Just A Reminder About Religious People

[VarlosZ]

[ QUOTE ]
Its not about falsifiability, if the believer recognises its a feely type of thing rather than a rational belief then bully for them but they cannot be taken seriously if they place their belief as more valid then others peoples feely beliefs.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's a common human failing, not a specifically theistic one.

[DougShrapnel]

[ QUOTE ]
What do you mean by "knowable"?

[/ QUOTE ]I mean a couple things, first the deeper meaning: that if it's typical to believe in Allah in your culture those touches by god come from allah, if it's Jesus that you grew up with then it's jesus that touches you, demons, aliens, ghosts it's all the same. The feelings are of course real, but they are agnostic, they are non exclusive to the meanings that we subscribe to them.

And the lessor meaning is that anyone who claims to have special knowledge of God is a liar.

[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 feel like its logically falsifiable. Don't knock my equaly valid epistemology.

chez

[/ QUOTE ]

agree again. the bottom line is that to have any sort of belief, you must start out at some unprovable position. for instance: "i think the sky is blue, because i see it as blue." might be more 'logical' than "i think the sky is green, because i feel like it's green," but it isn't any more valid or provable. how do you know that your perception is accurate and another's is inaccurate? you don't know, unless you take some things as given. (in your case, your perception of the material world=reality. in his case, something else)

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Its not about falsifiability, if the believer recognises its a feely type of thing rather than a rational belief then bully for them but they cannot be taken seriously if they place their belief as more valid then others peoples feely beliefs.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's a common human failing, not a specifically theistic one.

[/ QUOTE ]
Sure, ufoists, astrologists, presleyonthemoonists etc they all get the same treatment. Its not a war with god.

chez

[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.

[chezlaw]

[ 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 feel like its logically falsifiable. Don't knock my equaly valid epistemology.

chez

[/ QUOTE ]

agree again. the bottom line is that to have any sort of belief, you must start out at some unprovable position. for instance: "i think the sky is blue, because i see it as blue." might be more 'logical' than "i think the sky is green, because i feel like it's green," but it isn't any more valid or provable. how do you know that your perception is accurate and another's is inaccurate? you don't know, unless you take some things as given. (in your case, your perception of the material world=reality. in his case, something else)

[/ QUOTE ]
Some perceptions can be tested against reality, ain't perfect but its better that arbitary untestable beliefs.

Or maybe it isn't. The presleyonthemoonists are just as likely to be right as anybody else.

chez

[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.

[Brad1970]

[ QUOTE ]
Since they baptize long dead Jewish people and others,

[/ QUOTE ]

What is this supposed to mean? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[Jcrew]

[ QUOTE ]

You need to understand that there is a very real chance that some of these people are actually looking forward to judgement day! Mitt thinks Jesus will be in Missouri soon. Call it what you like... Dellusional or stupid.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think he is just in a situation similar to when his wife asks him whether he thinks she is fat.