Americans and God

Backslapping time. Well done us. We are fantastic.
User avatar
the hanging monkey
can't be arsed
Posts: 16721
Joined: 15 Sep 2003, 17:05
Location: The cultural mecca that is Huddersfield

Re: Americans and God

Postby the hanging monkey » 25 Oct 2011, 14:42

Matt Wilson wrote:
the hanging monkey wrote::lol: I love it when people post really poorly reasoned and shit arguments, I mean really shit, embarrassing even, and then claim other people's arguments are weak.

You're nearly as good as Davey. :lol:


And therein lies your whole problem. You're looking for an argument to convince you of God's existence, when there is none. There's not supposed to be either. You've missed the point entirely.

But continue to laugh and congratulate yourself on how you've 'won' though.

It is kind of funny at that.

:lol:


So you don't have an argument then?

Thanks for admitting it, although one wonders why you bothered arguing at all if there's not supposed to be an argument for god's existence.

And I will continue to laugh at anybody I like.

Right now I'm laughing at the notion of an educator advocating unreason. Actually, that's not funny, is it?
The Dríver wrote:We even have village idiots.

User avatar
the hanging monkey
can't be arsed
Posts: 16721
Joined: 15 Sep 2003, 17:05
Location: The cultural mecca that is Huddersfield

Re: Americans and God

Postby the hanging monkey » 25 Oct 2011, 18:39

Davey Avon FatBoy wrote:
the hanging monkey wrote:If knowledge has an end then we would know it had ended when we reached it, by definition.

Otherwise there would be at least one thing left to know.


That's the point. There is always at least one thing more to know.

You claim that everything is potentially knowable. Do you also believe that it is all potentially knowable by us?


Where have I claimed that everything is potentially knowable? I haven't.

There are limits to knowledge imposed upon us by the natural world, formalised as the uncertainty principle, which states that certain variables cannot simultaneously be known to a high degree of accuracy. The classic example is the position and momentum of an electron. Either may be known to a very high degree of accuracy, but not both, as to measure one, you must alter the other. This is not due to our technology, it is a fact about the natural world.
The Dríver wrote:We even have village idiots.

User avatar
Zeke
Posts: 2970
Joined: 17 Mar 2006, 00:37
Location: A dead in the eyes, soulless robot

Re: Americans and God

Postby Zeke » 25 Oct 2011, 18:55

I'm the one who's claiming that anything is potentially knowable to us (i.e. that nothing is in principle unknowable to us in all of its particulars). That we can know either a particle's position or momentum to an arbitrary degree of certainty but not both simultaneously doesn't really compromise that. Either facet is still knowable to us.

What Davey is proposing is that there are "things" that exist that are, in their entirety, unknowable to us; in every aspect. That we are unable to perceive them in any way shape or form. That they cause no effects within the world that we can observe. Essentially that they are things that exist in our world that affect our world in no way whatsoever; perfectly hidden from human detection. No secondary effects either, or tertiary or quaternary and so on and so on.

In other words, nonsense.
Last edited by Zeke on 25 Oct 2011, 19:16, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
the hanging monkey
can't be arsed
Posts: 16721
Joined: 15 Sep 2003, 17:05
Location: The cultural mecca that is Huddersfield

Re: Americans and God

Postby the hanging monkey » 25 Oct 2011, 19:05

Zeke wrote:What Davey is proposing is that their are "things" that exist that are, in their entirety, unknowable to us; in every aspect.


How does he know this? :lol:
The Dríver wrote:We even have village idiots.

User avatar
never/ever
Posts: 26478
Joined: 27 Jun 2008, 14:21
Location: Journeying through a burning brain

Re: Americans and God

Postby never/ever » 25 Oct 2011, 19:07

the hanging monkey wrote:
Zeke wrote:What Davey is proposing is that their are "things" that exist that are, in their entirety, unknowable to us; in every aspect.


How does he know this? :lol:



How do you know it's not true then? ;)
kath wrote:i do not wanna buy the world a fucquin gotdamn coke.

