Kevin's Watch

Sherman Landlearner wrote:Wow. I was so out there, I killed the thread for... (3-6-) 9 whole months. Is that impressive, or sad? LOL

Nah, Sherman... I doubt that... this is generally a slow-moving thread with occasional spurts.
(and I think the spurts are usually social conversation rather than on-topic stuff! )

I kind of appreciate your bluntness...

By the way... your discussion RE "length of a day"... (day? era? millenia?) that was something I'd thought about a lot myself!!
It's a serious question, and had really looked like it had great potential for resolving stuff that doesn't fit together perfectly.

Avatar wrote:Then don't believe anything.

--A

Pretty much where I am at... which leaves me free to criticize all other beliefs at a whim

I dunno...maybe not having any belief makes you ineligible to criticise beliefs? Sorta like if you don't have kids...people tend to frown on you criticising their parenting.

--A

And it's not as if having belief ever stops people from criticizing either...

Of course not, but maybe it gives them the "right" as it were.

--A

I don't see how. Arguments between faith always remind me of George Carlin. "My God has a bigger dick than your God!"

But they have a direct experience of faith. Is it possible to talk about god without having the experience? Without knowing what faith feels like?

--A

Avatar wrote:But they have a direct experience of faith. Is it possible to talk about god without having the experience? Without knowing what faith feels like?

--A

I guess it depends what they are criticizing. Criticizing someone purely for having faith, well I agree with your point there. But a criticism on such things as the treatment of women by a particular religion, or its attitudes to sexuality, is perfectly valid IMO.

But that's from a socio-cultural point of view. We literally have no argument against "god tells us to do it."

--A

Avatar wrote:But that's from a socio-cultural point of view. We literally have no argument against "god tells us to do it."

--A

How about "screw God then?"

Scarcely a cogent rebuttal.

--A

Avatar wrote:Scarcely a cogent rebuttal.

--A

Garbage in, garbage out

this will sum it up nicely (i believe)

I believe in coyotes and time as an abstract
I believe my shirt is wearing thin
And change is what I believe in
I believe my humor's wearing thin
And change is what I believe in
I believe my shirt is wearing thin
And change is what I believe in
I believe in example
I believe my throat hurts
I believe my humor's wearing thin
And I believe the poles are shifting

it's as valid a view as any philosopher will bring

Lady Revel wrote:My problem is that I do not know WHAT to believe. I am wishy-washy.

As Av said, don't believe anything. You don't have to. It's not a requirement. When a belief hits you like a falling piano, so you don't really have a choice, embrace it. Until then, you don't need to feel incomplete for not having any. And you don't need to drive yourself crazy because you think you must choose from among those you've heard of. And you don't need to try to embrace one you don't really feel right about, but chose only because you thought you were required to choose one or another.

And it's nice to see you around again.

Avatar wrote:But that's from a socio-cultural point of view. We literally have no argument against "god tells us to do it."

--A

Depends on how you feel about that statement. My argument against it is
to quote the sacred text of a different faith and say "You're mistaken, god says *THIS*". Watch their pointy little heads spin when their are faced wth the exact sort of argument they put forth.

That's just like the first ever colour-blind person arguing with somebody who's not about what colour something is. Each believes the evidence of their "senses." No resolution is possible.

--A

Avatar wrote: That's just like the first ever colour-blind person arguing with somebody who's not about what colour something is. Each believes the evidence of their "senses." No resolution is possible.

--A

Your final sentence there is exactly the point I am making to them.

First I'll preface this by stating my belief in objective reality.

Cambo wrote:I don't see how. Arguments between faith always remind me of George Carlin. "My God has a bigger dick than your God!"

But what if mine actually does?!?!?
(how. could. i. resist?)

Seven Words wrote:

Avatar wrote: That's just like the first ever colour-blind person arguing with somebody who's not about what colour something is. Each believes the evidence of their "senses." No resolution is possible.

--A

Your final sentence there is exactly the point I am making to them.

But you are incorrect. From their pov. Which is the most important pov to them. As it is to all of us. Resolution is, indeed, possible. They have achieved it. I absolutely agree with you. But you're not trying to convince me, and you're unable to convince them.

But the exchange usually happens in public. And i hope that anyone who has even remotely entertained doubt about mindlessly accepting dogma solely because they have always been told it, steps back and takes a good long look at what they're a part of. They may end up reinforcing their beliefs...which doesn't bother me because they've given it some thought. That's my purpose in that exchange...to get someone to stop and think. Not change their mind about their God/Gods/Goddess(es), but to think.

I vehemently disagreed with Rusmeister over in the Close, frequently (not as frequently as you, Fist, granted), but one thing I always respected and gave him credit for was eh HAD thought about it. He made a conscious decision to (from my perspective) abnegate his own values, decision-making, everything to the Authority of the Orthodox Church. But he thought it through, at length and in detail.