100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
|
Topic:
On belief...
|
|
Religion contains belief, but I would not say that there is sufficient reason to believe that religion is all about belief. no it was me that would say that. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
On belief...
|
|
Belief is all too often attached to religion. religion is all about belief. one must beblieve there is a god as such a concept cannot even be theorized much less established as fact. when i lost my belief in god i concluded that to believe anything i senseless. afterall, the two people i trusted most, my parents, led me to my senseless belief. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
On belief...
|
|
For one who claims to hold no belief jrbogie, the statements that you're making are chock full of presupposition. oh, i often presupose. but hold no beliefs. huge difference. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
On belief...
|
|
Here is an absolutely certain statement that is true of all humans who speak common language. One cannot take another at their word unless they trust.  not so. i've often taken people at their word who i did not know well enough to form a position of trust. i think that's called the benefit of the doubt. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
On belief...
|
|
Good judgment is not according to anyone, Pan. Good judgment comes from an accurate understanding. we all don't agree on what is acurate understanding. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Iran is a different place with different laws. People who live there need to follow said laws or move! i've often thought the same about christians or any other god fearing faithful. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
On belief...
|
|
nope. just my reasoning.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
iran is a muslim nation. imagine if the US was really the christian nation that so many god fearing folks here profess was what the founding fathers intended. therein lies the peril in which humanity must exists with religious dogma so prevelant that laws are shaped around it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
On belief...
|
|
there is no ABSOLUTE certainty and i need not refer to an internet site to realize that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i've protested and boycotted on wall street. dumped many of my equity holdings long ago. protest with cash now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We all hate the same things, huh. and here i've never used the word 'hate' as regards anything. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
On belief...
|
|
By the way, I do not make up the rules of logic/philosophy, I just do my best to follow them and point them out when necessary. we all make up our own rules of logic/philosophy. you simply insist on playing by your rules while rejecting the notion that others may follow a different set of rules. what is a persons philosophy if not his own notions derived from his own thinking supported by his own life experiences? must i agree with the logic/philosophies of augustine, thomas aquinas, hitler, muhamed simply because they've made known how they came to their conclusions? that's what you fail to get. you just cannot seem to fathom that someone else just might not adhere to the same reasoning process as you. so you resort to rediculing their reasoning seemingly thinking, 'believing' as you'd say, that such a debate tactic somehow raises your reasoning process on high above all others. it never has that effect, of course, but i see it often on the forums. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
On belief...
Edited by
jrbogie
on
Wed 09/28/11 02:11 AM
|
|
Now, here's another problem I see. It is one grounded upon behavioral expectation. If another makes statements which do not hold up to stringent critical thinking processes(logic/reason) while in the midst of objecting and/or debating to statements that I've made, then they ought expect criticism in return. I am actively practicing and engaging in critical/analytical philosophy, and this is a philosophy forum. When engaged in philosophical discourse, if another's statements logically lead to absurd, unintelligible, nonsensical, self-contradictory, and/or counterintuitive conclusions, I will point it out as clearly as I know how. That's one part of doing philosophy, and a crucial one for building and/or maintaining a coherent set of thoughts/beliefs about the world and/or ourselves. It is also crucial for not assenting to falsehood or likely falsehood. of course "stringent critical thinking processes [logic/reason] varies among individuals, no. your falsehoods are not likely my falsehoods. Yet another problem here is one of interpretation of facts/events. I do not aim at ridicule. You've accused me of intentionally proposing questions/dialogue for the intent of ridiculing another. This is an allegation that you are not equipped to be able to make about me. i'm eqquped to make any allegation i choose to make about you or anybody else. there is no question that you believe that that is the case, afterall you've stated it clearly enough. Following your earlier statements, I'm inclined to think that you believe that you know this, because you've experienced it and equate experience and knowledge. Well, that notion is false. Knowledge cannot be false. It cannot be knowledge. It is therefore, false belief. Now, in order for you to accept that, you must first trust the source. Evidently, that could be a problem in this case. Nonetheless, it is a requirement for taking another at their word. I'm telling you jrbogie, I am not ridiculing you personally. I'm merely being very critical of what is being stated/claimed. There is a huge difference. oh, i'm all to familiar with false beliefs posing as knowledge. christianity for instance. the sources you trust differ from the sources i trust. you ridicule many here personally. So here are the choices... 1. You accept the notion that you're mistaken about another's intent, based upon the testimony of the other. 2. You do not and continue to hold a false belief. you don't get to limit my choices. i've one that you neglected to mention. i can believe nothing. I cannot tell you what to do, nor would I. All I can say, is that your interpretation of what has transpired here in this thread and perhaps others is lacking in truth somewhere along the line. I am sorry you feel that way. no doubt my interpretations differ from yours as does what i find to be lacking. but no need to be sorry. i'm here for my entertainment and amusement and this thread has provided both. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
On belief...
|
|
from the get go you've been doing your best to tear down anybody's thoughts on belief who sees the topic from a different perspective than yours. This is not true. I'm prone to assent to anothers view, but it requires meeting the same strict criterion that I hold my own to. That's nothing special, really. I mean, what I state passes through the same "tearing down" mechanisms. That is why it interests me to hear another out. I need not agree afterwards, even if I'd like to at times. The accusation of ridiculing another is unfounded, I assure you. ah, so it's YOUR strict criteria that determines what is and is not redicule. i can assure you MY strict criteria differs greately. the accusation is definitely founded according to MY strict criteria. but i wasn't asking. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not to mention America was founded as a Christian Nation. not so in the least. nowhere do i see the word christian in the constitution. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
as regards flying, magnetic or what we call "whisky" compasses are pretty much becoming a thing of the past. with the advent of computers and particularly gps a modern airliner does not even have a compass that will point towards magnetic north. even emergency compasses no longer dangle from the windshield while bobbing around in a fluid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
On belief...
|
|
moreso hearing another out and then ridiculing whatever thinking differs from your own. you began this thread and, if i recall correctly, asked for other's thoughts on the topic of belief. from the get go you've been doing your best to tear down anybody's thoughts on belief who sees the topic from a different perspective than yours. fine with me. i find enjoyment and amusement in these forums much because of folks who begin threads such as this seemingly to encourage an exchange of viewpoints on topics of interest to them when all they really want is to have a platform for shouting yout their own view. i'll dive head first right in to such a thread just to see how far it'll go beating that same drum but if you've so little regard, much less respect, about how other people think, why ask for thoughts? just more fodder for ridicule?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
On belief...
|
|
I still do not find that that constitutes being an attack on her person. of course not. i would never suggest what YOU find. it's me that finds that it constitutes a personal attack. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
yes, in colorado your compass will point about seven dergrees east of true north if i remember correctly. as mangnetic north continues it's shift that will change but your compass will always point directly toward magnetic north. think "west is best, east is least" or add the deviation error when the compass points west of true north and subtract, seven degrees in your case, to correct an east variation. so if you want to go towards the north pole, instead of heading 360 degrees on your compass you'd pick up a heading of 353 degrees.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i don't think "science" has the authority to say no to anything as regards public education.
|
|
|
|
|
Previous
