Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
2012/12/13 03:31:52
Subject: Bill O'Reilly says "Christianity is not a religion"
d-usa wrote: I have plenty of proof that God exists, you don't have any proof that is convincing to you.
Ok, and what would that "proof" be?
Plenty of stuff that you have likely heard before and rejected. Feel free to Google and disregard as convenient to you.
Automatically Appended Next Post: And just because this seems like the perfect opportunity to post funny videos:
---NSFW---
(I think the video makes a good point that there are plenty of rational, reasonable, and polite atheists out there as well. But both sides have their crazy loudmouths)
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2012/12/13 03:51:22
2012/12/13 03:51:51
Subject: Re:Bill O'Reilly says "Christianity is not a religion"
Faith is a weakness, not a virtue. It's just an excuse for believing things you shouldn't believe, and I'm tired of people praising it like it's something desirable.
d-usa wrote: Plenty of stuff that you have likely heard before and rejected. Feel free to Google and disregard as convenient to you.
In other words, not proof at all, since all of the "heard before and rejected" arguments fail to come even close to being proof.
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
2012/12/13 03:52:03
Subject: Bill O'Reilly says "Christianity is not a religion"
When you say there is proof that good exists, I have to think you are using an odd definition of 'proof'. If it were honestly that simple there wouldn't be debates on the subject and faith would be a useless concept.
Amidst the mists and coldest frosts he thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts.
2012/12/13 03:55:11
Subject: Re:Bill O'Reilly says "Christianity is not a religion"
Faith is a weakness, not a virtue. It's just an excuse for believing things you shouldn't believe, and I'm tired of people praising it like it's something desirable.
Seriously? Faith is a weakness? And I'm not just talking about the religious side of faith either...o.O
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2012/12/13 03:57:26
Subject: Bill O'Reilly says "Christianity is not a religion"
Faith is a weakness, not a virtue. It's just an excuse for believing things you shouldn't believe, and I'm tired of people praising it like it's something desirable.
Faith is the first step in the process of knowledge. In the absence of possible experimentation, you naturally take a stance on speculative matters.
Which is why both science and religion have the same aim ; the production of a universal system of explanation.
I also very much like how you decided to ignore my questionning the fact that your beleif in scientific proof is as 'unproovable' as the beleif in God.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/12/13 04:02:23
[...] for conflict is the great teacher, and pain, the perfect educator.
2012/12/13 04:12:54
Subject: Re:Bill O'Reilly says "Christianity is not a religion"
whembly wrote: Seriously? Faith is a weakness? And I'm not just talking about the religious side of faith either...o.O
Entirely serious. Faith of any kind is a weakness, since it is by definition irrational belief in something you shouldn't believe.
d-usa wrote: I used to have faith that my mom loves me and that my wife does as well.
But now my faith is shattered...
You say this as a joke, but that isn't faith at all. You believe that your mom and wife love you because you have good reasons to. You observe how they act towards you, they say things like "I love you", etc. Therefore you come to the reasonable conclusion that they do in fact love you.
Having faith that someone loves you is being the creepy who sits around dreaming about how much that girl loves him and how they're destined to be together forever while she doesn't even know that he exists.
Kovnik Obama wrote: Faith is the first step in the process of knowledge. In the absence of possible experimentation, you naturally take a stance on speculative matters.
That's not true at all.
In the absence of experimentation you speculate. You propose an answer for purposes of investigating to see if it will help gain knowledge, but you always keep in mind that it's just speculation and you shouldn't have any confidence in your potential answer yet.
Faith means that you have confidence in your answer, even though you have no reason to be confident about it.
Which is why both science and religion have the same aim ; the production of a universal system of explanation.
The difference is that science proceeds by dealing with observed reality and bases its conclusions on facts while recognizing where it doesn't have an answer yet, while religion just declares that it has all of the answers and tells you to shut up and stop asking difficult questions. "God did it" isn't an explanation in any useful way, unless your goal is to avoid learning more about the world.
I also very much like how you decided to ignore my questionning the fact that your beleif in scientific proof is as 'unproovable' as the beleif in God.
Sorry, I don't waste time on self-congratulatory philosophy like that. Arguing that everything is unprovable is only interesting to people sitting around smoking pot and trying to impress each other with how "deep" their latest insight is.
As for the proof of science: it works.
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
2012/12/13 04:17:10
Subject: Re:Bill O'Reilly says "Christianity is not a religion"
whembly wrote: At it's basis, faith is something that is believed with strong conviction. That's all.
