dimreepr Posted June 16, 2018 Posted June 16, 2018 3 minutes ago, Endercreeper01 said: Not my most recent arguments... I'm still waiting for a proper response on an earlier post in this thread. Sorry missed that, ask again, please...
Endercreeper01 Posted June 16, 2018 Posted June 16, 2018 2 minutes ago, dimreepr said: Sorry missed that, ask again, please... Yet I await...
dimreepr Posted June 16, 2018 Posted June 16, 2018 1 minute ago, Endercreeper01 said: Yet I await... Ever had that moment? you know the one, the moment you realise you should have just shut TFU; well, maybe not at the time but certainly the following morning when you log in.
Endercreeper01 Posted June 16, 2018 Posted June 16, 2018 2 minutes ago, dimreepr said: Ever had that moment? you know the one, the moment you realise you should have just shut TFU; well, maybe not at the time but certainly the following morning when you log in. Not really, I'm not quite sure what you mean...
dimreepr Posted June 16, 2018 Posted June 16, 2018 1 minute ago, Endercreeper01 said: Not really, I'm not quite sure what you mean... The truth is only viewable by those that can see...
Endercreeper01 Posted June 16, 2018 Posted June 16, 2018 Just now, dimreepr said: The truth is only viewable by those that can see... I suppose so... I only try to be reasonable...
Bender Posted June 16, 2018 Posted June 16, 2018 1 hour ago, Endercreeper01 said: To say that such an observer does not exist is essential making the claim that "I" do not exist. Meaning, I would not be experiencing something because "I do not exist. I am clearly experiencing something, and so are you. I can't possibly not exist... There has to be some sort of conscious entity that is observing. I didn't say there is no observer/consciousness; I said there is no reason to assume it is a separate entity. In fact all evidence suggests that there isn't. 36 minutes ago, Endercreeper01 said: I'm only trying to use philosophical thinking in my arguments, though my reasoning is not always understood by others. It is understood just fine, possibly even better than you understand it yourself. We just don't clasify it as "reasoning" in the context of a science forum which requires evidence.
Strange Posted June 16, 2018 Posted June 16, 2018 40 minutes ago, Endercreeper01 said: I'm only trying to use philosophical thinking in my arguments Maybe you should try doing an introductory course in philosophy first. That will teach you the basic concepts of logical argument, critical thinking, etc. 41 minutes ago, Endercreeper01 said: Not my most recent arguments... I'm still waiting for a proper response on an earlier post in this thread. You are still ignoring the responses you have had. 13 minutes ago, Endercreeper01 said: I only try to be reasonable... You fail.
Endercreeper01 Posted June 16, 2018 Posted June 16, 2018 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Bender said: I didn't say there is no observer/consciousness; I said there is no reason to assume it is a separate entity. In fact all evidence suggests that there isn't. It is understood just fine, possibly even better than you understand it yourself. We just don't clasify it as "reasoning" in the context of a science forum which requires evidence. May I ask what evidence? It's rather difficult to describe or explain the observer in a way that everyone agrees with, although there should be some common understanding that you and I are both what could be described as observers/consciousness in some sense. 6 minutes ago, Strange said: You fail. It seems that I am not failing, seeing how none of my points are being addressed and are instead avoided. Edited June 16, 2018 by Endercreeper01
Strange Posted June 16, 2018 Posted June 16, 2018 12 minutes ago, Endercreeper01 said: It seems that I am not failing, seeing how none of my points are being addressed and are instead avoided. They have been addressed. Reported for trolling, preaching and being a general idiot.
Endercreeper01 Posted June 16, 2018 Posted June 16, 2018 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Strange said: They have been addressed. Reported for trolling, preaching and being a general idiot. Seriously? I have been trying to have an on topic discussion, while everyone else is avoiding arguing with my post. If anything, they should be the ones at fault for avoiding any argument with my post and going off topic. Edited June 16, 2018 by Endercreeper01
Moontanman Posted June 16, 2018 Posted June 16, 2018 (edited) 25 minutes ago, Endercreeper01 said: Seriously? I have been trying to have an on topic discussion, while everyone else is avoiding arguing with my post. If anything, they should be the ones at fault for avoiding any argument with my post and going off topic. Statement was off topic Edited June 16, 2018 by Moontanman Off Topic
swansont Posted June 16, 2018 Posted June 16, 2018 39 minutes ago, Endercreeper01 said: May I ask what evidence? ! Moderator Note No. That's not the topic of this thread. It's "What is faith?" Not existence, of either the self or a deity. 21 minutes ago, Endercreeper01 said: I have been trying to have an on topic discussion ! Moderator Note Not from where I'm sitting
iNow Posted June 16, 2018 Posted June 16, 2018 4 hours ago, Endercreeper01 said: I am yet to see any meaningful response to my post..... Have you considered opening your eyes? Many meaningful responses have been posted. The fact that you’re choosing to ignore and remain willfully ignorant of them doesn’t mean they don’t exist or haven’t been provided.