User avatar
Zeke
Posts: 2970
Joined: 17 Mar 2006, 00:37
Location: A dead in the eyes, soulless robot

Re: Americans and God

Postby Zeke » 25 Oct 2011, 19:08

the hanging monkey wrote:
Zeke wrote:What Davey is proposing is that their are "things" that exist that are, in their entirety, unknowable to us; in every aspect.


How does he know this? :lol:


He just...does.

He seems to claim that it's analogous to a dog's thoughts when we aren't there to observe the dog and infer what it's thinking. Or that famous tree that falls in the woods and makes a sound when no one is there to see or hear it.

He doesn't seem to get the difference between something we don't know simply because we weren't there to observe it and something that cannot be observed by us in principle and by its very nature. Whatever that nature might be...which we can't say...because we can't observe it.

User avatar
Belle Lettre
Éminence grise
Posts: 16143
Joined: 09 Oct 2008, 07:16
Location: Antiterra

Re: Americans and God

Postby Belle Lettre » 25 Oct 2011, 19:19

Esse est percipi I think the phrase is.
Nikki Gradual wrote:
Get a fucking grip you narcissistic cretins.

User avatar
never/ever
Posts: 26478
Joined: 27 Jun 2008, 14:21
Location: Journeying through a burning brain

Re: Americans and God

Postby never/ever » 25 Oct 2011, 19:22

not: Mundus vult decipi?
kath wrote:i do not wanna buy the world a fucquin gotdamn coke.

User avatar
Zeke
Posts: 2970
Joined: 17 Mar 2006, 00:37
Location: A dead in the eyes, soulless robot

Re: Americans and God

Postby Zeke » 25 Oct 2011, 19:24

I think it goes beyond mere perception, though. Much of the physical world is imperceptible to us and our somewhat feeble senses. It's that these supposed things cause no detectable effects within the perceptible world that we could then work backwards from and infer their existence that I find so puzzling.

Why should we (anyone) care in the slightest if such things exist? What difference would it make? By definition, none whatsoever. For all intents and purposes such things don't exist.

User avatar
never/ever
Posts: 26478
Joined: 27 Jun 2008, 14:21
Location: Journeying through a burning brain

Re: Americans and God

Postby never/ever » 25 Oct 2011, 19:54

Zeke wrote:I think it goes beyond mere perception, though. Much of the physical world is imperceptible to us and our somewhat feeble senses. It's that these supposed things cause no detectable effects within the perceptible world that we could then work backwards from and infer their existence that I find so puzzling.

Why should we (anyone) care in the slightest if such things exist? What difference would it make? By definition, none whatsoever. For all intents and purposes such things don't exist.



I care because I don't believe in that blanket perception. I prefer not to have a blinkered view on existence and limit myself what's out there right in front of me.
kath wrote:i do not wanna buy the world a fucquin gotdamn coke.

User avatar
Zeke
Posts: 2970
Joined: 17 Mar 2006, 00:37
Location: A dead in the eyes, soulless robot

Re: Americans and God

Postby Zeke » 25 Oct 2011, 20:00

never/ever wrote:
I care because I don't believe in that blanket perception. I prefer not to have a blinkered view on existence and limit myself what's out there right in front of me.



I'm not sure I have any idea as to what you're talking about. What is it that's being blinkered? And what do you gain by this absence of blinkering?

User avatar
never/ever
Posts: 26478
Joined: 27 Jun 2008, 14:21
Location: Journeying through a burning brain

Re: Americans and God

Postby never/ever » 25 Oct 2011, 20:06

Zeke wrote:
never/ever wrote:
I care because I don't believe in that blanket perception. I prefer not to have a blinkered view on existence and limit myself what's out there right in front of me.



I'm not sure I have any idea as to what you're talking about. What is it that's being blinkered? And what do you gain by this absence of blinkering?



Your view that things beyond 'mere perception' that have no effect on the perceptible world don't exist. I call that a blinkered view. Feel free to tell me that that's what you didn't mean at all- I'm open to all sorts of perceptions as you may know by now.
kath wrote:i do not wanna buy the world a fucquin gotdamn coke.