That's not true at all. I have a strong conviction that 1+1=2, but I don't need faith to have that conviction because I have indisputable fact. I have a strong conviction that the earth is round, but I don't have faith that it is round because I have evidence that it is round.
Faith only comes up when you don't have good reasons but still want to believe.
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
2012/12/13 04:24:45
Subject: Re:Bill O'Reilly says "Christianity is not a religion"
whembly wrote: At it's basis, faith is something that is believed with strong conviction. That's all.
That's not true at all. I have a strong conviction that 1+1=2, but I don't need faith to have that conviction because I have indisputable fact. I have a strong conviction that the earth is round, but I don't have faith that it is round because I have evidence that it is round.
Faith only comes up when you don't have good reasons but still want to believe.
That's one definition... but you're anti-religious views are sneaking in...
It can ALSO be: a high degree of trust or confidence in something or someone
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2012/12/13 04:29:20
Subject: Re:Bill O'Reilly says "Christianity is not a religion"
whembly wrote: That's one definition... but you're anti-religious views are sneaking in...
It can ALSO be: a high degree of trust or confidence in something or someone
Again, without good reason. If I trust that my employee isn't stealing from the cash register I'm believing it without proof. If I have proof from counting all of the cash every day and finding no errors then I don't trust that they aren't stealing, I know that they aren't stealing.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/12/13 04:29:31
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
2012/12/13 04:29:27
Subject: Re:Bill O'Reilly says "Christianity is not a religion"
Sorry, but that's just silly. We don't hesitate to state "X doesn't exist" when X is something that the majority doesn't believe in, we only make a special exception for religion because we're terrified of offending people.
Actually we hesitate all the time. That's why researchers say "It doesn't appear as though X exists." as opposed to "X does not exist." It is only when discussing God that people seem to lose their heads, on both sides of the argument. The reason for this isn't terror regarding offense, but terror regarding uncertainty.
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
2012/12/13 04:31:53
Subject: Re:Bill O'Reilly says "Christianity is not a religion"
dogma wrote: Actually we hesitate all the time. That's why researchers say "It doesn't appear as though X exists." as opposed to "X does not exist." It is only when discussing God that people seem to lose their heads, on both sides of the argument. The reason for this isn't terror regarding offense, but terror regarding uncertainty.
Yes, if you want to talk only about scientific studies which also tend to include estimates about the probability of being wrong. But in everyday language we don't say "your invisible friend Bob probably doesn't exist", we say "Bob is a delusion, go seek professional help asap".
Also, researchers tend to say that because it's early in their research, and they don't want to jump to conclusions. Attempts to prove god exists, on the other hand, have been failing completely for so long that it is no longer reasonable to expect any other outcome, and absolutely reasonable to drop the "probably not" disclaimer when talking about the subject.
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
2012/12/13 04:36:10
Subject: Re:Bill O'Reilly says "Christianity is not a religion"
dogma wrote: Then why are you presenting yourself as a self-assured atheist?
Yeah, because being confident enough to say that the only rational belief is "there is no god" is the same as declaring that everything is unprovable so we should doubt everything equally.
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
2012/12/13 04:45:08
Subject: Re:Bill O'Reilly says "Christianity is not a religion"
Yes, if you want to talk only about scientific studies which also tend to include estimates about the probability of being wrong. But in everyday language we don't say "your invisible friend Bob probably doesn't exist", we say "Bob is a delusion, go seek professional help asap".
When I am discussing religion in public I generally say "Your invisible friend Bob probably doesn't exist." I do this because I am not overly judgmental.
Also, researchers tend to say that because it's early in their research, and they don't want to jump to conclusions.
As a professional researcher, I can tell you that is completely wrong. When making a claim from research the author is [/i]always[i] expected to note that the conclusion is derived only from a selected body of information. Sometimes it doesn't happen, but then the reader assumes it was meant to unless the offense passes into egregious territory.
Yeah, because being confident enough to say that the only rational belief is "there is no god" is the same as declaring that everything is unprovable so we should doubt everything equally.
Bertrand Russell thought so.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2012/12/13 04:46:25
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
2012/12/13 04:48:33
Subject: Re:Bill O'Reilly says "Christianity is not a religion"
dogma wrote: When I am discussing religion in public I generally say "Your invisible friend Bob probably doesn't exist." I do this because I am not overly judgmental.
And if someone literally started telling you about Bob (not as an analogy for god) would you still be so polite?
Also, congratulations on admitting that it's not about some kind of objective truth/proof/whatever, and whether you say "no god" or "probably no god" is about how polite or judgmental you want to be.
