aspects of life.

Oh Dawkins you bad boy, we just came out of hundreds of thousands of years of having no clue whatsoever about about how the natural world works, you have shown us so much but still not everything has an answer why god why? I mean dawkins
The idea that we primates can understand everything is repugnant

Quote:

Originally Posted by Repugnant Abomination

Surely you don't believe there is nothing outside of science? Think about it for a minute.

Science is latin for knowledge, you're saying there is a priori and priori knowledge, what's missing there again? the greek and latin words for knowledge confuse me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Repugnant Abomination

Finally, the belief in God can be rational, in the epistemological sense of the word.

Does that mean that anything can be rational, in the epistemological sense of the word.? can you give some insight into this?

You keep mentioning meaning and science, as if Dawkins has ever said that science can answer such a question.
It's a hidden assumption, a meaningless question unless rephrased as “Why do human beings matter to us?”
And that goes for the ethics/morality as well.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Repugnant Abomination

but to show why an empiricist would have an issue accepting any kind of knowledge outside of sense experience.

Outside of sense experience? an empiricist (sentient) would never bump into anything paranormal like this (5)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Repugnant Abomination

No. What I'm saying is that science may eventually answer all naturalistic questions, but it cannot ever answer philosophical ones.

Explain how determinism is wrong please, also has god been hiding in the philosophy section all along?
No wonder science can't find him.

Dent · 09-09-2012, 03:41 PM

Philosophy v science: which can answer the big questions of life? | Science | The Observer

"but that ultimately the only source of facts is via empirical exploration. "
- Lawrence Krauss

"But if we want to know why someone made a sacrifice for a person close to them, a purely neurological answer would not be a complete one. The full truth would require saying that there was a "why" at work, too: love. "
- Phaglosiphor

Mr. Blonde · 09-10-2012, 01:15 AM

Nathaniel Hawthorne on Herman Melville: “He can neither believe, nor be comfortable in his unbelief."

Come back to us Repug. Don't stray too far down the path of apologism. I can't guarantee your intellect's safe return.

Saint DH · 09-10-2012, 11:21 AM

Nathaniel Hawthorne sucks more cock than your mother at a church social, so let's leave him the fuck out of this thread from now on.

Repugnant Abomination · 09-10-2012, 07:42 PM

1. There is no empirical evidence that slavery is wrong. We know it's wrong because we are rational beings capable of reason.

2. Slavery is not wrong, but we find it distasteful because of cultural values society instills in us.

Which?

Saint DH · 09-10-2012, 07:50 PM

I think number 1 is wrong, homeboy.

Beebs · 09-10-2012, 07:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Repugnant Abomination

1. There is no empirical evidence that slavery is wrong. We know it's wrong because we are rational beings capable of reason.

2. Slavery is not wrong, but we find it distasteful because of cultural values society instills in us.

Which?

1 Definitely is not a logically sound statement. 2 is obviously incorrect.

The empirical evidence of slavery being wrong is there, regardless if anybody recognizes it.

Mr. Blonde · 09-10-2012, 09:55 PM

I think what repug is dancing around is the ultimate message of morality.

e.g.

1. Is it ethical or moral to own human beings?

No - Why not? Who deems this action morally reprehensible? etc.

The answer ultimately lies in utilitarianism/"The Golden Rule". It harms other beings of the same species; therefore, it should be viewed as "bad" to every member of that species. Obviously, for myriad economic, cultural and social reasons, this is not/has not always been the case.

Sidenote: What are common objections to "The Golden Rule" philosophically?

Saint DH · 09-11-2012, 11:33 AM

I truly hate this day, September 11th.

Nothing is more infuriating to me than hearing people spouting off about God's love and having faith in God during difficult times. Blah blah blah more bullshit.

It's like, do you fucking idiots even realize that religion and "God's love" are the reasons that 9/11 even happened? Jesus fucking Christ.

Mr. Blonde · 09-11-2012, 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dirty Harry

It's like, do you fucking idiots even realize that religion and "God's love" are the fucking reason that 9/11 even happened? Jesus fucking Christ.

No. They do not. Figure out this mystery and you'll have solved pretty much why people are religious at all. Try pressing the issue and see what happens...

Beebs · 09-11-2012, 01:42 PM

It was understandable at the time, because fuck, do whatever gets you through the day.

