|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,902 Year: 4,159/9,624 Month: 1,030/974 Week: 357/286 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Belief Versus The Scientific Method | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 423 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 441 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
They're not "my" rules. They're THE rules - and YOU follow them in every instance but one. If your rules were accepted as valid, NOBODY could be a believer. If everybody FOLLOWED the rules in every instance, nobody would be a believer - and that would be a good thing.
Phat writes:
Again, for the same reasons YOU reject the research and arguments of the Santa-believers.
What puzzles me is why you reject the research and arguments of the apologists... Phat writes:
I have never read a single word by any "mythicist" so you can stop using that tired old PRATT.
... and accept the mythicists and other secular sholars with an axe to grind against the Jesus. Phat writes:
And AGAIN you say nothing to actually back up your position. SHOW us the difference between your god and all the other gods.
And you cant show why *we* only imagine God and never actually experienced an encounter with Him. Phat writes:
Duh. I recognized that the beliefs were empty, so I dropped them.
If so, how is it that you once were a believer...if in fact you only ha empty beliefs to work with? Phat writes:
Nonsense. People ignore the evidence or reject the evidence. That doesn't make the evidence subjective. It makes the people fools.
If all evidence were objective, all people would have no choice but to question and doubt their beliefs. Phat writes:
Nope. All you ever do is repeat that opinion. You never make the slightest effort to back it up.
And as I have tried to convince you time and time agin, all "Gods(gods) are NOT equal. Phat writes:
Argument from popularity. Invalid. PRATT.
If we had numerous believers in Big Foot and the Spaghetti Monster running around behaving like Biblical Christians... Phat writes:
Which is a fallacy. I invoke the appeal to popularity"I've been to Moose Jaw, now I can die." -- John Wing
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18348 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
jar writes: I'll bite. I feel like challenging myself this morning. My feelings for the Lord are strong, which gives me the courage to question my beliefs. Perhaps it is intangibles such as "feelings for the Lord" that led to so many inferences gleaned from other inferences which accompanied reports of reports in the monolith known as Biblical Christianity. I am reluctantly trying to approach these questions and self assertions from different angles. Perhaps I actually can learn to think...but only if it helps others more than the way that the apologists taught me to do. Look at your accounts of your experience Phat.What parts are actual reporting and what parts are pure inference? "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain " *** “…far from science having buried God, not only do the results of science point towards his existence, but the scientific enterprise itself is validated by his existence.”- Dr.John Lennox “The whole war between the atheist and the theist comes down to this: the atheist believes a 'what' created the universe; the theist believes a 'who' created the universe.” “The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” — Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18348 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
Finally we are getting somewhere!
OK here we go, Oh Saskatchewan Contrarian.
Phat writes:
If your rules were accepted as valid, NOBODY could be a believer.They're not "my" rules. They're THE rules - and YOU follow them in every instance but one. And that One represents my stand. You cant simply expect me to critically evaluate the object of my faith/character of my belief as if He were just another Harry Potter character. I mean...I am reluctantly trying...but I am not in any way comfortable with non belief.
If everybody FOLLOWED the rules in every instance, nobody would be a believer - and that would be a good thing. At last! You said what I have wanted you to say. So explain to me why it would be a good thing if we had a world where nobody believed in any Gods/Sources (which I think is impossible, by the way) and everyone was simply empathetic, humanistic, and followed a universal inclusive message that was love. self-sacrificial, and geared towards universal love. I mean, it sounds great! I need to ask myself why I resist it.
Phat writes:
What puzzles me is why you reject the research and arguments of the apologists...Again, for the same reasons YOU reject the research and arguments of the Santa-believers. Nope. You cant lump my one stand...my one belief which I stand on...and throw it in a pile with Santa believers and flat earth believers and Harry Potter believers.
