Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You can ask questions about anything you want, and I can reflect back to you how they sound.
for instance you ask "Should we ignore any and all scientific or historical evidence that contradict religious beliefs?" does it concern you that Picasso's faces contradict science. That the buildings of Escher have no historic evidence. Should people ignore those contradictions?
You ask, "Are there reasons we should respect religious beliefs more than we respect fantasy beliefs or conspiracy theories?" are there reasons you should respect jazz more than acid rock or string quartets?
" what about did the dinosaurs die out long before mankind evolved? "
huh? what about the Hotel California where you can check out any time you want but you can never leave? are you indignant that is a poor business model? What about the Eagles admitting that when they wrote the song it was not about a hotel at all.
Easy:
Fact
Fantasy
Unknown or unsure (which again is about human limitations, not empirical fact).
I don't know why you keep ignoring the obvious difference between empirical fact that is true no matter what humans think about it and human conventions (like the symbolism/metaphor that you reference with the 'Hotel California' example - that people may misunderstand them makes no difference to whether the thing is human convention or invention or true apart from human thought.
I don't know why this is so difficult for you.
Or rather, I do. That you are trying to muddy the waters with Metaphor shows that you understand the difference very well. But you don't want to admit it.
Easy: Fact Fantasy Unknown or unsure (which again is about human limitations, not empirical fact).
I don't know why you keep ignoring the obvious difference between empirical fact that is true no matter what humans think about it and human conventions (like the symbolism/metaphor that you reference with the 'Hotel California' example - that people may misunderstand them makes no difference to whether the thing is human convention or invention or true apart from human thought.
I don't know why this is so difficult for you.
Or rather, I do. That you are trying to muddy the waters with Metaphor shows that you understand the difference very well. But you don't want to admit it.
it has meaning to the person who glimpses what it is about.
whether that is art or song or a poem or a book.
why do we have favorites that we listen to or read or view over and over and over
layer upon layer of meaning and feeling evoked.
Depends on the UFO I have read some accounts of Alien space pilots landing to lecture the contactee ( ) on the evils of capitalism. Others have said 'We know all about Jesus' which made me laugh as you can take it two ways.
It is no surprise that, like God, the views of the Saucer occupants rather coincided with the views of the contactee.
There is a good reason why I see (and saw quite early on) that the thinking of The Fringe science believer, Cultist and the religious believer all use the same methods of argument - Faith - based back to front reasoning. Ambivalent attitude towards science. A willingness to lie and fake because proving what is known to be true is all that matters. Hypocritical accusations of bias towards those who do not accept the claim without question.
See one cult, you've seen them all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tzaphkiel
it has meaning to the person who glimpses what it is about.
whether that is art or song or a poem or a book.
why do we have favorites that we listen to or read or view over and over and over
layer upon layer of meaning and feeling evoked.
what does that have to do with empirical fact?
One if personal preference and one is empirical fact.
That we may not always know (though we may theorize and may or may not be right) which which has no bearing upon whether a thing exists only in the human mind or whether it exists outside of the human mind.
Why is this so difficult for you?
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 09-17-2019 at 12:53 AM..
...
One if personal preference and one is empirical fact.
That we may not always know (though we may theorize and may or may not be right) which which has no bearing upon whether a thing exists only in the human mind or whether it exists outside of the human mind.
empirical fact is not the reason people listen to music, are moved by art, savor poetry, or engage in a path of religion and spirituality.
empirical fact is not the reason people listen to music, are moved by art, savor poetry, or engage in a path of religion and spirituality.
No. Which is why that comes under human preference rather than empirical fact.
Though of course the mechanics of this - the paper and ink, the musical instrument and the little bells, books and candle of religion are Things that would exist even if all human life was removed from the planet. And even the biochemical mechanism of the evolved instincts that make us do this stuff could be a fact. Just as it could be (almost certainly is) the basis of morality and ethics.
Even Picasso, in his cubism was expressing a reality (one thing looks different from different directions) that existed apart from human perception. His decision to do that rather than paint what the eye perceived in one position was human preference.
Tangle it up all you like. Human thinking is not the same as empirical factuality. Intuition is not reliable Fact. To claim so is the old, old, Old claim that whatever pops into the head is (on Faith) to be proclaimed as true. And anyone who says different must be denounced, ignored or swept under the rug with mumbles about 'garbled messages'.
It isn't hard for those willing to doubt and question to see though these apologetics subterfuges, designed only to keep the self delusion going and thrust away the unacceptable fact that faith -claimants are very likely brainwashing themselves.
Which I wouldn't care about that, but the Faithful are trying to brainwash us as well.
No. Which is why that comes under human preference rather than empirical fact.
