zedvictor4

For sure.

Context allows us to focus less broadly.

But very rarely is context narrow enough to be able to resolve an issue precisely.

No two human computers are ever programmed exactly the same.

A bit like "dirven".

Only joking.

I wouldn't necessarily agree.

I was recently discussing the word family with some one, and although there is a general meaning to the word, it is also imprecisely definitive.

This is also the case with other words, belief is another example where imprecision is built into the definition.

Though I did conclude that such definitions were perfectly imperfect.

Nonetheless imprecision allows for variable interpretation.

And a pro-lifer might say that the Law is an Ass.

Whereas we know that The Law is The Law and an Ass is a Donkey.

Abortion is an emotive argument instilled in some.

And a pragmatic argument acquired by others.

And words have variable meanings and are open to variable interpretation. Definitions are rarely precise.

So for as long as people are allowed to form their own opinions, abortion will remain a contentious issue.

Pro lifers tend to be only selectively pro-life though.

And interestingly some vegans are pro-choice.

Woke is as woke does hey?

The truth is that, GODS were usually created in a known image by humans, and then they wrote stories about them.

Often men by men.

Though certain older multi-GOD beliefs were less misogynistic

And Hindu's were slightly wackier.

People do and say things to get themselves noticed.

And current agendas and trends might allow certain people to benefit from getting themselves noticed.

Political advantage, as it were.

Mr Trump was a prime example.

Give the people what they think they want, when they think they want it.

So Hindu's with acne float your boat?

Stephen the Incomparable.

You said it.

Exactly my point.

We can and do have differing opinions about separate issues, even if separate issues might have commonality.

It would be a tad dictatorial to propose otherwise.

How is all that any different to any other fantasy tale?

You are proposing from speculation only, the behaviour and requirements of a "being" that cannot be shown to exist.

So, based upon the writings of J.R.R. Tolkien, is it reasonable for me to accept without actual proof that Middle Earth must exist.

Albeit conveniently, outside of time, space and matter.

As ever.

GOD principle sound,

But not a floaty about Middle Eastern Being, outside of time, space and matter.

Basically because a "Being" implies physicality, which implies matter with event and duration.

Actuality.

Hmmmmm. Doesn't really make sense.

Because we always hold different opinions about different arguments.

So, as I questioned previously, is it therefore intellectually dishonest  to partake in a democratic process and not support the democratic result of that process.

Because supporting the process infers that one supports the outcome...A premise in other words.

I could ask the same about religious beliefs.

If we regard Christian belief  as the basis of a premise that infers ones support for the Abrahamic GOD, then would it be intellectually dishonest to not also support Islam.

I'm guessing that in both instances, you would reserve the intellectual right to disagree.

So first off.

A. Tell me what/who exactly is GOD.

When we've explicitly sorted out this conundrum, we can perhaps move on to the necessity of a relationship.

That's assuming that GOD (as yet unidentified) does indeed want a relationship with one and all.

Though, given that GOD has decided to remain unidentifiable for as long as it has been unidentifiable, it's therefore quite likely that GOD isn't actually going to be seeking a relationship with a human being anytime soon.

And as you quite rightly point out, actually identifying GOD, is  not the same as simply saying I believe in GOD.

 

It's probably quite content with a few Angels for company.....A notion which in itself is only worth considering if you can provide a positive outcome to A. 

For sure, we are all currently force fed woke gob-shite relative to skin tone and sexuality issues.

Sort of unequal equality, as it were.

I'm guessing that Mike is quite savvy and won't be unemployed for evermore.

And there's room for more than one debate website anyway.

I for one, appreciated the quality of DebateArt.

And wish Sir Lancelot well in his venture.

What would we do without people like Mike and Sir Lancelot?

Something else I assume.

Well for sure, electrical provision can be both a social and personal objective.

Though for reasons directly related to human demand for a continuous supply of energy and consumer goods, other issues relative to global environmental integrity have arisen.

And as the stoic old guard and it's fear and opposition to change slowly dies out, so the new guard sees the necessity to address issues of environmental sustainability.

Environmental sustainability relative to the sustainability of species existence. Not really something to be ignorantly disregarded.

Of course we could just ignore and say what the heck,  and keep pumping CO2 into the atmosphere, but fossil fuel is a limited resource anyway and will eventually run out, especially as population and demand increases.

So why not start to address the issue now and kill two birds with one stone, as the saying goes.

And in respect of my own personal situation:

We installed solar panels onto our  previous property.

We have since relocated and are in the process of renovating an old cottage, which will be re-roofed in May, with Solar panels to follow as and when finances will allow.

Unfortunately we do not earn  politicians salaries.

Solar panels, solar farms and wind farms are quite common in the UK now, by the way

And perhaps we also have a more integrated appreciation of environmental concerns, at a governmental level and also within the wider society.

And a goal, I suppose.

The goal would be survival and procreation.

And we would be infused with the plan of action.

Which I think, is similar to what you were saying.

The Electro-Chemically charged reality and function of a Mass relative to Universal Universality

So as a democratic American it would therefore be hypocritical for one to hold differing opinions about a democratically elected government and a democratically unelected opposition party. Because partisanship would be founded on a lie about ones claim to support democracy.

Because basically, you are saying that it is hypocritical to have varying opinions about related issues. Or in respect of the case in point, loosely related issues.

Sort of upholding the right to freedom of speech and expression, whilst denigrating the right to freedom of speech and expression.

I'm my own Master.

And also a Slave to myself.

So now its A then C.

So why not A then B then C.

And therefore everyone is a hypocrite except everyone who isn't a hypocrite.

If A then B.

Sort of like saying that a vegan cant believe in GOD.

Sort of conflating.

I think.

Coal Black and the seven mixed race, gender neutral un-pro-nouned LGBTQ, shorter people.

Interestingly, Coal Black will be voiced by a pasty Dane.

Yep, it takes a long time.

Thing is.

There's not a whole lot of difference between two fig leaves.

Well.

Nuclear Power Plants cost a fortune and are effective for their viable duration, then they become a logistical nightmare.

So an alternative is perhaps a better option.

And given that the Sun bombards us with enough energy in a day to supply our needs for a year (generalisation), it would seem reasonable to invest some time and effort into harnessing some of said energy.

Same applies  to the wind, which is essentially also a Sun driven energy source.

Hence the phrase renewable energy,  but obviously only for the life of the Sun.

Of course, we could also re-educate ourselves to be not so demanding and greedy.

You, me and politicians alike.

Hmmmmmmmmm.  

After all, out of the 8.7 million living species on Planet Earth, only one demands unlimited electrical energy on tap.

Yep, I agree.

Ignorance basically,

As in not knowing.

So we made stuff up because we could.

Stuff that wasn't particularly logical.

And some kids still get taught this stuff.

Even though we know far more now than we ever did.

And even though no one has ever met a GOD and taken a selfie with it.

And if we continue to teach kids old illogical stuff,

They will continue to grow up believing in old illogical stuff,

And teaching it to their kids.

And some will inevitably do silly things.

Nope.

GODDO had a bad experience once,

With a Middle Eastern type chick.

Got her pregnant,

And the rest is history.

Thought she was a bloke,

It was dark and the outfit was,

Not fancy,

But,

Gender neutral.

A World teeming with human organisms,

In a World where expectation exceeds attainability,

In a World where innovation exceeds the innovator,

In a World where innovation dictates,

What will happen next.

 

Religion is inspired by ignorance.

Nutty Man based religion is inspired by ignorance and testosterone.

Doesn't matter which club.

But some clubs tend to be nuttier than others.

Was that irony?

Apostasy is just another made up thing for religious anti-socialists, who have a propensity for violence.

Same old religious stuff then.

War is entertainment.

For sure.

Religion is undoubtedly politics.

All possibly true.

Something might matter,

I think that is the necessary motivation.

Normal is data manipulation and existence relative to programmed data and inherent programming.

Survival, procreation, getting up to do stuff in the morning, and ideas of fulfilment.

The Webb telescope only finds old light relative to an older Universe.

It doesn't find old galaxies per se.

Galaxies are as old as they are.

Probably a similar age to our own.

Though I understand the significance of the old light to the New Scientist.

Maybe something/s in a distant galaxy are currently thinking the same as you and I.

Nice to meet a fellow British Atheist.

Welcome to Dart.

I went to Sunday School,

And came home again,

None the wiser.

Mum was cooking Sunday Lunch,

And Dad had gone to the Pub,

With Uncle Jack.

He wasn't my real Uncle.

My Dad taught me all I needed to know about religion.

The "criminal element" is simply a labelled collective with an opposing ideology.

Labelled by an opposing collective with an opposing ideology.

Who dictates to society, will depend upon the size and power of the collective.

For sure it does.

I would suggest that there is a tendency to never really consider what A.I. means.

I would further suggest that the word "alternative" is more appropriate.

An intelligent entity will be just that.

Whereas a programmed device, remains just that.

A.I. will evolve, as everything does.

And the human manipulation and development of matter is no more or less a part of the process.

If you teach kids non-sense, then they will grow up believing in non-sense.

Muslims, Christians et al.

And some are taught extreme non-sense.

It's just the way it is.

How far does an object travel in 4 months, before it rebounds?

One can only guess, based upon known data.

Though I will be honest and say that I don't run with current gender trends.

You are either a sperm producer or an egg producer.

Failing that you are a developmental anomaly.

Though it would be foolish to suggest that species evolution isn't ongoing.

@ Malcharaz.

Will it be made, or will it evolve.

To be truly A.I.

Must it become self perpetuating?

I think so.

Free floating data extracting energy from the ether.

Does A.I. need to be robot shaped.

Though to a degree, we are already under the spell of airborne data.

You're clearly an Angel.

Believe it or not.

Despite what we are force fed these days,

Males and females are different.

Therefore they have a tendency to behave differently.

One has to actively seek out  this sort of conscious outlet.

And females are clearly less prone to doing so, and also tend not to hang around for long.

Maybe it's as simple as that.

Hopefully you will hang around for a while.

But not so vitriolically as Poly.

Well if you could ask the Russian people, they might tell you different.

But of course who would dare  to tell you what they really think.

No one wants to accidentally fall out of a tower block window if they can possibly help it.

And I wasn't necessarily thinking dermatitis.

But more, old school cold war paranoia.

I agree.

The internal  loneliness of the self.

Light into images.

Sound into noise.

Particulates into odours.

Touch into feeling.

Data into thoughts.

A. Sin is a concept relative to evolved intellect.

B. Human nature and associated aggression is a base function relative to survival and procreation.

So we could attempt to re-educate the entire human race.

And possibly re-engineer the human machine.

What are the chances of achieving either?