Total posts: 7,093
Posted in:
-->
@Plisken
Unless we agree on a goal we are not even having the same conversation. Our goal in this context refers to a goal that you and I agree on as our standard for the purposes of this conversation. My personal opinion actually has no place in a debate.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Plisken
That depends on whether our goal is protecting dogs or providing a system that allows for cultural heritage to dictate laws for each separate heritage. What are we trying to accomplish by creating or outlawing these zones?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Fallaneze
You could say that God has the same "measurable physical effect" by looking at the brain states of believers.
That is a measurement of the physical effect of the belief in god(s) not the measurable effect of any actual god(s).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Fallaneze
I don't know what you mean by that. Mathematical concepts are definitionally true. 2+2=4 could be identical to A+A=B but it might also not be. Math is just a way of describing the physical universe. We made it up.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Plisken
In that case I must ask what we are trying to accomplish with this system. If our goal is to protect animals from whatever we consider animal cruelty for example you shouldn't because some zones will have less protection from animals than others and a unified system could be geared to more effectively protect more animals. If on the other hand your goal is to allow communities the greatest possible freedom to live as the prevailing majority of any given zone feels is best then you should impliment the system.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Plisken
How would any answer I give be more than a subjective opinion?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Plisken
They could have such "zones" I suppose. Should have however is a subjective opinion. From an objective stand point there is no should be only what is and what isn't.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Fallaneze
I don't see how moral truth statements have measurable physical effects.
They effect the behavior of individuals because they consist exclusively of brain states.that is a purely physical effect and a cause we have no reason to believe is more than physical.
So you're fine with accepting systems of thought, like logic and math even though they have no measurable physical effects?
They are not measurable physical effects they are a tool we have invented to help us measure physical effects. Math is just an invented language used to refer to abstract concepts so that these concepts can be applied to actual physical things and the way things interact with one another. Logic is just a way of evaluating physical evidence and when used without accompanying physical evidence it can and often does lead to false conclusions.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Moral behavior is largely a subjective opinion. Some people think it is immoral to slaughter animals and some people think it is not. If one feels it is not immoral to slaughter animals but it is wrong to slaughter dogs or that some methods of slaughter are "more moral" than others then you merely having a discussion of degree.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Fallaneze
Moral "truth" is subjective. The others are simply systems of thought not actual physical things. That means they are just ways of interacting with or referring to physical things not the things themselves. You cannot point to the number two though you can point to two people or two apples.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Fallaneze
Are you referring to definitional truths? No married bachelor etc?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Fallaneze
I said it depends on what is being tested. A measurable physical effect is what I am looking for. In the case of a god claim one which is somehow distinguishable from simple physical causation
Created:
-->
@Plisken
Perfect is a subjective qualification not an objectively quantifiable one. Since Islam is a faith based belief a difference or change in the beliefs of those who hold said beliefs. The same would hold true for christianity.
Created:
-->
@Plisken
It is not unalterable as I said. Books are altered all the time. And it is not more literal than the bible. You could argue that it is taken more literally than the bible but that would merely be the subjective opinion of Muslims. It would be an untrue statement when discussing any Muslims that were of a different subjective viewpoint and is also subjective to how literally the bible is taken by any given christian.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
you told me that muslims could alter the quran. Show me your evidence for this assumption.
The Quran is just a book. Books can be altered. I'm not sure what your asking for proof of here.
Of course Muslims could alter the quran.Prove it
As I said I'm not sure what proof you need that books can and sometimes are edited, poorly translated or deliberately altered between printings.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
I did not say that I could. Who are you to tell them they can't?Who are you to tell them they can reform THEIR ideology?
You make that sound simple.
Change of that nature is rarely simple and often results in violence on both sides as happened when the protestants broke away from the Catholic church. That is part of the danger of faith based beliefs. The non believer can be dehumanized in the eyes of the believer which makes it seem more reasonable to do them harm.
But tell me. If it is the perfect and unalterable last word of god Allah, then why – from the Muslim point of view - would it need reforming?
This is not a necessary Muslim view whether it is currently the prevailing view or not. Only Muslims can alter what they believe and even then not by choice.
Created:
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
I am not talking about my feelings. Am also not talking about religion itself but only the act of using it to justify abuse.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
Of course Muslims could alter the quran. All it would take is the agreement of enough Muslims. Of course that would only hold true of Muslims that except this new doctrine. I don't think there is anything to be done about the dangers of faith and of course faith can be a positive force in peoples lives. This also applies to just about any faith based beliefs. The beliefs themselves are not the problem after all. The only problem is that some humans use such beliefs to control and or demonize and or justify harming other humans. Since this us true of all faith based beliefs I don't feel this is off topic.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Fallaneze
It depends on what is being tested but I gave an example. Post 40
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Fallaneze
Go outside and drop a rock. You have just tested gravity.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Fallaneze
Testable evidence. A hypothesis that cannot be tested is a poor hypothesis.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Fallaneze
There is no sufficient evidence of any god(s). One cannot say that no god(s) could exist (that is a black swan fallacy) but many god claims can be dismissed as logically contradictory.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Fallaneze
It would take sufficient evidence. Beliefs are not a choice. One cannot simply choose to believe something that one considers false.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Fallaneze
The default position is skepticism.
