Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   NOMA - Is this the answer?
Quetzal
Member (Idle past 5871 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 61 of 81 (18400)
09-27-2002 2:37 AM
Reply to: Message 60 by Minnemooseus
09-27-2002 1:30 AM


No disagreement with you Moose. It's probably a continuum, anyway.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by Minnemooseus, posted 09-27-2002 1:30 AM Minnemooseus has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by acmhttu001_2006, posted 09-30-2002 1:32 AM Quetzal has not replied

acmhttu001_2006
Inactive Member


Message 62 of 81 (18561)
09-30-2002 1:32 AM
Reply to: Message 61 by Quetzal
09-27-2002 2:37 AM


Like Moose's statement.
Sorry about not replying, I will reply to the other messages tomorrow. Just have been so busy. Hope everyone has had a great weekend. See you later.
------------------
Anne C. McGuire
Cell and Molecular, Mathematics, Piano and Vocal Performance Majors
Chemistry and Physics minors
Thanks and have a nice day

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Quetzal, posted 09-27-2002 2:37 AM Quetzal has not replied

gene90
Member (Idle past 3822 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 63 of 81 (19114)
10-05-2002 3:20 PM
Reply to: Message 55 by acmhttu001_2006
09-24-2002 11:29 PM


[QUOTE][B]That is true, not sure if God exists or does not exist.[/QUOTE]
[/B]
In that case, how can you call yourself a strong atheist?
The following quote is from Moose in this thread and it sums up the classifications pretty well, at least in the same way as I see them:
[QUOTE][B]I largly agree with your reasonings for this self appraisal, except, to me, a "fairly high confidence" would be more of a "medium atheist". The requirements for being a "strong atheist" would be an honest "absolute confidence" that there is no god. I don't believe that one with a rational mind can have such absolute confidence in dealing with such a nebulous concept as God's existance.[/QUOTE]
[/B]
I almost agree completely with his final sentence except I believe that a rational mind *could* have absolute confidence in the existance of a God or gods if that mind had a witness or beheld a manifestation (IE, if a god is real and proved its existance)
However neither luxury is possible for an atheist, therefore I agree to the extent that no rational mind can take up strong atheism.
[QUOTE][B]That is true, not sure if God exists or does not exist. But if he did, I would hate to be in your shoes when you get to "heaven" and he asks why you did not do a better job in convicing the rest of us.[/QUOTE]
[/B]
Fortunately, I am not held accountible for your decisions. If we were held accountible for everyone, nobody would go.
[This message has been edited by gene90, 10-05-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by acmhttu001_2006, posted 09-24-2002 11:29 PM acmhttu001_2006 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by nos482, posted 10-05-2002 3:36 PM gene90 has not replied

nos482
Inactive Member


Message 64 of 81 (19115)
10-05-2002 3:36 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by gene90
10-05-2002 3:20 PM


Originally posted by gene90:
I almost agree completely with his final sentence except I believe that a rational mind *could* have absolute confidence in the existance of a God or gods if that mind had a witness or beheld a manifestation (IE, if a god is real and proved its existance)
And what would constitute credible, verifible, or unbiased prove of this and still be considered rational?
However neither luxury is possible for an atheist, therefore I agree to the extent that no rational mind can take up strong atheism.
Unlike you they can go by empirical evidence. All you can claim is your so-called "spirit witness". I know which one I would concider to be more rational.
Fortunately, I am not held accountible for your decisions. If we were held accountible for everyone, nobody would go.
Accountability is irrelevant since everyone gets into heaven if your god's love has any real meaning or no one does.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by gene90, posted 10-05-2002 3:20 PM gene90 has not replied

gene90
Member (Idle past 3822 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 65 of 81 (19116)
10-05-2002 3:37 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by Quetzal
09-25-2002 2:49 AM


[QUOTE][B]I would venture that any religion that had irrefutable evidence (or at least evidence too concrete to ignore) of the existence of their particular deity would rapidly become dominant. [/QUOTE]
[/B]
That may or may not be true. I suspect that may be the case but I'm hesitant to announce agreement. Not when there are websites like http://www.fixedearth.com .
[QUOTE][B]I don't say I "know" there is no god. OTOH, I do say that the complete absence of confirming evidence and lack of any compelling logic (i.e., no phenomena examined to date have given any reason to drag in extra complications like deities), gives me fairly high confidence to state: "There is no god".[/QUOTE]
[/B]
I agree. I don't think people should have to believe in any deities just because they need them to make the numbers fit because the violates the concept of free will. There is also a very, very bad historical precedent.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by Quetzal, posted 09-25-2002 2:49 AM Quetzal has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by nos482, posted 10-05-2002 5:25 PM gene90 has replied