YaDinghus Posted June 16, 2018 Posted June 16, 2018 2 hours ago, Endercreeper01 said: I'm only trying to use philosophical thinking in my arguments, though my reasoning is not always understood by others. If your reasoning isn't understood by anyone, there are 2 possible explanations. Either you are a genius and everyone is stupid, or you are a moron. I'm not going to ask you what you think is more likely. You don't seem to grasp the concept of rhetorical questions.
Endercreeper01 Posted June 16, 2018 Posted June 16, 2018 (edited) 36 minutes ago, iNow said: Have you considered opening your eyes? Many meaningful responses have been posted. The fact that you’re choosing to ignore and remain willfully ignorant of them doesn’t mean they don’t exist or haven’t been provided. I was talking about a single post that I posted that I wasn't getting a proper response to. I have already been responding to such posts. 1 hour ago, swansont said: ! Moderator Note No. That's not the topic of this thread. It's "What is faith?" Not existence, of either the self or a deity. ! Moderator Note Not from where I'm sitting Are you going to address the off topic behavior of other posters on this thread? 17 minutes ago, YaDinghus said: If your reasoning isn't understood by anyone, there are 2 possible explanations. Either you are a genius and everyone is stupid, or you are a moron. I'm not going to ask you what you think is more likely. You don't seem to grasp the concept of rhetorical questions. It is not about my reasoning. I am discussing how reasoning can support faith and belief. Edited June 16, 2018 by Endercreeper01
koti Posted June 16, 2018 Posted June 16, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, Endercreeper01 said: ...I am discussing how reasoning can support faith and belief. Reasoning is not designed to support delusion. The only instance where I see justification is empathy towards people who are terminally ill and chose to live their last moments in delusion. I don’t see a reason to attempt to break their belief by reasoning in their last moments if thats what they chose. You don’t seem terminally ill to me Endercreeper01 so don’t worry, we’ll keep on adressing your delusions, fallacies and lack of coherence and lack of reasoning. Edited June 16, 2018 by koti
DrmDoc Posted June 16, 2018 Author Posted June 16, 2018 12 minutes ago, Endercreeper01 said: The topic is not about my reasoning, it is about how reasoning can support faith and belief. The topic is "What is faith" and why you have it. The "why" implies some of us may have reasons for having faith. Your reason appears to be what you believe is the absence of answers to questions you consider fundamental. In this way, you perceive faith as a bridge between what is known and what is unknown or unknowable. However, this perception merely shows how you use faith rather than how you define faith. By definition, faith is the antithesis of reason and religious faith is the antithesis of scientific methodology. Faith is belief without reason, basis, evidence, or need for same. Science and faith are not the same in that reason, reasoning and evidence are essential to the nature of science. Without same , it isn't science. There are reasons for the emergence of religious faith and those reasons may be tangible to believers. However, reason, reasoning and evidence aren't essential to the nature or foundation of religious faith. So my feeling is that the religious faithful visit science discussion sites to test their metal as an emulation of Daniel in the lions den. What they don't seem to perceive is that this confrontational desire to engage these websites is an expression, ironically, of their lack of faith. Their insecurity in their beliefs, IMO, compels a desire for confirmation akin to being surrounded by a pride of hungry lions yet remaining unscathed and steadfast in their faith.
Phi for All Posted June 16, 2018 Posted June 16, 2018 5 minutes ago, DrmDoc said: By definition, faith is the antithesis of reason and religious faith is the antithesis of scientific methodology. Faith is belief without reason, basis, evidence, or need for same. ! Moderator Note As the OP, this is the definition of the topic everyone should be using to base arguments on. If anyone has a different definition, then use a different word for it, and start a different thread. Any more circular reasoning will be circularly filed.
Endercreeper01 Posted June 16, 2018 Posted June 16, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, koti said: Reasoning is not designed to support delusion. The only instance where I see justification is empathy towards people who are terminally ill and chose to live their last moments in delusion. I don’t see a reason to attempt to break their belief by reasoning in their last moments if thats what they chose. You don’t seem terminally ill to me Endercreeper01 so don’t worry, we’ll keep on adressing your delusions, fallacies and lack of coherence and lack of reasoning. Delusion is quite a strong choice of words to describe faith. Faith does not have to be considered delusional. Edited June 16, 2018 by Endercreeper01
beecee Posted June 16, 2018 Posted June 16, 2018 12 hours ago, Endercreeper01 said: Philosophical thinking is also reason. Does it not have legitimacy as a way of finding answers to questions of existence? Has anyone yet informed you that "faith" is independent of "reason"? You may also be interested in the following.......https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reason#Evolution_of_reason Evolution of reason: " A species could benefit greatly from better abilities to reason about, predict and understand the world. French social and cognitive scientists Dan Sperber and Hugo Mercier argue that there could have been other forces driving the evolution of reason. They point out that reasoning is very difficult for humans to do effectively, and that it is hard for individuals to doubt their own beliefs (confirmation bias). Reasoning is most effective when it is done as a collective – as demonstrated by the success of projects like science. They suggest that there are not just individual, but group selection pressures at play. Any group that managed to find ways of reasoning effectively would reap benefits for all its members, increasing their fitness. This could also help explain why humans, according to Sperber, are not optimized to reason effectively alone. Their argumentative theory of reasoning claims that reason may have more to do with winning arguments than with the search for the truth."
