secularmerlin

Peer reviewed as in repeatable consistent results in laboratory conditions.

As for anecdotal evidence otherwise known as eye witness testimony...

I accept physical evidence. Do you have any?

Didn't you once spray paint the halls of DID in defiance of the idea of assistant moderation? Oh well at least we don't have some fool that wants the job. You cannot trust people who want authority.

Mopac: the ultimate reality exists.

Secularmerlin: that doesn't mean your claims about it are correct.

Mopac: I agree.

Finally. So you retract your claims then?

I await your link to a peer reviewed study on the subject. Until then I have no choice but to reject your claim.

That doesn't mean your claims about it are correct.

Prove it.

I just don't understand all the symbols you use. Maybe you could try using words instead? Otherwise you just have a nice day.

As long as you are trying to communicate with dashes dots and triangles that is my response. Use your words ebuc.

This is incorrect. I think neither of us know. You are the one making knowledge claims.

I don't care what language you use to refer to things that are outside the observable physical universe. You still cannot observe things beyond the observable universe so you are committing a logical fallacy any time you make any claim about them.

Proof Mopac. Without it you don't have anything to refute.

You need to be humble because you never say anything new or unique. To recap I accept that some reality exists and I reject that you could possibly know anything about anything which exists outside the observable. Anything that is not a part if the observable physical universe is by definition unobservable and an unobservable thing is an unknowable thing and if a thing is unknowable then you cannot know anything about it. It is ridiculous to think that you can teach anyone anything about something that you don't know.

How many times must I repeat that I am looking for an interlocutor not a teacher. In any case you don't seem to have a ything demonstrably real to teach.

Unless you can demonstrate that Jesus was a part of reality he has no place in your definition. 

I think we have found something we agree on.

@Grugore 

While one might one may kidnap and enslave someone slavery and kidnapping are different crimes.

@Grugore

So a social ill that is not the result of breaking the supposed commands of Jesus. Thank you for conceding that point.

@Grugore

It is a form of him an trafficking and human trafficking is something that I consider immoral in all its forms. In any case you have yet to establish that we are not discussing outright slavery and Jesus did not specifically forbid either.

@Grugor

Maybe I reject scripture because I think slavery and indentured servitude are immoral and so any god(s) that do not forbid them (to say nothing of those that actively endorse them) are immoral god(s). In any case you asked for me to name one social ill that was not a direct result of disobeying the supposed commands of Christ (for the purposes of this discussion those commands from Christ as depicted in the bible) and whether we are discussing slavery or indentured servitude we are discussing a social ill that Jesus as depicted in the bible did not command us to abolish. Your challenge has been met.

@Grugore

Blocking me just because you don't like what I have to say is a bit cowardly. You cannot show me in the bible where Jesus commanded we not own slaves and I can show you in the bible where Yahweh commands that you buy them from the nation's around you. Even if it is only indentured servitude (and it certainly isn't worded that way) it is still a social ill that you can engage in without breaking Christ's supposed commands. Now do you want to take this back to the pm or have it out right here?

I don't know why any god(s) would but if some god(s) are responsible for the creation of life then clearly the god(s) under discussion did create a system of survival of the fittest. It should be mentioned however that fittest doesn't necessarily mean strongest.

I'm not sure there are any justifications. 

Human beings have rights and are entitled to respect. Ideas, books, and beliefs don’t, and aren’t.

Studying Islam has made me an atheist
-Douglas Murray

Indeed I am a different person now than before I wrote this post. Now I am the person who wrote this post before I was not.

That would be just fine with me. Live and let live, but I don't personally want anything to do with star trek style transporters

You misunderstand my trepidation. I do not fear philosophical zombies but rather fear dying and being replaced by one during a routine transporter trip. This would still be my concern if I was provably a philosophical zombie before hand.

In 2004 I was a theist and would continue to be one for at least another half a decade and I knew precious little about Richard Dawkins. (Not that it matters but I am a far bigger advocate of Mat Dilihunty's philosophy).

So you are here to experience an echo chamber in which the only participants already agree? That isn't very realistic.

Religion is like a pair of shoes... Find one that fits for you, but don't make me wear your shoes.

-George Carlin

Who do you think was better: Jesus or Buddha; I mean, just in terms of not letting themselves get crucified?

-Anthony Jeselnik

I'm not a religious person; I would call myself an atheist. I don't have a good story behind it, I'm just reasonable

-Anthony Jeselnik

-Louis C.K.

If you want to make God laugh, tell him about your plans

-Woody Allen

I don't see that this issue is overly different. 

Even if I would be the same person I do not consent to have all of my organs removed and put into an android copy of myself and I don't necessarily accept that I would be.

As many true things and just as important as few false things as possible.

I'm  not sure what you mean. You are merely incorrect that I assume anyone is a liar or has any mental aberration. This does not present me with any problem that needs fixing and I'm not sure how joining or failing to join any religious group would necessarily solve any problems for me.

Incorrect.

I have no evidence for or against any god(s) in the same way I have no evidence for it against any ghosts or Bigfoot or flying teapots. My only claim is that we do not have any sufficient evidence and in the absence of evidence the reasonable thing to do is to withhold belief. You are welcome to your beliefs but if you don't care about convincing people of them what are you doing on a debate sight?

I mean do not accept. I do not need to accept any position to reject yours.

The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.

-Thomas Jefferson 

There is something infantile in the presumption that somebody else has a responsibility to give your life meaning and point… The truly adult view, by contrast, is that our life is as meaningful, as full and as wonderful as we choose to make it.

-Richard Dawkins

Quotes ethang5 quotes. 

You could teleport a complex computer but it would.not be the same complex computer. That my brain is entirely physical does not mean that it is not my brain and it does not make.an identical brain into mine. I would.not consent to be teleported specifically because I don't believe in the concept of souls and so the thing that appeared on the pad on the other end would not be me in any sense.

The theory is a utilitarian one yes? We follow through on punishment not because of misguided idea of justice or revenge but because if we do not we invite further murder. I did not look up Rome's basilisk but your context is clear.