|
Author
|
Topic: Method of Madness: post-hoc reasoning and confirmation bias.
|
jar
Member (Idle past 423 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
Message 139 of 253 (116425)
06-18-2004 12:02 PM
|
Reply to: Message 138 by custard
06-18-2004 11:53 AM
|
|
Okay, but still pretty undefined.
You say economic threat or cultural encroachment would not be valid cause. I think I can understand what you mean by economic threat so let's begin there. If nation A believed that nation B was so great an economic threat that if not opposed, the people of nation A would starve to death, would that be sufficient cause to go to war?
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 138 by custard, posted 06-18-2004 11:53 AM | | custard has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 140 by custard, posted 06-18-2004 12:11 PM | | jar has replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 423 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 141 of 253 (116436)
06-18-2004 12:24 PM
|
Reply to: Message 140 by custard
06-18-2004 12:11 PM
|
|
Well, maybe i didn't make myself understood
but that's not unusual. I'm old and slow and often confused. What I was thinking about in terms of an economic threat would be where Nation B has total control of something vital, maybe the natural resources that are essential to Nation A. As an example, imagine that Nation B can totally cut off the supply of raw materials and fuels to Nation A so that all industry in Nation A will grind to a halt. Faced with the prospect of all industry stopping, millions of people out of work and starving, no fuel to even move food if it could be grown, from the farms to the cities, would Nation A be justified in going to war with Nation B?
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 140 by custard, posted 06-18-2004 12:11 PM | | custard has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 142 by custard, posted 06-18-2004 12:45 PM | | jar has replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 423 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 143 of 253 (116448)
06-18-2004 12:49 PM
|
Reply to: Message 142 by custard
06-18-2004 12:45 PM
|
|
So when the US cut off the supply of oil and steel to Japan in the early 1940s...
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 142 by custard, posted 06-18-2004 12:45 PM | | custard has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 144 by custard, posted 06-18-2004 1:08 PM | | jar has replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 423 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 145 of 253 (116462)
06-18-2004 1:23 PM
|
Reply to: Message 144 by custard
06-18-2004 1:08 PM
|
|
IMHO, it is a perfect example. But let's continue and perhaps you will see why. The point was to show that the absolute laid out originally would expand to become very subjective in reality. You added...
Yeah, Japan committed atrocities and invaded their neighbors, we were certainly justified in cutting off supplies to them; otherwise, we would have been responsible for funding their aggression. So now we have changed the prohibition about war even further. It appears that you believe that is might also be justified to protect others. Is that correct?
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 144 by custard, posted 06-18-2004 1:08 PM | | custard has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 146 by custard, posted 06-18-2004 1:34 PM | | jar has replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 423 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 147 of 253 (116473)
06-18-2004 1:48 PM
|
Reply to: Message 146 by custard
06-18-2004 1:34 PM
|
|
Actuall, our embargo would have done exactly that. When we cut off oil and steel we literally shut down their economy. Regardless, they had not attacked or threatened us, but instead had attacked and threatened others. So let's make it somewhat plainer. Could war be justified to protect others? I am not addressing PBA as I believe it was adequately addressed (or at least everyone gave their opinions) in that thread.
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 146 by custard, posted 06-18-2004 1:34 PM | | custard has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 149 by custard, posted 06-18-2004 1:56 PM | | jar has replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 423 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 152 of 253 (116496)
06-18-2004 2:22 PM
|
Reply to: Message 149 by custard
06-18-2004 1:56 PM
|
|
The old Sins of Omission gambit, eh?
And I suppose you would like a yes or no answer? Guess what? You can't get one. While many would like for life and the world to be simple, unfortunately, it is not. You ask...
If you came across one man literally killing another man and you chose to keep walking, would you be violating the commandment 'thou shall not kill?' It depends on the circumstances. Person A is literally killing Person B because... A is defending his life from attack? A is defending someone else who was being threatened by B? Life is simply not neat. Morality is simply not true or false. Absolutes aren't.
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 149 by custard, posted 06-18-2004 1:56 PM | | custard has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 153 by custard, posted 06-18-2004 2:35 PM | | jar has not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 423 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 173 of 253 (117337)
06-21-2004 10:14 PM
|
Reply to: Message 172 by NosyNed
06-21-2004 10:05 PM
|
|
Re: D o o m e d !