Phat writes:
And you cant show why *we* only imagine God and never actually experienced an encounter with Him.And AGAIN you say nothing to actually back up your position. SHOW us the difference between your god and all the other gods. Showing you the difference will likely involve a lifetime. The Spirit only moves in people. Perhaps you too have it(Holy Spirit) and don't realize that you do...yet you do good. I will say that if you had the spaghetti monster spiritor you followed the Stan Lee spirit of creative imagination we could only judge whether they were extensions of the Holy Spirit(of which there is but One) based on what you did with what you had.
ringo writes: The beliefs are sound. It is the human dogma and inferences from generations of apologists that are empty. (see? You won that one. But we have yet to prove that all apologists are dishonest)
I recognized that the beliefs were empty, so I dropped them. Phat writes:
If all evidence were objective, all people would have no choice but to question and doubt their beliefs.ringo writes: I will cautiously agree that many Nonsense. People ignore the evidence or reject the evidence. That doesn't make the evidence subjective. It makes the people fools. Phat writes:
And as I have tried to convince you time and time again, all "Gods(gods) are NOT equal.Nope. All you ever do is repeat that opinion. You never make the slightest effort to back it up. Play devils advocate a moment. Can it even be backed up? How can you make an argument defending one God over other Gods? Ravi Zacharias once wrote a book about it...but his credibility got shot to pieces, ironically...because he ended up following the wrong god and got busted and exposed for it.
Phat writes:
If we had numerous believers in Big Foot and the Spaghetti Monster running around behaving like Biblical Christians...Argument from popularity. Invalid. PRATT. WRONG. You want to throw this one away, but it is a valid argument. You cant defend relativity among many Gods while ignoring the fact that only one of them has an army of followers, evidence of changed lives, and many homeless getting fed, much spare change flowing, and positive creativity in general. My point is that *some* apologists and *some* Biblical Christians are very creative, empathetic, and useful. There are virtually no Big Foot believers doing anything. The assertion that Big Foot=Jesus is itself a PRATT.
Phat writes:
I invoke the appeal to popularityThis is a fallacy. If it is a fallacy for Biblical Christians it is a fallacy for non-believers. You don't get to claim that you all live in reality while we all live in fantasy...at least not without a better argument. Edited by Phat, : No reason given.Edited by Phat, : No reason given. Edited by Phat, : No reason given. "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain " *** “…far from science having buried God, not only do the results of science point towards his existence, but the scientific enterprise itself is validated by his existence.”- Dr.John Lennox “A God without wrath brought men without sin into a Kingdom without judgment through the ministrations of a Christ without a Cross.” “The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” — Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 441 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
Sure I can. A lot of us here have done that.
You cant simply expect me to critically evaluate the object of my faith/character of my belief as if He were just another Harry Potter character. Phat writes:
You should think about that and answer it for yourself. So explain to me why it would be a good thing if we had a world where nobody believed in any Gods/Sources By the way, Gods are not Sources. The human mind is the source of all gods.
Phat writes:
Yes I can. I've done it several times in this thread already. Why can't you give any coherent response?
You cant lump my one stand...my one belief which I stand on...and throw it in a pile with Santa believers and flat earth believers and Harry Potter believers. Phat writes:
Then you'd better start now when we've still got a little lifetime left.
Showing you the difference will likely involve a lifetime. Phat writes:
Copout.
The Spirit only moves in people. Phat writes:
We have a perfect score so far. Feel free to roll out the next victim.
But we have yet to prove that all apologists are dishonest Phat writes:
It has nothing to do with patience. Empty is empty; it doesn't take long to figure that out. What can take a long time is accepting what you know deep down is true. But I will also assert that some of us were more patient than you were and found substance in beliefs where you hastily found only emptiness. And I was not hasty. I've been thinking about this a lot longer than you have.
Phat writes:
If you can't back it up, that should be a strong indication that it isn't true.
Play devils advocate a moment. Can it even be backed up? Phat writes:
How can you make an argument defending Fred Flintstone over Homer Simpson? How would that argument be anything but empty?
How can you make an argument defending one God over other Gods? Phat writes:
False. Stupidly false. ... only one of them has an army of followers, evidence of changed lives, and many homeless getting fed, much spare change flowing, and positive creativity in general. ALL Gods have followers. Some of them have many more followers than yours.
Phat writes:
How so? It has never been refuted. 0<1000.
The assertion that Big Foot=Jesus is itself a PRATT. Phat writes:
Of course. If it is a fallacy for Biblical Christians it is a fallacy for non believers. And I'll remind you again that you are not a "Biblical Christian" since you reject the Bible as a "dusty old book".