User avatar
Zeke
Posts: 2970
Joined: 17 Mar 2006, 00:37
Location: A dead in the eyes, soulless robot

Re: Americans and God

Postby Zeke » 25 Oct 2011, 20:36

never/ever wrote:Your view that things beyond 'mere perception' that have no effect on the perceptible world don't exist. I call that a blinkered view.


I got that much. It's just that I have no idea why you call that a blinkered view. Hence my question: what's being blinkered?

Feel free to tell me that that's what you didn't mean at all


Just add "for all intents and purposes" and that will serve as a simplified version.

I'm open to all sorts of perceptions as you may know by now.



Even ones we can't possibly have?

;)

User avatar
Zeke
Posts: 2970
Joined: 17 Mar 2006, 00:37
Location: A dead in the eyes, soulless robot

Re: Americans and God

Postby Zeke » 25 Oct 2011, 21:05

Let me put it this way. The world, by which I mean the humanly detectable world, is a pretty vast and complicated place. So vast and so complicated that you could expend your entire life experiencing it and pondering those experiences and not have exhausted even a tiny little fraction of it. I mean we're talking about a whole fuck load of stuff going on that's pretty damned overwhelming if you start giving it some serious thought.

Now, given that, why should anyone expend energy trying to perceive the imperceptible? What can possibly be gained by putting your belief in something that cannot affect you or anyone who ever has or will live? that cannot affect anything in the world in any way shape or form? I mean isn't there already enough stuff to deal with? You know, stuff that can actually affect you and the world in which you live in some way?

What would be the point?

User avatar
never/ever
Posts: 26478
Joined: 27 Jun 2008, 14:21
Location: Journeying through a burning brain

Re: Americans and God

Postby never/ever » 25 Oct 2011, 21:40

Look, I understand your question. It's a bit like saying 'why should we sent people into space when we don't even know how the human brain works'?
I don't share your view that the 'something' I believe in hasn't affected me, my outlook on life and the belief that a shared faith can make a change. That may be nothing concrete in your eyes but it is fundamental to me. i have no need to prove to everyone that there is (a) God, if you are willing to see him He is there.
Of course i have no physical proof. Sure, i could be fooled and after my death I'll be dumped into the same black hole with you unbelievers. I could get hooked on drugs and get the same spiritual highs. I am not using faith to hedge my bet that there is a spiritual Being out there that awards places in heaven or hell. It's in essence much more complex than that yet even so simple in practice.
I cannot exist by just living on this planet alone. It's fascinating and absorbing but I know that all this life, my very existence is more than a product of evolution- the fact that i cannot explain it (as it is called a Mystery) is, to put it really random, like watching a magic trick without knowing how the magician pulled it. We are so consumed with explaining everything it takes the pure mystery out of everything- that's why i find your view 'blinkered' in regards to not wanting to expand your vision because it's not worth the effort (paraphrasing here). Just to make sure, this is an extreme simplification and i don't see God as a sort of Supermagician but it kind of explains what my spiritual take on this is.

I respect you for asking the questions you put here- I'm not theologically schooled nor have the same historical prowess that some posters here have shown. I am fully aware that what I've written here may open me up for ridicule and scorn but i've been writing and editing this now for some time, it is something that is hard to explain here behind a keyboard. I've found a lot of solace in my faith, if that makes me a coward in the eye of a particular individual posting here, well bully you.
kath wrote:i do not wanna buy the world a fucquin gotdamn coke.

User avatar
Zeke
Posts: 2970
Joined: 17 Mar 2006, 00:37
Location: A dead in the eyes, soulless robot

Re: Americans and God

Postby Zeke » 25 Oct 2011, 22:06

never/ever wrote:Look, I understand your question. It's a bit like saying 'why should we sent people into space when we don't even know how the human brain works'?
I don't share your view that the 'something' I believe in hasn't affected me, my outlook on life and the belief that a shared faith can make a change. That may be nothing concrete in your eyes but it is fundamental to me. i have no need to prove to everyone that there is (a) God, if you are willing to see him He is there.


