Register | Sign In

Understanding through Discussion

EvC Forum active members: 48 (9179 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,255 Year: 5,512/9,624 Month: 537/323 Week: 34/143 Day: 7/17 Hour: 0/4

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Author Topic:   Can't ID be tested AT ALL?
Suspended Member (Idle past 5965 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006

Message 188 of 304 (317378)
06-03-2006 10:06 PM
Reply to: Message 186 by crashfrog
06-03-2006 12:01 AM

Re: What IC means and what it doesn't.
There you are crashfrog, I thought I'd run you back to the nipple...
Did the rest of you see the conversation elsewhere?
http://EvC Forum: What are you? EvC poll -->EvC Forum: What are you? EvC poll
Posts 103 through 121 (maybe more)

Any biters in the stream?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 186 by crashfrog, posted 06-03-2006 12:01 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 189 by Belfry, posted 06-03-2006 10:22 PM Rob has not replied
 Message 190 by crashfrog, posted 06-03-2006 10:55 PM Rob has replied

Suspended Member (Idle past 5965 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006

Message 191 of 304 (317420)
06-04-2006 12:06 AM
Reply to: Message 190 by crashfrog
06-03-2006 10:55 PM

Re: What IC means and what it doesn't.

<"Those who cannot be defeated intellectualy by NWR and instead speak with precision... will be silenced by NWR">
Nonesense? Why it was the 'sense' that scared you off my friend.
You don't believe in sense. The irony (and a fatal contradiction) is that you try to make 'sense' of that with all kinds of brilliant maneuvering.
You believe in what you do not know (by your own philosophical absurdity). Whereas some of us believe in what we do know. If we bring faith into the picture, Jesus did not come to inspire 'belief', but to give sight to the blind.
Don't get me wrong, you are free to have faith in evolution. You just have to believe in things that make no sense. And since all information is only abstraction to you (as we discussed in the other thread), you are free to make it (abstraction) up as you go.
I can understand where you are coming from. As you are now, so once was I...
You said, "You're conflating a number of seperate concepts that really have nothing to do with each other. For instance, an "abstraction" is not the same as a "lie." Many abstractions are true.
A book contains no information if no one is able to read it. Information is simply an arrangement of matter - an abstraction - that causes changes in our brains, through our senses, that we recognize as information. If that information happens to be a true statement about the world, it's not because of anything the statement contains in itself; it's because we all have rules about how to create statements that improve the odds that they'll be true. We call those rules "reason."
And, no, I'm not condradicting myself. My statements are both abstractions and true."
And I replied, "A book 'cannot exist' if 'no-one' is able to read it, Because 'no-one' was able to write it. At least, not unless we create an abstraction to imagine such a place.
All lie's are abstractions! Imaginations and inventions. Imposters!
Stop trying to '''''prove''''' abstractions to me please, lest you defeat yourself.
With the Sword of the counsellor, Rob
Now, this is a forum deticated to a controversial subject. I would like to assert that on one side of the battle, we have individuals (like yourself) who like very much to bully the opposition by declaring that their arguments are abstractions, inferring that there is no truth.
Then, with the majority of popular science (watch out for anything 'pop') on your side, you claim to promote a philosophy that is in fact true, for the purpose of denying truth.
It is far too obvious for you to see, that things are far simpler than you'd like them to be. What is a delight to me, is that within that simplicity, is an infinite sea of knowledge. It is knowable (hence the 'know' in both terms). It is coherent. It is testable. It is based on fact. It is not just believable to suit an agenda, but is in fact the only worldview that forces you to give up your agenda, hence it's unpopular stigma!
You talk about books that don't exist, I talk about the one that existed before creation.
Here is an example of 'reason', 'knowledge', 'light', 'understanding' etc (All synonomous terms):
John 1:1-4
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of men.
9 The true light that gives light to every man was coming into the world. 10 He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. 11 He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. 12 Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God-- 13 children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband's will, but born of God. 14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
Sorry for the sermon, but without 'reason', all of this talk is simply abstraction, Rob
Rob, this is both off topic and also on the science side. If you have scientific evidence to present, fine, but sermons carry no weight over here.
Edited by AdminNWR, : message off-topic
Edited by Rob, : Extreme displeasure with arrogance and a lack of willingness to tolerate it.
Edited by Rob, : oops...
Edited by AdminJar, : No reason given.

Any biters in the stream?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 190 by crashfrog, posted 06-03-2006 10:55 PM crashfrog has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:

Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024