Total posts: 13,876
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
I'm just referring to burden of proof.
Not burden of proof relative to a specific context or exchange.
So:
I propose that the universe is contained within a solid box, therefore the burden of proof rests upon you to prove that it doesn't.
Is this a logical progression of reasoning?
Or just an easy cop out for me.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Salixes
And such a simple concept.No
Therefore I think that it is very fair to suggest that you might only function at somewhere around 50%.
Or perhaps you just simply cannot be bothered to think outside of your limited little box.
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say the latter.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dynasty
If you were prepared to be logical you would admit that the logical progression would be GOD - I WILL PROVE GOD EXISTS rather that GOD - YOU PROVE GOD DOESN'T EXIST.The burden of proof.
The existence of something without proof, would not be questioned unless it had been proposed.
Theists shifting the burden of proof is just a convenient cop out, in other words a way of avoiding the primary burden of proof.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
Exactly.If God does indeed exist.
Though as is regularly pointed out, any imaginary form can be postulated.
Has Kalam ever achieved anything other than postulation?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Salixes
Debateart religious convention is generally based around Christianity with some references to Judaism and Islam and the occasional bit of Hinduism throw in.
Though generally it's Christanity that comes under scrutiny.
My reference to an unconventional interpretation of God is based upon what might or might not be the outcome and purposes of material evolution.
Can you comprehend this?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
An ocean of conscious awareness.
Ok.
That's not much different to a cloud of data, especially if you consider what form A.I. might take in the future and what form A.I. might have taken in the past.
Something that naturally evolves rather than something that supernaturally exists without cause.
An ultimate state of matter prior to the collapse and rebirth of a universe.
Perhaps it's just as hard for you to get your head around this concept as it is for me to get my head around your God idea.
Though as I see, both concepts could actually refer to the same thing.
Created:
-->
@Vader
The postage stamp joke was mildly amusing.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Christen
Smart people will be smart.
And less smart people will be less smart.
And guns are the solution?
And aliens are little green creatures from outer space.
And if Lesbian Dance Theory is marketable, then that's capitalism for you.
And money is the one true God.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
A sentient blob of organic matter is a sentient blob of organic matter.
And peripheral labelling is something that passes the time of day.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
Why should it be a he and why should it not be Chinese?/
Why should it be the long haired Northern European hippy guy of Bible illustrations.
It was probably originally envisaged as a swarthy black haired Middle Easterner.
It might look just like E.T.
How do we know if no one has ever seen it?
I personally think that it is a formless cloud of data.
I won't be worshipping it though.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Salixes
Lobster Telephone Strawman Haha.
And you will have to explain "Kerrist". Not an expression that I am familiar with and I cannot find a relevant definition anywhere. Many thanks.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Haha.
Salixes one track mind unfortunately blinkers their judgement somewhat. They're missing the wood for the trees as it were.
And everyone and everything is a strawman other than their own blinkered angst.
Good fun nonetheless.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Salixes
No.
Only if God instructed all peoples all at the same time, would that be true.
Geographical separation might bring about different interpretations of the same thing.
Most religions have a similar format when you clear away all the bullshit.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Salixes
You're still getting bogged down in the same old, god and species debate and therefore missing the bigger creationary/evolutionary picture.
As I have already stated elsewhere, to much negative angst is perhaps clouding your judgement.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Salixes
As I clearly stated I am an atheist in regard to a supernatural God phenomena.
And probably just like you, I think that conventional religions are pointless nonsense.
But unfortunately or not as the case may be, the argument that you cited is sound.
Something that cannot be proven, therefore cannot be disproven either. Pink elephants and all.
So better to channel all that angst energy, into calm positive reasoning.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
We have very little or even no understanding regarding the reality of everything.
All that we are fairly sure of is this universe.
We certainly have no way of knowing if there was or might be a before or an after.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Hmm.
Try the media or admin.
Depends on how well you can market yourself.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Salixes
An alternative hypothesis might suggest that people of Chinese origins were or might be instrumental in the creation of the old or new God.
That is to ask, might everything have evolved in exactly the same way previously and might everything evolve in exactly the same way in due course?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Salixes
Although I am in conventional terms an atheist, I am still patently aware that your above comment cannot be substantiated. It's very much a catch 22 situation regarding the unlikely or likely existence of a supreme creative being.Because the fact is, god does not exist.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Salixes
Depends upon how broad ranging you care to be with your discussion.
If you are just talking species development then I would perhaps have to agree with you.
But that is only considering a tiny piece of the picture.
At some point there had to be some sort of creation event (something from nothing), from which a developmental process (evolution) began. Organic and consequent species development is very much the latter part of that process.
The God idea obviously evolved when a humanoid species started to derive the ability to ask questions.
And of course a supreme (humanoid) being hypothesis was probably always going to be the likely outcome.
That is to say, that humans would create a God in their own image.
Nonetheless, the cause of primary creation is a separate issue and all possible cards are still firmly on the table.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Litigation and media would probably be the two highest earners from the current wave of trendy P.C. offence related issues.
There's also probably a raft of new administrative jobs being created to police the diversity and equality sector.
Perhaps you could find a niche in one of these industries.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Milk and beef.
Assuming that the majority of right wing American Conservative Christians don't go in for all that faffy modern dietary nonsense.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dynasty
The joke is the joke.
It's the recipient that creates the offence.
One can either choose to be offended or not or simply to ignore.
Though nowadays it is extremely fashionable and P.C. to choose the offended option and I also think that it is fair to say that some people derive a certain enjoyment and satisfaction from that presumption.
And of course if offence is marketed cleverly there is bound to be money to be made.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
What's new?
All leaders tend to become useless eventually.
Occasionally you have to wait for them to die.
It's more a question of who serves what purpose and for whom.
Created:
Posted in:
@RationalMadman
The penis evolved/was designed as a penetrative device to facilitate copulation.
The piss thing is a clever bit of multitasking.
And with a worldwide population of over 7.5 billion, NoFap was probably inevitable.
All that time on peoples hands and nothing to do.
Best extricate that stale jiz.
Created:
Posted in:
Kalam: This so that so there.
1. What is God and what was it's cause?
2. So we assume that everything including God begins.
3. We assume that the universe and more appropriately matter began to exist.
4. Therefore we assume that the universe and more appropriately matter has a cause.
5. And the notion of transcendency is what it is. A fanciful higher brow word intended to define something that is only notional.
6. And arguments such as Kalam attempt to give validity to notional assumptions. Which in terms of knowledge leaves us still firmly stuck at the beginning of something without a clue.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
Hope all goes well for you.
I admire your unwavering faith, despite our differences.
Regards.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@dustryder
It's all about satisfying inherent reproductive demands.
How one achieves such satisfaction is largely irrelevant.
Unless procreation is the actual purpose. Nonetheless there are ways around that one which do not involve heterosexual copulation.
The whole living together, marriage, fitted kitchen thing, in reality is completely irrelevant as long as the perpetuation of the species is not affected.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
@3RU7AL
There is a distinct lexical difference between being perceived to be reasonable or not, and having reasons.
A. Has reasons to think that B. is unreasonable, giving B. reasons to suggest that A. is being unreasonable.
Similarly B. has reasons to assume that they are being reasonable and that A's. reasons are therefore unreasonable, whilst A assumes that their reasons are reasonable and that B's reasons are therefore unreasonable.
And so on.
The reason defines the reasoning irrespective of whether the reason is perceived to be either reasonable or unreasonable.
Therefore the reason is always reasonable irrespective of whether or not the reason is considered to be either reasonable or unreasonable.
If you get my drift.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Some people might consider that the propensity to believe in various nonsenses, is perhaps genetic sickness.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
It's an age thing isn't it?
I think that there are ways of doing things.
And different ways of doing things, which I have personally been conditioned to find preferable.
This might or might not make me seem conservative or liberal depending upon the point of view of the observer.
I very occasionally find my Nokia a useful tool.
But the majority of the time it's where I left it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
I have a years old Nokia (purchase price £9.99) that just does calls and texts, which cost's me £1 per week..
And I never ever us all my allowances.
I was in a restaurant with my wife yesterday and the younger couple at the next table spent most of their time when not eating, communicating with their respective devices rather than with each other.
Evolution maybe?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Homosexuality wasn't the trend back in the day.
All necessary facilitations now permitted.
2020.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Well my math is fine.
Though there was no complex math required with that problem.
It was simply about sequencing digits relative to certain criteria.
I like to do number puzzles, sudoku etc. maybe that helps.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Bigotry is one of those grey words.
Who has the right to decide the difference between a difference of opinion and intolerance?
After all, people tend to either agree or disagree. Otherwise a stasis of indecisive tolerance would perpetuate
Isn't it just the strength of the accompanying rhetoric that is used to define bigotry or not?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
A few minutes.
Most of the time was taken up by checking that I hadn't infringed the rules.
Concentrating on rule 10 was the key.
Created:
Posted in:
Everything is natural.
Stuff and things either are or are not.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Salixes
Depending upon age of course.
Sex, food and survival are the natural preoccupations.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
Yep.
I've decided to flip on religion too.
Tomorrow I will be mostly Sikh.
Created:
Posted in:
@ BrotherDThomas
You can take it as the truth if you wish. That's your prerogative.
I certainly cannot accept mythology as being wholly truthful.
There certainly may have been a Jesus character.
But the flood and the big boat thing just doesn't realistically stack up.
Therein lies the mythology.
A fact and fiction human contrived pseudo-hypothesis.
And the Christian pseudo-hypothesis is but one of many.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
You speak of things that you think you know.
Rather than things that you actually know.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
I know why these things are done.
Though I have been conditioned to think that they are pointless.
Whereas you think that they have value.
Just variable data programming and utilisation.
Similarly you think you know what the Ultimate Reality is.
Whereas I think that neither of us actually has the ability to know what it is and therefore we can only speculate.
Which is what all religion is....Speculation.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
Be honest.
You haven't got a clue.
It's no good whatsoever attempting to explain the finer details when the basics already have you baffled.
?-1-0-1-0-1-0-1-0-1-0-1-0-?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
LOL.
If your last reply is not a rant then I don't know what is.
Nonetheless:
Trump is the protagonist and Netanyahu the Zionist is his friend and they recently met inside of America.
And so the thread unravelled itself.
And I never mentioned Sandinistas, Bolsheviks or Maoists.
Whereas you, unwittingly or not have just introduced them to the thread.
See how these things unravel?
And all the above created during a period quiet reflection at the start of my day.
No ranting was or is ever needed.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
Just as you are unwilling to entertain the idea that you might just be barking up the wrong tree.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
If you think about it logically the whole flood thing and the big boat and the subsequent regeneration thing just doesn't stack up.
So is it really worth getting hung up about?
Created: