Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite. - John Kenneth Galbraith
I'm retarded 
quote:
Karnaj had this to say about Matthew Broderick:
I had several witty answers all involving some form of sodomy, but truth be told, I have no religion. The supernatural interests me in much the same way a TV show or book would--as a curiosity. I honestly don't feel that warm and happy feeling that religious people do when they talk about affirming their faith, and I certainly don't believe in any sort of god or gods.
This sums me up pretty well.
Though I don't have any sodomy jokes, so minus that part.
Spaghetti monsters seem just as useful as anything else as a means of quieting neolithic insecurities while huddling around the campfire as protection against things that move in the night.
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
Dr. Gee fucked around with this message on 07-07-2008 at 04:36 PM.
I am a naturalist, as opposed to a supernaturalist, in that I do not believe that anything is beyond the scope of the natural universe. To supernaturalists this makes me an atheist, and because most people default to supernaturalism this is how I usually describe myself.
However, I am not a nihilist. I do place faith in some things. The primacy of humanity by virtue of sentience, for example, and a prevailing order to and objectivity of the universe and human nature. To atheists, this makes me a deist in the order of Albert Einstein and Benjamin Franklin.
quote:
ACES! Another post by Maradon!:
However, I am not a nihilist. I do place faith in some things. The primacy of humanity by virtue of sentience, for example, and a prevailing order to and objectivity of the universe and human nature. To atheists, this makes me a deist in the order of Albert Einstein and Benjamin Franklin.
That doesn't really sound deist to me! My understanding of deism is that there's a specific entity who created the universe, but doesn't interfere in day-to-day matters and isn't specifically the god of <insert theistic religion>.
None of which you mentioned so I wouldn't apply the label there.
Maradon! fucked around with this message on 07-07-2008 at 07:20 PM.
quote:
From the book of Maradon!, chapter 3, verse 16:
However, I am not a nihilist. I do place faith in some things. The primacy of humanity by virtue of sentience, for example, and a prevailing order to and objectivity of the universe and human nature. To atheists, this makes me a deist in the order of Albert Einstein and Benjamin Franklin.
That can also be called "Randian" (or Objectivist, if you prefer).
quote:
Maradon! said this about your mom:
I guess that depends on your perspective.I am a naturalist, as opposed to a supernaturalist, in that I do not believe that anything is beyond the scope of the natural universe. To supernaturalists this makes me an atheist, and because most people default to supernaturalism this is how I usually describe myself.
However, I am not a nihilist. I do place faith in some things. The primacy of humanity by virtue of sentience, for example, and a prevailing order to and objectivity of the universe and human nature. To atheists, this makes me a deist in the order of Albert Einstein and Benjamin Franklin.
A right proper fellow of the Enlightenment you are! You'd do well with Comte, Condorcet, and Diderot--to mention a few frogs.
Kant and DesCartes would probably be right up your alley.
But Ayn Rand and Immanuel Kant are also awesome to be certain
quote:
The propaganda machine of Vorbis's junta released this statement:
A right proper fellow of the Enlightenment you are! You'd do well with Comte, Condorcet, and Diderot--to mention a few frogs.Kant and DesCartes would probably be right up your alley.
Fuck you and your fucking name-dropping. When I was your age, I was shredding the arguments of creationists and Christians before my 1 PM breakfast! Get more substantive, else I'll drop some motherfuckin' science on you one time.
Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite. - John Kenneth Galbraith
quote:
Karnaj's account was hax0red to write:
Fuck you and your fucking name-dropping. When I was your age, I was shredding the arguments of creationists and Christians before my 1 PM breakfast! Get more substantive, else I'll drop some motherfuckin' science on you one time.
Go ahead and drop some science on me. I'm content with my mostly-ontic understanding of the world. I've got enough of an ontological understanding to not worry that the sun won't rise in the morning, or be surprised by simple natural phenomena. That's all the more a literature major needs.
And it's not like it's hard to shred the arguments of creationists--they're unpopular and fundamentally flawed both scientifically and theologically. Though, you did manage to execute your refutations with eloquence unbefitting a cock-rammed mouth. 
OH SHIT.
[ edit: I just realized I've actually read a decent bit of each thinker I dropped in this thread. Go go liberal arts! ] Vorbis fucked around with this message on 07-08-2008 at 12:58 AM.
Then sodomize them.
It's okay to do it if you do it in the name of holy vengeance.
quote:
Captain Tarquinn put down Tada! magazine long enough to type:
This thread makes me want to worship Khorne.
I worship corn.
Well, actually, I worship its avatar, Kentucky Straight Bourbon Whiskey, which by law must be made from at least 51% corn.
Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite. - John Kenneth Galbraith
"Don't want to sound like a fanboy, but I am with you. I'll buy it for sure, it's just a matter of for how long I will be playing it..."
- Silvast, Battle.net forums
"Don't want to sound like a fanboy, but I am with you. I'll buy it for sure, it's just a matter of for how long I will be playing it..."
- Silvast, Battle.net forums
quote:
Karnaj's fortune cookie read:
I worship corn.Well, actually, I worship its avatar, Kentucky Straight Bourbon Whiskey, which by law must be made from at least 51% corn.
Sorry, I just realized that I made a typo in my last post. Captain Tarquinn fucked around with this message on 07-08-2008 at 01:52 PM.
Just because you haven't seen a million dollars, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
quote:
Norim the Stumpy probably says this to all the girls:
Just because you haven't seen a million dollars, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Whoops, too late, I quoted it.
quote:
Just because you haven't seen a million dollars, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
You are going to Hell for this comment. Taeldian fucked around with this message on 07-08-2008 at 02:48 PM.
Now, of course, that goes right back around and hits him with his responsibility to prove God's existence. That's why people are getting ready to pounce. But, after all, he's not asserting that proof exists. Nor that it should exist. The metaphysical world, as I've said earlier, isn't contained by the physical world, nor could it be studied by the same sciences that study the physical world. Where it interacts, that's where things get murky--that's why neurosciences are so interesting. Thoughts, emotions, &c., are all real, but they're not actual. But they are expressed by people, and so they, in some fashion, descend into the physical world through a physical mechanism.
But, we can't conduct rigorous, methodical experiments on anything metaphysical, since it's not actual, and so it is said not to exist. At least, that's been the case since Hobbes brought materialist thought into vogue.
quote:
Dr. Gee's account was hax0red to write:
Atheist, although the arguments for His Noodly Magnificense are beginning to sway me.
Bingo.
I'm more of a mind like this: Religion doesnt have a part in my normal, everyday existance in any way, really, so I have no real opinion of it myself. I enjoy learning about religion the same way that I enjoy watching HGTV. Sometimes its interesting, sometimes I just want to turn off the TV.
quote:
Vorbising:
The metaphysical world, as I've said earlier, isn't contained by the physical world, nor could it be studied by the same sciences that study the physical world. Where it interacts, that's where things get murky--that's why neurosciences are so interesting. Thoughts, emotions, &c., are all real, but they're not actual. But they are expressed by people, and so they, in some fashion, descend into the physical world through a physical mechanism.
What I don't understand about this portrayal is that if the supernatural isn't contained by the physical world, how can you make the claim that the supernatural affects the physical world at all?
If the supernatural affects the physical universe, then it's effects would most certainly be quantifiable.
quote:
There was much rejoicing when Maradon! said this:
What I don't understand about this portrayal is that if the supernatural isn't contained by the physical world, how can you make the claim that the supernatural affects the physical world at all?If the supernatural affects the physical universe, then it's effects would most certainly be quantifiable.
This is the murky area, as I said. To portray the physical and metaphysical as mutually exclusive would be incorrect, but does allow for the conclusion that we haven't a damned reason to care about anything metaphysical. Rather, they're mostly exclusive; there is some overlap. Things like free will, identity, morality, &c., are not what you would call physical things. Yet they are known innately and naturally (that is, they're not entirely social constructions--their trappings, which are legion, are certainly conventional, but they exist as universals), and thus must in some fashion exist physically.
Take religion for example. Mankind is, as man, inclined to believe in some form of a metaphysical world. Even in Enlightenment countries where professed atheism and general spiritual apathy have become the epistemological norm, the youth show more religious affiliation than their parents. Physically, this innate "spiritual inclination" of man can be explained genetically. But it also is a, to be hatefully obtuse, shadowy hint of the penumbra emanating from man's metaphysical existence.
Of course, that conclusion can be entirely discounted by materialist methodology and ruled as an extraneous theory that gets us nowhere when it comes to understanding our world. And rightfully so--it takes an amount of faith to not reduce man and the world to solely their physical natures.
The argument that I find best suited to show, from tangible evidence, the reality and importance of our metaphysical dimension belongs to Professor Voegelin: The strength of a philosophy can be seen by its fruits when applied to politics--The Enlightenment's views of man resulted in the bloodshed of the French Revolution, which sparked the entire series of Marxist revolts, and thus contributed to most every major conflict in the 20th century.
To recover from my tangent: The physical traces of the metaphysical are, to be redundant, physical and in that fashion quantifiable. That those traces are merely physical is both a popular and an understandable perception. It's like trying to identify the source of a draft in a dark room--you can find the chink in the wall that's allowing for the room to develop an air current, but you can only speculate as to the atmospheric conditions outside and their causes.
If we could find any phenomena for which the metaphysical were the most likely explanation (which we have yet to do, but is made plausible under this portrayal), we could certainly infer a lot about the "effector" from them. In other words, scientifically analyzing the metaphysical.
It doesn't make sense for the metaphysical to be able to physically effect the physical without itself being subject to the same analysis by which we'd study any other physical phenomenon.
As a side note, I also take great umbrage at the arbitrary assignment of atrocities committed by atheists to atheism.
quote:
Maradon! had this to say about dark elf butts:
There's actually a great deal that you can tell from that draft, though, particularly if the draft were caused by the atmospheric conditions outside.If we could find any phenomena for which the metaphysical were the most likely explanation (which we have yet to do, but is made plausible under this portrayal), we could certainly infer a lot about the "effector" from them. In other words, scientifically analyzing the metaphysical.
It doesn't make sense for the metaphysical to be able to physically effect the physical without itself being subject to the same analysis by which we'd study any other physical phenomenon.
As a side note, I also take great umbrage at the arbitrary assignment of atrocities committed by atheists to atheism.
Shit, I don't understand the way in which they interact, and my portrayal is a rather rough sketch of to what extent I do understand it. But what I can say in good faith is that by some mechanism--whether it be draft-like, in which case your conclusion is quite correct, or if it be some sort of parallelism akin to Strange Action at a Distance, or some other option--the metaphysical and physical worlds interact enough that it is reasonable to discuss the metaphysical from physical evidence, and yet also reasonable to assume its non-existence in some form of naturalistic determination.
And, as a response to your side note, your umbrage, I'm afraid, is taken early and incorrectly. Atrocities are committed by individuals--atheism isn't the cause, much like Catholicism wasn't the cause of Catholic corruption. However, atheism is a symptom--a rather benign one--of the materialist reduction. It's because the Marquis de Sade was a fucked up person that he day-dreamed about cannibalistic slaughter orgies all day. His atheism was just a side note. Robespierre was violently compassionate, but it wasn't because of his religious devotion to human dignity.
I didn't mean to be unclear about that, I just didn't feel like writing a Dethessay complete with footnotes and appendices of minutiae.
quote:
The strength of a philosophy can be seen by its fruits when applied to politics--The Enlightenment's views of man resulted in the bloodshed of the French Revolution, which sparked the entire series of Marxist revolts, and thus contributed to most every major conflict in the 20th century.
Maybe I read that wrong but it certainly sounds to me like it's blaming atheists for every major conflict in the 20th century.
Other than that we're in agreement in not knowing how all that other stuff works!