Fair enough to a point. I didn't mean to lump you in with Davey and what we've been talking about. That's where the whole business about this "something" that cannot affect us or the world in any way came from. If that doesn't apply to you then fine. We're just talking at cross purposes.

The one thing I might ask: is it necessary for that something to exist for you to be affected in the way you are affected? Or is the belief alone sufficient?

If you don't particularly feel like answering or if you don't feel as though an answer would serve any further purpose then feel free to let it drop. I'll do the same.


I cannot exist by just living on this planet alone. It's fascinating and absorbing but I know that all this life, my very existence is more than a product of evolution- the fact that i cannot explain it (as it is called a Mystery) is, to put it really random, like watching a magic trick without knowing how the magician pulled it. We are so consumed with explaining everything it takes the pure mystery out of everything- that's why i find your view 'blinkered' in regards to not wanting to expand your vision because it's not worth the effort (paraphrasing here). Just to make sure, this is an extreme simplification and i don't see God as a sort of Supermagician but it kind of explains what my spiritual take on this is.


To this I would simply say that there is still a vast amount that we don't (yet) know about the world. There's still plenty of room for mystery if you want it. But ultimately I think they're mysteries that can be solved if we happen to survive long enough to solve them. And that they'll be solved by the means we've used to solve so many other former mysteries. I also happen to think that what we do know about the world and how it works is pretty damn amazing in and of itself. Although it may not have quite the same sense of mystery it is certainly capable of supplying a sense of awe for those who wish to see it that way.

User avatar
the hanging monkey
can't be arsed
Posts: 16721
Joined: 15 Sep 2003, 17:05
Location: The cultural mecca that is Huddersfield

Re: Americans and God

Postby the hanging monkey » 25 Oct 2011, 23:04

Davey Avon FatBoy wrote:Between that and the constant point scoring chatter from the likes of Monkey and the Prof ("Oh you are really on the ropes now, Davey) , I think an honest broker would be able to see why the perception of bad faith on their part persists.


I missed this little gem.

How fucking dare you lecture anyone on honesty?
The Dríver wrote:We even have village idiots.

User avatar
The Prof
Trading coffee in Abyssinia
Posts: 46392
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 18:32
Location: A Metropolis of Discontent

Re: Americans and God

Postby The Prof » 25 Oct 2011, 23:10

I had to look up 'bad faith',

"Bad faith (Latin: mala fides) is double mindedness or double heartedness in duplicity, fraud, or deception.[1] It may involve intentional deceit of others, or self deception"

I mean...really?

User avatar
toomanyhatz
Power-mad king of the WCC
Posts: 29992
Joined: 07 Apr 2005, 00:01
Location: Just east of where Charlie Parker went to do some relaxin'

Re: Americans and God

Postby toomanyhatz » 25 Oct 2011, 23:18

:lol:

Man, is this thread ever comedy gold!

Look, I think you could definitely pick on the word choice here (wouldn't be the first time a semantic argument masqueraded as something more substantive on these threads), but if he meant the perception of one-upmanship (my no god is better than your God) he's absolutely right on the money- and it's been mentioned by believers and non-believers alike.

But really, if you must (and it seems like you must), have at it. We have a while to go before we catch up to our benchmark for long-windedness.
Footy wrote:
The Who / Jimi Hendrix Experience Saville Theatre, London Jan '67
. Got Jimi's autograph after the show and went on to see him several times that year


1959 1963 1965 1966 1974 1977 1978 1981 1988 2017* 2018 2020!! 2023?

User avatar
The Prof
Trading coffee in Abyssinia
Posts: 46392
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 18:32
Location: A Metropolis of Discontent

Re: Americans and God

Postby The Prof » 25 Oct 2011, 23:51

toomanyhatz wrote:if he meant the perception of one-upmanship (my no god is better than your God) he's absolutely right on the money- and it's been mentioned by believers and non-believers alike.


That's just having an opinion on the subject. What's "one-upmanship" about thinking your position makes sense?


It's the "duplicity, fraud, or deception" that he need to clarify.


Return to “Classic Threads & Treasury of Mirth”