Now, it's almost sad more than infuriating, and I lean way more towards anger than sadness.

THEINCREDIBLEdork · 09-11-2012, 06:06 PM

Black people are lazy and unmotivated. Ironically, they lead much happier lives when they are put to work.

Treating a black person abusively is wrong. Sure, there were cruel slave owners, but I'm sure they were cruel to other creatures as well. We didn't have laws forbidding abuse that we have today. For example, animal abuse laws.

As long as you keep them fed well, keep them healthy and disease free, and maintain an authoritative but not abusive relationship there is nothing inherently wrong with slavery.

Beebs · 09-11-2012, 08:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Mistoffelees

Black people are lazy and unmotivated. Ironically, they lead much happier lives when they are put to work.

Treating a black person abusively is wrong. Sure, there were cruel slave owners, but I'm sure they were cruel to other creatures as well. We didn't have laws forbidding abuse that we have today. For example, animal abuse laws.

As long as you keep them fed well, keep them healthy and disease free, and maintain an authoritative but not abusive relationship there is nothing inherently wrong with slavery.

Even if you take that seriously, it's only one type of slavery.

thekremlin · 09-12-2012, 07:25 AM

This should clear everything up.

Saint DH · 09-12-2012, 09:02 AM

I may have been intoxicated when I drew that.

But hey, maybe you should print it out and take it to your local tattoo palor since apparently you're collecting the world's shittiest tattoos on your body. This one should be a great addition!

Mr. Blonde · 09-12-2012, 03:17 PM

Protesters attack U.S. diplomatic compounds in Egypt, Libya - CNN.com

Woke up late today and am fucking furious at both the fact that this happened and the US response to it:

Hillary Clinton: "The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. Our commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation."

Embassy: "condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims -- as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions. Respect for religious beliefs is a cornerstone of American democracy," the statement said. "We firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others."

f3lix · 09-12-2012, 04:15 PM

Liberals condemn, republicans bomb.

Mr. Blonde · 09-12-2012, 04:18 PM

And what's the Libertarian stance on this event?

ninjaface · 09-12-2012, 04:21 PM

The statement from the embassy was made before the violence broke out.

Beebs · 09-12-2012, 04:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Blonde

And what's the Libertarian stance on this event?

In a few weeks a man is found with a hole in his head, nobody claims responsibility, it's lost in the news cycle.

Mr. Blonde · 09-12-2012, 04:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ninjaface

The statement from the embassy was made before the violence broke out.

Source?

Directly from the article

Quote:

The U.S. Embassy in Cairo announced that it had canceled visa services for Wednesday.
It also said in a statement that it "condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims -- as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions."
"Respect for religious beliefs is a cornerstone of American democracy," the statement said. "We firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others."

Beebs · 09-12-2012, 04:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ninjaface

The statement from the embassy was made before the violence broke out.

It also appears that the violence used the protest as a screen. No clue if the protest was incited, or simply a good opportunity.

Dent · 09-12-2012, 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Blonde

Woke up late today and am fucking furious at both the fact that this happened and the US response to it:

But the film is clearly provoking them!
news title earlier was "blabla(movie creator) denies guilt"

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Blonde

And what's the Libertarian stance on this event?

ninjaface · 09-12-2012, 04:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Blonde

Source?

U.S. embassy in Cairo condemns Muhammed video - POLITICO.com

TooLazy;Didn'tClick?

Bottom of article states:

CORRECTION: An earlier version of this item reported that the embassy issued the statement after the attacks. It did not. This item has been further updated with additional details as they have become available.

Mr. Blonde · 09-12-2012, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beebs

It also appears that the violence used the protest as a screen. No clue if the protest was incited, or simply a good opportunity.

I've heard this as well now, details still coming out I guess:

U.S. officials: Attack on consulate in Libya may have been planned - The Washington Post

09-09-2012, 03:41 PM	#1227 (permalink)
Dent Lost in Hilbert Spice Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Surrounded by knaves and fools Posts: 3,462 Internets: 174266	Philosophy v science: which can answer the big questions of life? \| Science \| The Observer "but that ultimately the only source of facts is via empirical exploration. " - Lawrence Krauss "But if we want to know why someone made a sacrifice for a person close to them, a purely neurological answer would not be a complete one. The full truth would require saying that there was a "why" at work, too: love. " - Phaglosiphor
	Last edited by Dent; 09-09-2012 at 06:00 PM.