As a professional researcher, I can tell you that is completely wrong. When making a claim from research the author is [/i]always[i] expected to note that the conclusion is derived only from a selected body of information. Sometimes it doesn't happen, but then the reader assumes it was meant to unless the offense passes into egregious territory.
Are you seriously telling me that if a physics researcher is writing a paper they have to put a "probably" disclaimer on F=M*A?
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
2012/12/13 05:05:25
Subject: Re:Bill O'Reilly says "Christianity is not a religion"
Also, congratulations on admitting that it's not about some kind of objective truth/proof/whatever, and whether you say "no god" or "probably no god" is about how polite or judgmental you want to be.
Are you seriously telling me that if a physics researcher is writing a paper they have to put a "probably" disclaimer on F=M*A?
I'm telling you that when researchers make claims from research that they are expected to note that their conclusions are derived from that research.
If a physics researcher were making a claim about force, then he would need to citeNewton. Much as I need to cite Ken Waltz whenever I talk about realism.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2012/12/13 05:08:18
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
2012/12/13 05:17:36
Subject: Bill O'Reilly says "Christianity is not a religion"
Peregrine wrote: There is, but both are irrational. We don't hesitate at all to call people delusional for believing in things in the absence of evidence (for example, if I tell you all about my invisible friend Bob who is standing right next to you), and the only reason we make a special exception for religion is to be polite to the majority. It's completely inconsistent to make that special exception, and ridiculous to pretend that there's some kind of philosophical justification for it rather than just politeness.
Speak for yourself, because I don't do it just to be polite. I do it because I can see the limitations of my own conclusions, and the lack of evidence for them. And so I think it would the height of arrogance to start condemning someone else for forming a different conclusion on just as little evidence.
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
2012/12/13 05:18:04
Subject: Re:Bill O'Reilly says "Christianity is not a religion"
dogma wrote: Yes, because such a person is dangerous.
Oh good, so you admit that this is all just about how confrontational you want to act, not how justified the belief is.
I said no such thing.
Yes you did. You cited your desire to avoid being judgmental, not any kind of argument that calling the belief delusion would be unjustified.
I'm telling you that when researchers make claims from research that they are expected to note that their conclusions are derived from that research.
Even when they're stating obvious truths that are completely uncontroversial? Are you seriously telling me that you would need to waste space in a paper citing basic equations like F=M*A, or going back to the original research on calculus before you can solve an integral? Because if that's true, it's really stupid.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
sebster wrote: Speak for yourself, because I don't do it just to be polite. I do it because I can see the limitations of my own conclusions, and the lack of evidence for them. And so I think it would the height of arrogance to start condemning someone else for forming a different conclusion on just as little evidence.
Yeah, I'm sure you really accept the limits of your own conclusions about someone's imaginary friend, and give serious consideration to the thought that you might be wrong and there might be an invisible person standing right next to you. I'm sure you are very humble and treat this claim with just as much respect as a claim that the earth is round, and aren't just pretending otherwise to win a forum argument.
And sure, I'll admit that it might be true, you might be obsessively polite and nice and hate being judgmental at any time, but most people aren't. Most people have completely different standards for what proves something true or false when they're talking about everyday things vs. when they're talking about their god.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/12/13 05:21:44
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
2012/12/13 05:42:32
Subject: Re:Bill O'Reilly says "Christianity is not a religion"
Faith is a weakness, not a virtue. It's just an excuse for believing things you shouldn't believe, and I'm tired of people praising it like it's something desirable.
Wow. This takes the cake as the most pathetic and worthless comment I have seen on this site yet. Get yourself a cookie man, no bigger crap has ever been dropped in here.
You are, of course, entitled to your opinion. Just don't expect anyone to give a crap about what you say after this. And yes, that is probably the most polite way of responding to your statement.
Reality is a nice place to visit, but I'd hate to live there.
Manchu wrote:I'm a Catholic. We eat our God.
Due to work, I can usually only ship any sales or trades out on Saturday morning. Please trade/purchase with this in mind.
2012/12/13 05:46:23
Subject: Re:Bill O'Reilly says "Christianity is not a religion"
Oh good, so you admit that this is all just about how confrontational you want to act, not how justified the belief is.
That isn't what I said, that is the inference you drew.
Someone going on about Bob is strange, and most likely delusional, because very few people believe in Bob's existence. The Bobite is a strange man, the theist is not.