Though of course the mechanics of this - the paper and ink, the musical instrument and the little bells, books and candle of religion are Things that would exist even if all human life was removed from the planet. And even the biochemical mechanism of the evolved instincts that make us do this stuff could be a fact. Just as it could be (almost certainly is) the basis of morality and ethics.
Even Picasso, in his cubism was expressing a reality (one thing looks different from different directions) that existed apart from human perception. His decision to do that rather than paint what the eye perceived in one position was human preference.
Tangle it up all you like. Human thinking is not the same as empirical factuality. Intuition is not reliable Fact. To claim so is the old, old, Old claim that whatever pops into the head is (on Faith) to be proclaimed as true. And anyone who says different must be denounced, ignored or swept under the rug with mumbles about 'garbled messages'.
It isn't hard for those willing to doubt and question to see though these apologetics subterfuges, designed only to keep the self delusion going and thrust away the unacceptable fact that faith -claimants are very likely brainwashing themselves.
Which I wouldn't care about that, but the Faithful are trying to brainwash us as well.
the premise you are stating seems to be "if its not an empirical fact then it is brainwashing"
that is not correct
you seem to have the view "if it is not a fact then it is faith" and that "only facts are reliable" and that "anything that is not a fact is not reliable"
that is also not correct
that perception, insights, feelings, intuition, discernment are "self delusion" "brainwashing" "unreliable" "subterfuge"
if that is the case then music, love, song lyrics, poetry, courage, art, integrity, compassion, benevolence, are all "self delusion, brainwashing, unreliable, subterfuge"
that is flawed logic.
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 09-17-2019 at 07:19 AM..
the premise you are stating seems to be "if its not an empirical fact then it is brainwashing"
that is not correct
you seem to have the view "if it is not a fact then it is faith" and that "only facts are reliable" and that "anything that is not a fact is not reliable"
that is also not correct
that perception, insights, feelings, intuition, discernment are "self delusion" "brainwashing" "unreliable" "subterfuge"
if that is the case then music, love, song lyrics, poetry, courage, art, integrity, compassion, benevolence, are all "self delusion, brainwashing, unreliable, subterfuge"
that is flawed logic.
It is indeed. recall thate there are three position on Truth
What actually is so, no mater what we think about it
what is human preferences or conventions.
Unknowns.
What is unknown is not a matter of human preference. It is unknown until we can prove something about it.
Faith -claims are proclaiming as a known what is unknown, because we do not yet have reliable proof for it.
That is where god -claims and revelation which are unproven by any convincing evidence are unknowns. Human preference about them are opinions, but they are not empirical facts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tzaphkiel
That's what i have been saying all along.
If what you have been saying all along is that 'a path of religion' (spirituality is a broad term but I take it that you mean something similar, here) is a matter of human preference and is not a a demonstrated fact, but merely Faith -claims, then we are in agreement.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 09-17-2019 at 09:43 AM..
empirical fact is not the reason people listen to music, are moved by art, savor poetry, or engage in a path of religion and spirituality.
So when I asked if you understand what I wrote in my comment #428 (and after all the other efforts to help you understand as well), you still do not? At all?
It is so sad to be so disconnected from an entire aspect of our Reality.
Again I appreciate and understand what you too are explaining. Really I do...
I think we all know what it is like to believe, sense or experience something that makes us feel wonderful, special, but I am very curious how you address people who tell you similar to what you are explaining that you too probably have a hard time understanding or believing.
Do you believe Beetle Man actually brought that beetle back to life as he claims? After being dead for some time, with the help of God? Do you believe Joseph Smith had communications with God and angels? Do you believe what Jim Jones managed to get his followers to believe? How many examples can we come up with to which you too would admit you don't believe even though they are the most fervent believers in what they say? Like you are? When the Mormon missionary comes to my door and I ask the same question about how believing in Mohammad is any less worthy than believing in Joseph Smith, I never get a good answer. I never get a good answer period...
Everyone with these claims of knowing God thinks they know better, because of the experience, but obviously when these beliefs conflict as they do, everyone can't be correct about what they THINK they know or experience. Right?
How do you respond to the person on the street corner who tells you they know God because they jumped off a two-story building and survived? Do you think odds are probably the guy had a true encounter with God, or maybe not? Probably not? Probably just some dumb luck? Or do you not even bother to pass such judgement?
Of course we can all believe what we like, and we do, but when it comes to how others should consider any such claimed encounters with God, what would you think is reasonable for everyone to do? Assume all speak the truth? What is your criteria for judging what others believe or claim that you might suspect is not true?
Last edited by LearnMe; 09-17-2019 at 10:50 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have read some accounts of Alien space pilots landing to lecture the contactee (