nos482
Inactive Member


Message 66 of 81 (19130)
10-05-2002 5:25 PM
Reply to: Message 65 by gene90
10-05-2002 3:37 PM


quote:
Originally posted by gene90:
That may or may not be true. I suspect that may be the case but I'm hesitant to announce agreement. Not when there are websites like http://www.fixedearth.com .
People will believe in the craziest things.
I agree. I don't think people should have to believe in any deities just because they need them to make the numbers fit because the violates the concept of free will. There is also a very, very bad historical precedent.
Free will is not as free as we would like to make ourselves believe it is. We are still ruled by many of our instincts. As I've stated before EVERYTHING we do is to prove our fitness to reproduce to the opposite sex. Sex is everything. To deny this is to deny one's humanity as well.
Put in UBB endquote code - Adminnemooseus
[This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 10-05-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by gene90, posted 10-05-2002 3:37 PM gene90 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by gene90, posted 10-05-2002 7:01 PM nos482 has replied

gene90
Member (Idle past 3822 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 67 of 81 (19134)
10-05-2002 7:01 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by nos482
10-05-2002 5:25 PM


[QUOTE][B]We are still ruled by many of our instincts. As I've stated before EVERYTHING we do is to prove our fitness to reproduce to the opposite sex. Sex is everything. To deny this is to deny one's humanity as well.[/QUOTE]
[/B]
That's not necessarily true. Vows of celibacy and even instances of self-castration show this is not the case.
Also, it seems to me that the notion of not being able to keep one's pants on being the definition of humanity is a less-than-noble outlook on the world. Surely you could think up something more pc?
[This message has been edited by gene90, 10-05-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by nos482, posted 10-05-2002 5:25 PM nos482 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 68 by TrueCreation, posted 10-05-2002 7:11 PM gene90 has not replied
 Message 69 by nos482, posted 10-05-2002 9:30 PM gene90 has replied

TrueCreation
Inactive Member


Message 68 of 81 (19135)
10-05-2002 7:11 PM
Reply to: Message 67 by gene90
10-05-2002 7:01 PM


--Took some of those words right out of my mouth, I had second thoughts about whether I should respond to another nos post an hour ago. I was going to gargle something up somewhere along the line of artificial vs. natural selection. Didn't exactly look forward to what other flames would result from clicking the 'Submit Now' button.
------------------
[This message has been edited by TrueCreation, 10-05-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by gene90, posted 10-05-2002 7:01 PM gene90 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by nos482, posted 10-05-2002 9:32 PM TrueCreation has not replied

nos482
Inactive Member


Message 69 of 81 (19148)
10-05-2002 9:30 PM
Reply to: Message 67 by gene90
10-05-2002 7:01 PM


Originally posted by gene90:
That's not necessarily true. Vows of celibacy and even instances of self-castration show this is not the case.
People also comit suicide as well. Self-hatred can be a strong emotion as well. They do the population a favor by taking themselves out of the gene pool. Though, I don't know how much about these vows of celibacy actually work considering recent events which have come to light. The Church can't hide too much nowadays and get away with it like to use to. I've heard of children who would tell on their priest and the child would be the one who got in trouble and punished.
Also, it seems to me that the notion of not being able to keep one's pants on being the definition of humanity is a less-than-noble outlook on the world. Surely you could think up something more pc?
Like it or not that is what makes us what we are. Political correctness is for fools, IMO. The motivation for all we do is basically just to impress the opposite sex.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by gene90, posted 10-05-2002 7:01 PM gene90 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by TrueCreation, posted 10-05-2002 9:43 PM nos482 has replied
 Message 73 by gene90, posted 10-07-2002 8:46 PM nos482 has replied

nos482
Inactive Member


Message 70 of 81 (19149)
10-05-2002 9:32 PM
Reply to: Message 68 by TrueCreation
10-05-2002 7:11 PM


quote:
Originally posted by TrueCreation:
--Took some of those words right out of my mouth, I had second thoughts about whether I should respond to another nos post an hour ago. I was going to gargle something up somewhere along the line of artificial vs. natural selection. Didn't exactly look forward to what other flames would result from clicking the 'Submit Now' button.

