The Cellar  

Go Back   The Cellar > Main > Philosophy

Philosophy Religions, schools of thought, matters of importance and navel-gazing

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-12-2008, 12:05 AM   #1
xoxoxoBruce
The future is unwritten
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 71,105
Since you're the only person I've ever heard say a bird comes from a cinder block, I have to wonder about your thought process.

If I remember correctly, you are the one saying, "that large swaths of the population hold unfathomable beliefs". If they are unfathomable to you, but you choose to deride and belittle them anyway, that's not debate, that's ignorance.
__________________
The descent of man ~ Nixon, Friedman, Reagan, Trump.
xoxoxoBruce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2008, 01:25 AM   #2
Phage0070
Snooty Borg
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce View Post
Since you're the only person I've ever heard say a bird comes from a cinder block, I have to wonder about your thought process.
On what grounds to you disparage my cinder block, yet tout your magic sky wizard? After all, both have as much hard evidence to support their creative abilities, but many more would acknowledge the existence of my block than your wizard.

By the way, you are using a straw man argument here. The block analogy was intended to show how unreasoning belief leads to absurd consequences; attempting to attribute it as the core of my argument is a fallacy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce View Post
If I remember correctly, you are the one saying, "that large swaths of the population hold unfathomable beliefs". If they are unfathomable to you, but you choose to deride and belittle them anyway, that's not debate, that's ignorance.
Again, this is a straw man. I never said that their beliefs were unfathomable; rather, you implied that they were and I objected. My original proposal stated that their beliefs were completely fathomable, and critically flawed.

Allow me to quote you:
Quote:
Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce View Post
…for assuming you know what that large swath of the population thinks.
Here you basically state that I cannot possibly understand common beliefs, and now less than an hour later you are trying to attribute *your* statement to me; and then ridicule me for it! Either you need to work on reading comprehension or you are purposefully attempting to use logical errors to support your position.
Phage0070 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2008, 11:56 AM   #3
xoxoxoBruce
The future is unwritten
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 71,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phage0070 View Post
On what grounds to you disparage my cinder block, yet tout your magic sky wizard? After all, both have as much hard evidence to support their creative abilities, but many more would acknowledge the existence of my block than your wizard.
You say the bird came from a cinder block, with no evidence. I said the bird evolved from dinosaurs, for which there is evidence.
The fact that I also believe in God, doesn't alter the evidence.
You also make the assertion that God is a man and God is in the sky, which I did not... another assumption on your part about what other people think.
Quote:
By the way, you are using a straw man argument here. The block analogy was intended to show how unreasoning belief leads to absurd consequences; attempting to attribute it as the core of my argument is a fallacy.
No, the cinder block is your strawman.
Quote:
Again, this is a straw man. I never said that their beliefs were unfathomable; rather, you implied that they were and I objected. My original proposal stated that their beliefs were completely fathomable, and critically flawed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phlage0070
Are you suggesting that large swaths of the population hold unfathomable beliefs?
You're the one that described them as unfathomable, not I.
Quote:
Here you basically state that I cannot possibly understand common beliefs, and now less than an hour later you are trying to attribute *your* statement to me; and then ridicule me for it! Either you need to work on reading comprehension or you are purposefully attempting to use logical errors to support your position.
First you say I "basically" made a statement I didn't. Secondly, above I've shown it was your statement that introduced "unfathomable".
Your basic problem is believing that all people of faith, subscribe to a set of "common beliefs" you have cataloged in your head.
This pigeon, among others, don't fit that hole.
__________________
The descent of man ~ Nixon, Friedman, Reagan, Trump.
xoxoxoBruce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2008, 01:00 PM   #4
Phage0070
Snooty Borg
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce View Post
You say the bird came from a cinder block, with no evidence. I said the bird evolved from dinosaurs, for which there is evidence.
The fact that I also believe in God, doesn't alter the evidence.
Either you are comparing apples to oranges here, or you are saying that you never attribute things to God without evidence. Therefore, if you cannot prove the existence of God (something that would be required to draw a causal relationship) then you must never attribute anything to God. If you do indeed believe in an undetectable entity which does absolutely nothing I must confess confusion as to your fondness toward such a belief.