Even when they're stating obvious truths that are completely uncontroversial? Are you seriously telling me that you would need to waste space in a paper citing basic equations like F=M*A, or going back to the original research on calculus before you can solve an integral? Because if that's true, it's really stupid.
No, I am not. I am telling you what I wrote. If you are making an argument with respect to a fundamental principle, you must cite that principle.
Welcome to academia.
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
2012/12/13 05:50:24
Subject: Re:Bill O'Reilly says "Christianity is not a religion"
dogma wrote: Someone going on about Bob is strange, and most likely delusional, because very few people believe in Bob's existence. The Bobite is a strange man, the theist is not.
Since when does the popularity of a belief matter? The fact that lots of people believe in god just means that lots of people are wrong.
You also didn't make a coherent argument that theism is delusional.
Belief in ANYTHING despite a complete absence of proof, or even a good argument, is delusion. You're out of touch with reality, and believing something out of stubborn refusal to accept a fact that you don't like.
No, I am not. I am telling you what I wrote. If you are making an argument with respect to a fundamental principle, you must cite that principle.
Welcome to academia.
Oh good, so we're changing the subject. We started with a statement that you have to include a "this is not 100% absolute indisputable fact, we could be wrong" disclaimer when doing research, and now we've completely changed that to having to cite your sources. These are two entirely different things.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/12/13 05:50:44
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
2012/12/13 06:22:31
Subject: Re:Bill O'Reilly says "Christianity is not a religion"
Since when does the popularity of a belief matter?
The beginning of time? When lots of people believe in a thing, regardless of the truth of the belief, their belief matters and renders what they believe material.
Belief in ANYTHING despite a complete absence of proof, or even a good argument, is delusion. You're out of touch with reality, and believing something out of stubborn refusal to accept a fact that you don't like.
Oh good, so we're changing the subject. We started with a statement that you have to include a "this is not 100% absolute indisputable fact, we could be wrong" disclaimer when doing research, and now we've completely changed that to having to cite your sources. These are two entirely different things.
Why are you using quotation marks? You aren't quoting me, so who are you quoting?
So, again, that is not what I said. I would appreciate it if you took the time to engage me honestly.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/12/13 06:24:11
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
2012/12/13 06:32:51
Subject: Re:Bill O'Reilly says "Christianity is not a religion"
dogma wrote: The beginning of time? When lots of people believe in a thing, regardless of the truth of the belief, their belief matters and renders what they believe material.
So when lots of people believed that it was ok to own slaves that was relevant to whether it was? When lots of people believed the sun revolved around the earth that mattered, until the majority opinion changed and moved the sun?
That isn't an argument which deals with theism.
Of course it is. Theism is a belief without the slightest bit of evidence to back it up. The only reason we don't call it delusion like any other imaginary friend is because we want to be polite to the majority who suffer from the unfortunate belief.
Why are you using quotation marks? You aren't quoting me, so who are you quoting?
Go read grammar 101.
So, again, that is not what I said. I would appreciate it if you took the time to engage me honestly.
Not in those words, but let's look at your actual quote:
That's why researchers say "It doesn't appear as though X exists." as opposed to "X does not exist."
Can you honestly not tell the difference between your initial quote which talks about stating a degree of uncertainty rather than an absolute "no" and your most recent statement which is talking about citing your sources?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/12/13 06:33:58
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
2012/12/13 06:53:55
Subject: Re:Bill O'Reilly says "Christianity is not a religion"
Faith is a weakness, not a virtue. It's just an excuse for believing things you shouldn't believe, and I'm tired of people praising it like it's something desirable.
Wow. This takes the cake as the most pathetic and worthless comment I have seen on this site yet. Get yourself a cookie man, no bigger crap has ever been dropped in here.
You are, of course, entitled to your opinion. Just don't expect anyone to give a crap about what you say after this. And yes, that is probably the most polite way of responding to your statement.
I'd like to applaud this as a solid response to an idiotic question. Dogma and Sebster are doing excellent work as well. Peregrine, congrats you've earned a spot on my ignore list for awhile. Maybe when I take you off you'll be more coherent and less bombastic. You remind me of a kid in my high school, found "no god" about our Junior year and was always in people's faces about it.
Always seemed a rather insecure mode of behavior to me.
I beg of you sarge let me lead the charge when the battle lines are drawn
Lemme at least leave a good hoof beat they'll remember loud and long
Seriously? Faith is a weakness? And I'm not just talking about the religious side of faith either...o.O
who sits around dreaming about how much that girl loves him and how they're destined to be together forever while she doesn't even know that he exists.