Hey Ned. You're not home free yet. IMHO, GOD really couldn't care less if you believe in him or not. Afterall, would you be concerned if an ant didn't believe in you?
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 172 by NosyNed, posted 06-21-2004 10:05 PM | | NosyNed has not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 423 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
Re: D o o m e d !
Hangdawg13 Sure, GOD said, "Love GOD, and love others as you love yourself". But that's a pretty broad commandment and directed only to Christians. Ask yourself why GOD would care whether someone believed in him or not? If GOD is, as you and I believe, really awsome, would he really be so trivial as to worry about what Ned says or even believes? Did you ever read the "The Last Battle"?
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
jar
Member (Idle past 423 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
Re: D o o m e d !
Well, are you, or your wife, or anyone that you know, GODs? That is not just a passing question, it is meant most seriously. Are you GOD? But the topic is post-hoc reasoning and confirmation bias. These last few exchanges, with me and others in this thread, might be very productive. If you look at your last post you might note that it is totally written from YOUR perspective, from YOUR point of view and Christian Bias. And it is totally unrelated to what I had said. I said that I cannot imagine GOD getting too uptight because a human denies he exists. You respond
But God has integrity. His righteousness and justice must be satisfied. If God did not adhere to his own character, he would cease to be God. as though what Ned believes requires GOD to repond, as though Ned (or anyone else for that matter) can attack, threaten, damage or challenge GOD's righteousness and justice. As though GODs existence is dependant on Ned's belief, or your belief, or my belief. That is silly. You say...
If God did not adhere to his own character, he would cease to be God. That makes GOD sound like some corner pimp that just got dissed. Now he needs to get in somebody's face. No, IMHO, GOD is far more than that. GOD actually cares enough to send his son down to get killed for all the folk that didn't believe in him. Who exactly do you think he wanted to save? Believers?
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
jar
Member (Idle past 423 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
Saved?
Not everyone, but close. A lot of Christians like Hitler, the infamous Dr. Scott or Jerry Falwell will, IMHO, be SOL. Folk like Judge Moore and liars like Hovind, Wyatt and such have no chance of salvation. But when it comes to heaven I imagine there will be a whole bunch of Atheists getting right in while a long line of Christians get sent to the back of the bus. But as you say, that's only my humble opinion. Your mileage may vary.
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
jar
Member (Idle past 423 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
Re: Ok an athiests turn then
You do not Know the Bible is true, you believe the Bible is true. Those are two very different things. In several posts you've mentioned
And besides that I have studied a little bit of prophecy and some hidden messages in the Bible and some other numerical anomalies that God has put in there as sort of a security measure. Can you help us by pointing to one such prophesy, hidden message or numerical anomaly that can be verified?
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
jar
Member (Idle past 423 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
Re: Ok an athiests turn then
Hangdawg13 asks????
Jar, do you believe Jesus Christ is Lord, God and man in one person, and that he died on the cross as a subsitute for us, and that he was raised again on the third day and now resides at God's right hand in heaven? Please answer this question. What I believe is belief, not fact.
Faith IS a way of knowing. Wrong. Completely wrong. Belief is not knowing.
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
jar
Member (Idle past 423 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
Re: Ok an athiests turn then
Beliefs. Beliefs. What I believe is totally outside the bounds of this thread. This is on Post-hoc reasoning and confirmation bias. If I said something was true simply because I believed it, I would be proving the very point made in this thread. You may gather from my posts what I believe is true. You might even believe that you know what I believe. But that is far different from fact or truth. The fact is, there is almost no evidence that Jesus even lived and there is no evidence for his death or resurection. If you know of some, please produce it. There is a thread at Message 1 asking for that very proof. Any belief in his life and death, his resurrection is simply that. It is a BELIEF. Read the Nicene Creed...
We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all that is, seen and unseen. We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, of one Being with the Father. Through him all things were made. For us and for our salvation he came down from heaven: by the power of the Holy Spirit he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary, and was made man. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered death and was buried. On the third day he rose again in accordance with the Scriptures; he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end. We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son. With the Father and the Son he is worshiped and glorified. He has spoken through the Prophets. We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church. We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. We look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen. It is a statement of belief, not fact. In every instance it says "We Believe", not "We Know".
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 218 by Hangdawg13, posted 06-28-2004 3:31 PM | | Hangdawg13 has not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2