Quote:
Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce View Post
You're the one that described them as unfathomable, not I.
First you say I "basically" made a statement I didn't. Secondly, above I've shown it was your statement that introduced "unfathomable".
Allow me to summarize the gist of our exchange (as I see it).
Me: Faith-based people operate in this way, which is flawed in this manner.
You: You are foolish to think you can understand what those people believe.
Me: Are you saying I cannot understand what they believe, or that what they believe is inherently impossible to understand? Either way I disagree.
You: You are the one that described them as impossible to understand, not I.
Me: …the hell?

Quote:
Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce View Post
This pigeon, among others, don't fit that hole.
The crux of my statement is that holding a belief that is not based on proof, or “faith” as it is commonly called, is inherently flawed. I support such a claim through ‘reductio ad absurdum’ or “reduction to the absurd,” a well-known style of logical argument.

At this point you have claimed my argument does not apply to you because your beliefs are different. Unfortunately, at this point your beliefs are also *secret* which inhibits my response. I request that you explain exactly what you believe, thus fleshing out your position into more than “just cuz.”
Phage0070 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2008, 01:45 PM   #5
xoxoxoBruce
The future is unwritten
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 71,105
OK, let me cut through the tangents.

You don't believe in God. That is your right and I couldn't care less.

but, when you say;
"A faith-based person concludes that God made it,.."
"What astonishes me the most is that society functions as well as it does with large swaths of the population choosing to be selectively bat-shit crazy."
"...you choose to fill in reality from your imagination..."

it shows that you have decided, that billions of people must think and act in a manner you have predetermined. That is bat-shit crazy.

You can't understand why faith and science don't have to be mutually exclusive.
It appears, because you've heard some people rail against one or the other, probably in the evolution debate, you to have decided that everyone has to choose a side.
That "fer me or agin me" attitude is offensive to me, and all rational people.
__________________
The descent of man ~ Nixon, Friedman, Reagan, Trump.
xoxoxoBruce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2008, 02:28 PM   #6
Phage0070
Snooty Borg
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce View Post
…it shows that you have decided, that billions of people must think and act in a manner you have predetermined. That is bat-shit crazy.
Nonsense! I specifically stated that my criticism was directed toward faith-based people; if they are not basing their beliefs on faith then it is your error in concluding I was speaking about them. If I was criticizing people who drive cars then it would not be valid for you to object that many people ride bikes; I’m not talking about them!

Quote:
Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce View Post
That "fer me or agin me" attitude is offensive to me, and all rational people.
Now hold on, you *just* said that it is crazy to decide that billions of people must think and act in a manner you have predetermined. I should hope that “all rational people” number in the billions, so your hypocrisy here is astounding.


I think it is clear at this point you are unwilling or unable to address the argument in a logical manner. If you have issues with my reasoning by all means continue. Otherwise I ask that you keep insults or accusations against me personally out of the forum, especially those intended to confuse the issue or other readers.
Phage0070 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2008, 07:45 PM   #7
xoxoxoBruce
The future is unwritten
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 71,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phage0070 View Post
Nonsense! I specifically stated that my criticism was directed toward faith-based people; if they are not basing their beliefs on faith then it is your error in concluding I was speaking about them. If I was criticizing people who drive cars then it would not be valid for you to object that many people ride bikes; I’m not talking about them!.
Then you will have to define what you mean by "faith based people". I took it as all people of faith, ie, non atheists/agnostics. If I was mistaken, I apologize.

Quote:
Now hold on, you *just* said that it is crazy to decide that billions of people must think and act in a manner you have predetermined. I should hope that “all rational people” number in the billions, so your hypocrisy here is astounding.
There is no hypocrisy. Any rational person would be offended by you attacking/insulting them for their faith. The same for deriding what you predict they would think/do, when you have no way of knowing what they would think, or how they would act, in a given situation.

Quote:
I think it is clear at this point you are unwilling or unable to address the argument in a logical manner. If you have issues with my reasoning by all means continue.
I've already told you why I have no conflict between my faith and science.
You apparently don't believe it on the grounds that, for a person of faith that isn't possible. Hmm, I must be lying.
Quote:
Otherwise I ask that you keep insults or accusations against me personally out of the forum, especially those intended to confuse the issue or other readers.
Insults? Accusations? I've only seen the ones you've hurled at me and billions of "bat-shit crazy" people who believe in a God.
__________________
The descent of man ~ Nixon, Friedman, Reagan, Trump.
xoxoxoBruce is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:54 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.