koti Posted June 16, 2018 Posted June 16, 2018 1 hour ago, Endercreeper01 said: Delusion is quite a strong choice of words to describe faith. I agree. Quote Faith does not have to be considered delusional. Glad you brought this up. All religious faith is by definition based on lack of evidence. I agree that it is questionable if we can use a medical term to describe faith, I’m leaning towards a position that we could. When you look at it from a scientific point of view, there isn’t much difference between a psychotic disorder and faith - they are both routed in the same evidence-less delusion. After all, how can we quantify that talking and seeing invisible people (schizophrenia) is different from seeing and talking to invisible gods?
Endercreeper01 Posted June 16, 2018 Posted June 16, 2018 (edited) 11 minutes ago, koti said: I agree. Glad you brought this up. All religious faith is by definition based on lack of evidence. I agree that it is questionable if we can use a medical term to describe faith, I’m leaning towards a position that we could. When you look at it from a scientific point of view, there isn’t much difference between a psychotic disorder and faith - they are both routed in the same evidence-less delusion. After all, how can we quantify that talking and seeing invisible people (schizophrenia) is different from seeing and talking to invisible gods? That is a very harsh view of faith. Faith in a god is nowhere near comparable to schizophrenia. Such a comparison is an extreme overstatement. Not having any physical evidence to support it does not make it immediately false, nor does it make a belief in such delusional. You can't make the claim that a belief in a god is delusional. Such a claim represents a very extreme view. It is harsh enough to sound as if it was filled with hatred and contempt towards the mere concept of faith. Edited June 16, 2018 by Endercreeper01 2
Prometheus Posted June 16, 2018 Posted June 16, 2018 2 minutes ago, koti said: I’m leaning towards a position that we could. When you look at it from a scientific point of view, there isn’t much difference between a psychotic disorder and faith Mental illness is defined in terms behavioural or mental dysfunction. This functioning is usually assessed in terms of interactions with and deviations from social norms. Given the ubiquity of religious faith in the human condition and the fact that the vast majority of such people can navigate life, i think equivocations of faith to mental illness are not only inaccurate but inflammatory.
beecee Posted June 16, 2018 Posted June 16, 2018 9 hours ago, Endercreeper01 said: @beecee hardly responded to any of my main points in that post. you said..... 18 hours ago, Endercreeper01 said: There is still much left unexplained by science, including the nature of consciousness. Evolution does not explain how it is possible for a consciousness to exist out of brain matter. Consciousness is a major hole in scientific thought that is simply not being properly addressed. It's set aside instead of being treated as the hole in scientific thought that it is. I replied....... 16 hours ago, beecee said: I just said that But that's no excuse to imply some unsupported myth. referring to this extract in my post addressed to you thus..... 19 hours ago, beecee said: Where did the BB come from and why? As yet we can't be sure, but some reasonable speculative science answers are available...In essence, no need for faith in any higher power. 16 hours ago, beecee said: Obviously it does because we are an example. Of course it is! We just do not have any scientific answers as yet. 100 years ago we were not aware of how the elements were created....nor what mechanism drove the Sun and Stars. The first sentence above was in reply to your statement that evolution did not explain consciousness....Obviously since evolution is indisputable, and we are conscious, this consciousness seems to be a step in the evolutionary ladder. The second statement was in reply to your claim that consciousness is not being properly addressed. Perhaps your denial that I had answered your questions/statements, was more a reaction in giving you a history lesson as to how far science has taken us and at the same time, how it has demolished any need for baseless faith and hope in mythical situations? 3 minutes ago, Endercreeper01 said: That is a very harsh view of faith. You can't make the claim that a belief in a god is delusional. Such a claim represents a very extreme view. It is harsh enough to sound as if it was filled with hatred and contempt towards the mere concept of faith. Let me soften his approach then. Faith, and hope in some extraordinary higher power, is more to do with individuals wanting and needing comfort and solace, and a desire for some purpose in their life and being terrified of the fact that one day they will be nothing more then an empty carcass, left to decompose and in time be scattered amongst the stars from whence he or she, along with all of us came.
Recommended Posts