09-11-2012, 06:06 PM	#1237 (permalink)
THEINCREDIBLEdork Emperor Meow Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 9,316 Internets: 284585	Black people are lazy and unmotivated. Ironically, they lead much happier lives when they are put to work. Treating a black person abusively is wrong. Sure, there were cruel slave owners, but I'm sure they were cruel to other creatures as well. We didn't have laws forbidding abuse that we have today. For example, animal abuse laws. As long as you keep them fed well, keep them healthy and disease free, and maintain an authoritative but not abusive relationship there is nothing inherently wrong with slavery.
	#YOLO

09-10-2012, 01:15 AM	#1228 (permalink)
Mr. Blonde Spice Master Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 17,969 Internets: 278288	Nathaniel Hawthorne on Herman Melville: “He can neither believe, nor be comfortable in his unbelief." Come back to us Repug. Don't stray too far down the path of apologism. I can't guarantee your intellect's safe return.

09-10-2012, 11:21 AM	#1229 (permalink)
Saint DH Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 6,113 Internets: 284753	Nathaniel Hawthorne sucks more cock than your mother at a church social, so let's leave him the fuck out of this thread from now on.

09-10-2012, 07:42 PM	#1230 (permalink)
Repugnant Abomination Almost there... Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 5,979 Internets: 161638	1. There is no empirical evidence that slavery is wrong. We know it's wrong because we are rational beings capable of reason. 2. Slavery is not wrong, but we find it distasteful because of cultural values society instills in us. Which?

09-10-2012, 07:50 PM	#1231 (permalink)
Saint DH Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 6,113 Internets: 284753	I think number 1 is wrong, homeboy.

09-10-2012, 09:55 PM	#1233 (permalink)
Mr. Blonde Spice Master Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 17,969 Internets: 278288	I think what repug is dancing around is the ultimate message of morality. e.g. 1. Is it ethical or moral to own human beings? No - Why not? Who deems this action morally reprehensible? etc. The answer ultimately lies in utilitarianism/"The Golden Rule". It harms other beings of the same species; therefore, it should be viewed as "bad" to every member of that species. Obviously, for myriad economic, cultural and social reasons, this is not/has not always been the case. Sidenote: What are common objections to "The Golden Rule" philosophically?

09-11-2012, 11:33 AM	#1234 (permalink)
Saint DH Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 6,113 Internets: 284753	I truly hate this day, September 11th. Nothing is more infuriating to me than hearing people spouting off about God's love and having faith in God during difficult times. Blah blah blah more bullshit. It's like, do you fucking idiots even realize that religion and "God's love" are the reasons that 9/11 even happened? Jesus fucking Christ.

09-11-2012, 01:42 PM	#1236 (permalink)
Beebs Poor Sport Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Indianapolis / Middlebury / Long Lake Posts: 5,306 Internets: 127341	It was understandable at the time, because fuck, do whatever gets you through the day. Now, it's almost sad more than infuriating, and I lean way more towards anger than sadness.

09-12-2012, 09:02 AM	#1240 (permalink)
Saint DH Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 6,113 Internets: 284753	I may have been intoxicated when I drew that. But hey, maybe you should print it out and take it to your local tattoo palor since apparently you're collecting the world's shittiest tattoos on your body. This one should be a great addition!

09-12-2012, 03:17 PM	#1241 (permalink)
Mr. Blonde Spice Master Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 17,969 Internets: 278288	Protesters attack U.S. diplomatic compounds in Egypt, Libya - CNN.com Woke up late today and am fucking furious at both the fact that this happened and the US response to it: Hillary Clinton: "The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. Our commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation." Embassy: "condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims -- as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions. Respect for religious beliefs is a cornerstone of American democracy," the statement said. "We firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others."

09-12-2012, 04:15 PM	#1242 (permalink)
f3lix Gangnam Style Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: DH's Massage Parlor Posts: 6,383 Internets: 213510	Liberals condemn, republicans bomb.

09-12-2012, 04:18 PM	#1243 (permalink)
Mr. Blonde Spice Master Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 17,969 Internets: 278288	And what's the Libertarian stance on this event?

09-12-2012, 04:21 PM	#1244 (permalink)
ninjaface Level 20 Holothetan Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Space Posts: 5,245 Internets: 210144	The statement from the embassy was made before the violence broke out.