Phat writes:
It's not a "claim". It's supported by evidence. "We" can all agree on what reality is, whether we're atheists or Christians or Jews or Muslims or whatever. You believers can't even agree on what your fantasy is like. You dont get to claim that you all live in reality while we all live in fantasy..."I've been to Moose Jaw, now I can die." -- John Wing
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18348 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
ringo writes: Speculation. You want this to be true yet you simply cannot prove it. Im telling you that God was around long before humans. (Or perhaps I should elaborate. One of the Gods was around long before humans. The rest of them we made up. By the way, Gods are not Sources. The human mind is the source of all gods. Edited by Phat, : No reason given."A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain " *** “…far from science having buried God, not only do the results of science point towards his existence, but the scientific enterprise itself is validated by his existence.”- Dr.John Lennox “The whole war between the atheist and the theist comes down to this: the atheist believes a 'what' created the universe; the theist believes a 'who' created the universe.” “The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” — Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 441 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
Nope. Conclusion based on evidence. Even you understand that the OTHER gods are made up in human minds.
ringo writes: Speculation. Gods are not Sources. The human mind is the source of all gods. Phat writes:
As I've told you many times, I do NOT just want it to be true. It would be a comfort to me if there was a real god watching over me - but there isn't. You want this to be true yet you simply cannot prove it. And I DO have evidence that gods are made up in human minds. See above. Edited by ringo, : No reason given."I've been to Moose Jaw, now I can die." -- John Wing
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
drlove Member (Idle past 821 days) Posts: 153 Joined: |
Belief is involved in the scientific method when that method is attempted to be applied to things that involve more than the natural laws the bind science.
In what is called science we often have disagreements. For example, in the US disagreements between doctors talking about the vaccine issue. Dr. Robert Malone: We've been watching Fauci lie for decadesIn the article we see that men of science argue opposite views.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17828 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
I think you should cite a more reliable source, and choose a better example. Even in this article it’s not alleged that there is any scientific disagreement.
Further, the article does not address anything beyond the bounds of science anyway.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8564 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 4.7 |
Fauci has the support of the world immunology community. The only detractors are the small vocal insurgents from the right.
As PaulK said this article does not highlight any dispute in science. It is a political hatchet job.Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dwise1 Member Posts: 5952 Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
Furthermore, that link is to WorldNetDaily, which Wikipedia describes thus:
quote: Not very promising.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17828 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
Hence my first point was “you should cite a more reliable source”. I’d rank even the Daily Mail above Wingnut Daily and I’d be very cautious about citing that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dwise1 Member Posts: 5952 Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
Belief is involved in the scientific method when that method is attempted to be applied to things that involve more than the natural laws the bind science. Which is to say, never. Because nobody who properly uses the scientific method would attempt to apply it to the supernatural. Attempting to apply the scientific method to the supernatural would constitute misuse and abuse of the scientific method. For a more complete discussion of this question, refer to a topic from back in 2007: So Just How is ID's Supernatural-based Science Supposed to Work? (SUM. MESSAGES ONLY). In it I posed the question of just how IDiots' reformed science was supposed to actually work. 396 message in total. No answer to my fundamental question of just how it is supposed to work.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8564 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 4.7
|
This kind of post Message 128 is curious to me. How can anyone be so wrong on so many levels in one post?
I know there are a lot of stupid people in this world but this one takes on the color of a targeted stupidity. My opinion: This message was never intended to be a stupid rip by some stupid person trying to make a lame science point. This message was intended to drop a bit of poison into the mind of the public. The reich-wing hates Dr. Fauci because the man does his job and calls out their bullshit. Disguise the drop of poison as a science thing in a science forum where it’s sure to be noticed and read. EvC is a small, but useful target for the eyes we attract. Remember this kind of insidious messaging is probably happening at lots of sites across the American tier of internet society. Pump it out drop by drop: Fauci lies, Covid lies, government lies. Besides Trump didn’t like him either. EvC, we have just been gaslighted. Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given. Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22504 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.9 |
ringo writes: ALL evidence is objective. I have a different take on this one. Observational evidence is only as objective as our efforts are successful at removing the human element. The more that is done, or the more people repeating the observation, then the more objective is a given piece of evidence. My favorite example of this is the Millikan oil drop experiment. The early experiments performed by Millikan measured an electron charge that was lower than the actual value, and those who repeated Millikan's experiment also obtained lower values, in part an effect of following the methods Millikan outlined, but also biasing the values they obtained towards Millikan's values. More people repeating the experiment introduced objectivity through experimental changes and/or improvements, and also through different perspectives, and over time the value became the one we accept today. --Percy
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024