Created:
Posted in:
Are you familiar with the game were you answer any question with a question?.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
Islam is not a religion of peace. I never said it was. There is no religion of peace. I am not an Islam apologist. I don't know what is beautiful or right about the belief itself.
I suppose you could argue that peaceful Muslims are a minority but that is not borne out by my experience since I have never personally met a violent Muslim.
You are correct that criticizing Islam (the belief) is not the same as discrimination against Muslims. That being said exactly what would you like to see happen in regards to Islam and muslims? For that matter what would you like to see done about other possibly violent beliefs? Beliefs that call for the exalecution of homosexuals, nonvirgin women, divorced women and people that work on any day of the week they choose for example? I'm pretty sure if we ban Islam for it's violent commands it would logically follow that we should ban any belief system with similar commands. Are we upset about thise too or just Islam?
Created:
-->
@Stephen
I am not defending Islam. Trying to lead readers to believe this is deceitful. Of course there is always the chance that I am not implying that you are trying to contradict anything and you are not implying that I am defending Islam. So far as far as I know all that has happened is that I have said that ALL faith based beliefs can be dangerous and you have not said anything that contradicts this.
I will say that it is wrong from my perspective to discriminate against individuals based on their beliefs and that I know Muslims who are peaceful and gentle individuals who respect the beliefs of others no matter what their religion teaches.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Fallaneze
We have no evidence of any will absent of an organic brain free or otherwise.
Created:
-->
@triangle.128k
Did you even read my post? Because you certainly didn't address it.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
All faith based beliefs can be dangerous. Nothing you have said contradicts this.
Created:
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
This says nothing about my self esteem.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
Firstly psalms 137:9 Happy is the one who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks
Secondly it hardly matters what the new testament says since Jesus specifically states that he did not come to change a dot or letter of the (old testament) laws (Mathew 5:18) so all the violence commanded and condoned by Yahweh carries over.
Lastly it doesn't matter what a faith based system actually teaches. Even if the belief is all about sunshine and rainbows it still carries the potential to be used as a justification for doing harm to the "nonbeliever" and christianity, which has observably resulted in human atrocities, is no exception to the rule.
This does not mean however that I am singling christianity out. Even Hinduism and Buddhism (some forms of which advocate total non harm to all living creatures not just humans) have caused their fair share of wars and human misery.
And of course political systems (also faith based) cause endless wars.
Created:
-->
@Plisken
What does that have to do with kieth's post? He did not specify whether marriage was involved only homosexuality.
Created:
-->
@triangle.128k
Then allow me to disabuse you of two incorrect assumptions. Firstly while there are religious atheists most of us do not identify with any religion and secondly atheists, even the religious ones, do not believe in god(s) in the same way that no bachelor is married. As a consequence we do not tend to worship any god(s). Also, and you'll have to take this up with an actual Muslim if you don't believe me, I'm pretty sure most Muslims only believe in one of the many thousands of god concepts and that is the abrahamic god.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
My heart is full.of abomination. What does that mean exactly? No let me guess it means that I do not agree with or take your claims about a reality that you admit is unknowable seriously.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@janesix
I still practice meditation techniques. I find they promote calm that has utility in many asspects of life.
Created:
-->
@Plisken
Then why did you bring up marriage at all since you were responding to a comment that said nothing about extramarital sex?
Created:
-->
@Plisken
I'm sorry but to perfectly frank I'm not sure what you are agreeing with.That's plausible
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
I don't take either of you seriously, I think you're idiots. Losers.
Still can't make a point without resorting to insults and personal attacks I see. If I were your god(s) I'd be very disappointed in this sort of behavior (assuming your god(s) is/are real and that they can feel disappointment).
Created:
-->
@triangle.128k
What are you on about here? While it's true that all atheists are different I'm pretty sure most of us don't worship at all.
Created:
-->
@Mopac
Ultimately, I think it is better to learn from the people who believe it than the people who don't.
Allow me to respectfully disagree. It is far better to learn from a knowledgeable person then a faithful one.
Created:
-->
@Plisken
Something else about this comment. Does this mean that two married homosexuals can have nonsinful sex? I'm pretty sure that's what your saying here right?All sex outside of marriage is sinful.
Created:
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
My self esteem was never under discussion but thank you for your concern.
Created:
-->
@Plisken
There you see. Faith based beliefs can be used to harm others. (In this case harming the self esteem of individuals who are only fulfilling their primary biological function).All sex outside of marriage is sinful.
Created:
-->
@Plisken
Faith as in any faith. Religion of peace in this context would seem to mean unable to promote violence.
It is however Grugore's thread perhaps I misunderstood him.
Created:
-->
@Plisken
All faith based beliefs can be dangerous. All of them. There is no religion of peace any more than there is a political system of peace.
Created: