Just A Reminder About Religious People

[willie24]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If someone says that he's a believer because he feels the touch of god, his belief is not logically falsifiable. So, you know, stop trying to falsify it. More importantly, IMO, don't call him a moron because he's using a different (yet equally valid) epistemology.

[/ QUOTE ]

agreed.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm afraid I disagree. I have read the recent posts about intuition and logic. The problem which was addressed regarding the valid uses of intuition do not extend to being touched by god. We can use intuition to arrive at better conclusion's then with logic when the topics are knowable, and then only after a great deal of study.

The claims that are made with regard to god are unknowable. We must indeed use logic to determine that what is presented to us as the word of god is indeed fabricated to at least some extent. Mistranslated or dileberately enhanced after the fact. You cannot know the authenticness of Bible in your heart, with out first having great understanding of lit.

[/ QUOTE ]

i guess i don't see what (what we are talking about) has to do with intuition vs. logic. i agree with the jist of what you are saying, but i don't think it applies. the "believer" is not trying to reach a logical conclusion through intuition. he is STARTING OUT with an assumption that whatever he believes is true. you do the exact same thing when you believe that the world is exists outside of yourself and that what you see and hear and smell and taste and feel the touch of is indicative of reality.

[DougShrapnel]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If someone says that he's a believer because he feels the touch of god, his belief is not logically falsifiable. So, you know, stop trying to falsify it. More importantly, IMO, don't call him a moron because he's using a different (yet equally valid) epistemology.

[/ QUOTE ]

agreed.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm afraid I disagree. I have read the recent posts about intuition and logic. The problem which was addressed regarding the valid uses of intuition do not extend to being touched by god. We can use intuition to arrive at better conclusion's then with logic when the topics are knowable, and then only after a great deal of study.

The claims that are made with regard to god are unknowable. We must indeed use logic to determine that what is presented to us as the word of god is indeed fabricated to at least some extent. Mistranslated or dileberately enhanced after the fact. You cannot know the authenticness of Bible in your heart, with out first having great understanding of lit.

[/ QUOTE ]

i guess i don't see what (what we are talking about) has to do with intuition vs. logic. i agree with the jist of what you are saying, but i don't think it applies. the "believer" is not trying to reach a logical conclusion through intuition. he is STARTING OUT with an assumption that whatever he believes is true. you do the exact same thing when you believe that the world is exists outside of yourself and that what you see and hear and smell and taste and feel the touch of is indicative of reality.

[/ QUOTE ]It has to do with intuition because people are saying that they feel God's work, or plan, or hand, or noodley appendage. Starting with the assumption that FSM's noodley appendage touched him is an act of logic. But feeling the al dente is intuition.

We can discuss it both way's. Just let me know which one. Are we talking about assuming the FSM exists, or are we talking about sensing the touch of the al dente appendage? Or something entirely different?

[willie24]

[ QUOTE ]
. But feeling the al dente is intuition.

[/ QUOTE ]
i don't know if intuition is the right word. maybe it is. i guess i've never felt "the noodle", so i wouldn't know. either way, it's a trivial distinction. you can percieve reality through your senses or percieve it through your "intuition" or through some other means - but you can never know that what you experience is more "real" than what someone else experiences. that is my only point.

if we take for granted the 'standard' model of the world, then of course i agree that science is right and faith is wrong. the problem is that the religious faithful probably don't the accept the standard model, even if they don't realize it.

edit: "the standard model of the world" is a phrase i just made up meaning: the model of the world where one reality exists, time and space exist, and consciousness is either separate from the material world, or is created by the material world.

[luckyme]

[ QUOTE ]
edit: "the standard model of the world" is a phrase i just made up meaning: the model of the world where one reality exists, time and space exist, and consciousness is either separate from the material world, or is created by the material world.


[/ QUOTE ]

Please make a post that is true in all respects to the concept that the 'standard model' as you present it is false.

luckyme

[willie24]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
edit: "the standard model of the world" is a phrase i just made up meaning: the model of the world where one reality exists, time and space exist, and consciousness is either separate from the material world, or is created by the material world.


[/ QUOTE ]

Please make a post that is true in all respects to the concept that the 'standard model' as you present it is false.

luckyme

[/ QUOTE ]

i'm having difficulty decoding your request. i take it to mean: please suggest a model of the world that does not meet my definition of the standard model.

if i am reading that wrong, please clarify for me.

possibilities:
the world is a dream you are having (this is ambiguous. could mean different things depending on who/what "you" are)

more specifically, consciousness creates the world and itself in a loop-like manner. for instance, "the world doesn't exist. it is just imagined. where did the imaginer come from? he is part of the imagination he is having. the dream only exists relative to itself."

related idea, even more specific, would be that there are infinite parallel worlds, in which every possible reality is happening at once etc yada yada yada.

i have a feeling i might have misinterpreted your request, so please restate if necessary.