Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 60 (9209 total)
0 online now:
Newest Member: Skylink
Post Volume: Total: 919,462 Year: 6,719/9,624 Month: 59/238 Week: 59/22 Day: 0/14 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Atheist Changes Mind
coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 120 days)
Posts: 3645
From: Indianapolis, IN
Joined: 03-29-2004


Message 16 of 34 (167605)
12-13-2004 4:25 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by Parasomnium
12-13-2004 2:40 AM


Hey Seven, your link doesn't appear to work.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Parasomnium, posted 12-13-2004 2:40 AM Parasomnium has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by Parasomnium, posted 12-13-2004 5:12 AM coffee_addict has not replied

  
Parasomnium
Member
Posts: 2228
Joined: 07-15-2003


Message 17 of 34 (167614)
12-13-2004 5:12 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by coffee_addict
12-13-2004 4:25 AM


When I click on it, it works fine. But here's the link in plain text, so you can just copy and paste it: Home - Rational International
It's still a link of course, but if you position your cursor carefully you can select the actual text of the link and paste it in the address bar of your browser. If it still doesn't work, then I suggest you just google the subject. Something will turn up, I'm sure.

"It's amazing what you can learn from DNA." - Desdamona.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by coffee_addict, posted 12-13-2004 4:25 AM coffee_addict has not replied

  
Dr Jack
Member (Idle past 128 days)
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003


Message 18 of 34 (167619)
12-13-2004 5:51 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by NosyNed
12-11-2004 1:29 AM


Re: Hard to tell
I'd say, in general, that the Philosophers I've met have a horrible tendency to draw broad conclusions from snippets of misunderstood science when it appeals to them and to ignore science when it does not.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by NosyNed, posted 12-11-2004 1:29 AM NosyNed has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by Silent H, posted 12-13-2004 6:43 AM Dr Jack has replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 6073 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 19 of 34 (167633)
12-13-2004 6:43 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by Dr Jack
12-13-2004 5:51 AM


Re: Hard to tell
the Philosophers I've met have a horrible tendency to draw broad conclusions from snippets of misunderstood science when it appeals to them and to ignore science when it does not.
You're right. But look around, that goes for scientists as well. Its funny how many biologists feel well placed to discuss physics, or cosmologists discuss fine points of genetics. The Intelligent Design movement is full of that.
In the end everyone discussing knowledge is a philosopher, that includes scientists who are natural philosophers, and regular old philosopher philosophers. Everyone from every field is capable of making the error you describe.
I moved from straight philosophy into "hard science" and saw the same mistakes being made by the same amount of people. Only the scientists got to play like they must be right because they have a specified "scientific degree". They are not immune and sometimes a badge helps you miss that you might be a bad guy too.

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Dr Jack, posted 12-13-2004 5:51 AM Dr Jack has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Dr Jack, posted 12-13-2004 6:49 AM Silent H has not replied

  
Dr Jack
Member (Idle past 128 days)
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003


Message 20 of 34 (167635)
12-13-2004 6:49 AM
Reply to: Message 19 by Silent H
12-13-2004 6:43 AM


Re: Hard to tell
Hmm, yes, you're quite right. It's unfair to single out philosophers.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by Silent H, posted 12-13-2004 6:43 AM Silent H has not replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18639
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 4.4


Message 21 of 34 (167679)
12-13-2004 10:35 AM
Reply to: Message 13 by NosyNed
12-12-2004 7:06 PM


Re: Spelling errors
I think he is making a joke of it! I was about to actually correct his spelling since it irritated me. I then realized that he was trying to annoy the spellprudes, of whom I am Chief.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by NosyNed, posted 12-12-2004 7:06 PM NosyNed has not replied

  
coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 120 days)
Posts: 3645
From: Indianapolis, IN
Joined: 03-29-2004


Message 22 of 34 (167685)
12-13-2004 10:45 AM


Now that we know the philosopher made no such change in his beliefs, shouldn't we rally to burn fox down for lying again? This is like the millionth time that they lied like this.

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by AdminPhat, posted 12-14-2004 10:50 AM coffee_addict has not replied

  
AdminPhat
Inactive Member


Message 23 of 34 (168059)
12-14-2004 10:50 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by coffee_addict
12-13-2004 10:45 AM


Facts change thread
Well, burning fox down would be revenge on the world, but I think it would be easier to shut this thread down now. Atheist Did Not change mind after all. Atheist(Flew) merely wanted press.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by coffee_addict, posted 12-13-2004 10:45 AM coffee_addict has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by NosyNed, posted 12-23-2004 10:40 PM AdminPhat has not replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 9011
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 24 of 34 (171244)
12-23-2004 10:40 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by AdminPhat
12-14-2004 10:50 AM