Self-deception is a powerful instinct as well.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by TrueCreation, posted 10-05-2002 7:11 PM TrueCreation has not replied

TrueCreation
Inactive Member


Message 71 of 81 (19151)
10-05-2002 9:43 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by nos482
10-05-2002 9:30 PM


"They do the population a favor by taking themselves out of the gene pool."
--Unless you can supply us with data which suggests suicidal affliction is a genetic disorder, this is nonsense. And even still. There are many with qualities which greatly outweigh others in brilliance who may also have a retardation in other characteristical properties. Albert Einstein is a prime example of this.
"Like it or not that is what makes us what we are. Political correctness is for fools, IMO. The motivation for all we do is basically just to impress the opposite sex."
--Reality is no longer all about the survival of the fittest population, humanity has an abstract mind and with it comes other interests. There is much that I do, for instance, which is attemptedly for the better of humanity itself, and they aren't really 'get the gurl' obligations.
------------------
[This message has been edited by TrueCreation, 10-05-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by nos482, posted 10-05-2002 9:30 PM nos482 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by nos482, posted 10-06-2002 8:20 AM TrueCreation has not replied

nos482
Inactive Member


Message 72 of 81 (19162)
10-06-2002 8:20 AM
Reply to: Message 71 by TrueCreation
10-05-2002 9:43 PM


Originally posted by TrueCreation:
--Unless you can supply us with data which suggests suicidal affliction is a genetic disorder, this is nonsense.
I didn't say that, but yes it can be genetic.
http://www.suicide-parasuicide.rumos.com/...SSIVE%20DISORDER?
And even still. There are many with qualities which greatly outweigh others in brilliance who may also have a retardation in other characteristical properties. Albert Einstein is a prime example of this.
He didn't ty to kill, or castrate, himself.
--Reality is no longer all about the survival of the fittest population, humanity has an abstract mind and with it comes other interests.
Irrelevant.
There is much that I do, for instance, which is attemptedly for the better of humanity itself, and they aren't really 'get the gurl' obligations.
Women like a man who can show that he cares about others. It proves that he will more likely take better care of her children.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by TrueCreation, posted 10-05-2002 9:43 PM TrueCreation has not replied

gene90
Member (Idle past 3822 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 73 of 81 (19254)
10-07-2002 8:46 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by nos482
10-05-2002 9:30 PM


[QUOTE][B]They do the population a favor by taking themselves out of the gene pool.[/QUOTE]
[/B]
I take serious issue with the above. I think it qualifies as one of the more disturbing comments I've seen around here. I suggest you choose your words *much* more carefully in the future.
[QUOTE][B]People also comit suicide as well.[/QUOTE]
[/B]
And when people do it for religious reasons it shows that people aren't like animals hard-wired for survival. Even the most basic instincts can be overridden, including the sexdrive, and as you just pointed out, even self-preservation, the most important drive of all.
[This message has been edited by gene90, 10-07-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by nos482, posted 10-05-2002 9:30 PM nos482 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by nos482, posted 10-07-2002 8:55 PM gene90 has replied

nos482
Inactive Member


Message 74 of 81 (19257)
10-07-2002 8:55 PM
Reply to: Message 73 by gene90
10-07-2002 8:46 PM


Originally posted by gene90:
You have a history of saying disgusting and degenerate things in this forum but this takes the cake. What was going through your mind when you said that?
The truth is not always pretty.
And when people do it for religious reasons it shows that people aren't like animals hard-wired for survival.
Like bees, ants, and lemmings just to name a few?
Even the most basic instincts can be overridden, including the sexdrive, and as you just pointed out, even self-preservation, the most important drive of all.
I didn't say that we couldn't overcome them, only that we are ruled more by them than we like to believe. Even if we don't act on them directly they still influence us. We may not go out and tried to have sex with every person we see still doesn't mean that we aren't trying to prove our fitness to reproduce either even if it is on a subconscious level. That is how instinct works.
[This message has been edited by nos482, 10-07-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by gene90, posted 10-07-2002 8:46 PM gene90 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by gene90, posted 10-07-2002 9:02 PM nos482 has replied

gene90
Member (Idle past 3822 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 75 of 81 (19258)
10-07-2002 9:02 PM
Reply to: Message 74 by nos482
10-07-2002 8:55 PM


[QUOTE][B]The truth is not always pretty.[/QUOTE]
[/B]
Just because it isn't pretty doesn't make it true. Really now, we don't need genes carried by suicidal people? They are inferior by virtue of the way they died? Worse, you believe that the world is better *without* them? The arrogance in that remark, and the extreme
disregard for a substantial segment of humanity, is astounding.
[QUOTE][B]Like bees, ants, and lemmings just to name a few?[/QUOTE]
[/B]
Bees and ants are hive insects, all descended from one individual. By sacrificing themselves to defend the nest they are helping perpetuate their own genes. This is just pure Darwinism.
The whole lemming mass suicide thing is a crop of bull.
Did Disney Fake Lemming Suicide for 'White Wilderness'?
[QUOTE][B]I didn't say that we couldn't overcome them, only that we are ruled more by them than we like to believe.[/QUOTE]
[/B]
It seems like you've moved back a bit from your assertion that everything people do is for sex.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by nos482, posted 10-07-2002 8:55 PM nos482 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by nos482, posted 10-07-2002 10:20 PM gene90 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