An update on Flew
As I type I am listening to him on CBC radio.
He has decided that there is some reason for thinking that "Aristotle's God" might exist. This is contradictory to the web page we have.
This may be on an "As It Happens" archive in a few hours.
His reasoning seems to be totally on the problem of the origin of life not evolution. He thinks it is a big problem.
He is commenting on Darwin's late in life "conversion".
I'm not sure he has his facts straight.
He says that "the god of theism certainly would be the cause of the big bang".
What are the characteristics of this god? he is asked. What is it's purpose?
"Why should he have a purpose?" is his response. One must assume either the universe going on forever or, if you like, as Aristotle believed that there was a first cause.
Does your god concern himself with maintaining his creations? Is he interested in us?
Only a god who wants to be praised and wants to be obeyed would create a universe in which there are people to praise and obey is his answer.
He is not a Christian it seems.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by AdminPhat, posted 12-14-2004 10:50 AM AdminPhat has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by Silent H, posted 12-24-2004 5:48 AM NosyNed has replied
 Message 27 by Taqless, posted 12-24-2004 11:22 AM NosyNed has replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 6073 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 25 of 34 (171284)
12-24-2004 5:48 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by NosyNed
12-23-2004 10:40 PM


Re: An update on Flew
Actually it does sound like he's shifting into the fundie camp, slowly but surely. These specific tidbits are mainstays of the fundie circles, and I have watched an entire family move from theistic scientists to true fundies under their spell...
1) Darwin's late in life "conversion".
2) the god of theism certainly would be the cause of the big bang
3) One must assume either the universe going on forever or, if you like, as Aristotle believed that there was a first cause.
4) Only a god who wants to be praised and wants to be obeyed would create a universe in which there are people to praise and obey is his answer.
Essentially this is setting out an historical precedent to create the groundwork for his own conversion, then moving into assertions and ancient philosophy for explaining why a god must exist (stock dilemma, with "going on forever" being a generic catchall which does not measure up to other unknown possibilities), and finally what God it must be.
After all it is only the monotheistic Gods whose only answer is obedience, and he has already denied the possibility of Islam, through his bizarre and offensive commentary.
My guess is he's converting but wants his cake and eat it too.

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by NosyNed, posted 12-23-2004 10:40 PM NosyNed has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by NosyNed, posted 12-24-2004 10:18 AM Silent H has not replied
 Message 28 by Taqless, posted 12-24-2004 11:27 AM Silent H has not replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 9011
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 26 of 34 (171294)
12-24-2004 10:18 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by Silent H
12-24-2004 5:48 AM


BTW not as it happens
It was actually on a later reprise of some of the morning shows. I'll try to find an archive later. Busy days right now.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Silent H, posted 12-24-2004 5:48 AM Silent H has not replied

  
Taqless
Member (Idle past 6167 days)
Posts: 285
From: AZ
Joined: 12-18-2003


Message 27 of 34 (171299)
12-24-2004 11:22 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by NosyNed
12-23-2004 10:40 PM


Re: An update on Flew
What are the characteristics of this god? he is asked. What is it's purpose?
"Why should he have a purpose?" is his response.
And then?
Does your god concern himself with maintaining his creations? Is he interested in us?
Only a god who wants to be praised and wants to be obeyed would create a universe in which there are people to praise and obey is his answer.
Isn't this a contradiction? It provides purpose where he I thought he implied there was none. Maybe I'm misunderstanding?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by NosyNed, posted 12-23-2004 10:40 PM NosyNed has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by NosyNed, posted 12-24-2004 11:45 AM Taqless has replied

  
Taqless
Member (Idle past 6167 days)
Posts: 285
From: AZ
Joined: 12-18-2003


Message 28 of 34 (171300)
12-24-2004 11:27 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by Silent H
12-24-2004 5:48 AM


Re: An update on Flew
holmes,
....why a god must exist (stock dilemma, with "going on forever" being a generic catchall which does not measure up to other unknown possibilities)...
What is the big problem with forever? Not that it's your viewpoint, but I see this as being offered as a huge hurdle to be explained {insert a god} all of the time. "Conscience Purpose" seems to be a human hangup that the universe is under no obligation to adhere to. Any insight?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Silent H, posted 12-24-2004 5:48 AM Silent H has not replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 9011
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 29 of 34 (171301)
12-24-2004 11:45 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by Taqless
12-24-2004 11:22 AM


Contradiction
It appears to be a contradiction and that is what I thought listening to him. For a famous philosopher he rambled a bit. I wasn't all that impressed.
You should also remember I was trying to type as he was speaking so you can't trust that I have it right.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Taqless, posted 12-24-2004 11:22 AM Taqless has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by Taqless, posted 12-24-2004 12:03 PM NosyNed has replied

  
Taqless
Member (Idle past 6167 days)
Posts: 285
From: AZ
Joined: 12-18-2003


Message 30 of 34 (171308)
12-24-2004 12:03 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by NosyNed
12-24-2004 11:45 AM


Re: Contradiction
Having worked in the healthcare field a bit he is sounding like one or both of the following that I've personally seen:
1) Significant loss(es) of someone(s) he cared for. I've seen individuals accept theism based on their inability to cope with where and what will happen to that specific person (not themselves). Seems odd, but we all tend to "bank the fire" of our youth with increasing age....sometimes it's easier to "give in". Pure speculation, but obervations nonetheless.
2) A mild form of dimentia.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by NosyNed, posted 12-24-2004 11:45 AM NosyNed has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by NosyNed, posted 12-24-2004 1:03 PM Taqless has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024