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.
Makes sense to me as I know I have been one of the people who has used the "court of law" approach many times before. Here too, I think we arrive in the same place with respect to what is "admissible" or not, and again as I attempt to litigate by way of my Ten Truths!
LearnMe, do you ever let off on your self promotion? Your PR is getting a tad out of hand. Do you really need to spam every blinking thread with it?
LearnMe, do you ever let off on your self promotion? Your PR is getting a tad out of hand. Do you really need to spam every blinking thread with it?
What are you saying?
That it's like...….
"Yes, dear, I know!!! "......after your kid has asked you for the umpteenth time to watch him go underwater which just isn't a spectacular event (even personally) in itself after the first couple of times
Wow! That's sad. It doesn't take much for you new-atheists to throw one of your own under the bus! #mobrules
I don't agree with all of LearnMe's 'Nine Truths', but I do admire him for taking the initiative to put together an explicit case for his materialist worldview and offer it up to be critiqued. Someone who does something like that stands out from the crowd, in my books. Most others have never prepared a document of their own like that. Yes, he promotes his "Truths" often, but so what? Some of you people have been on this forum for over a decade and I'm sure you've repeated yourselves many times.
Wow! That's sad. It doesn't take much for you new-atheists to throw one of your own under the bus! #mobrules
I don't agree with all of LearnMe's 'Nine Truths', but I do admire him for taking the initiative to put together an explicit case for his materialist worldview and offer it up to be critiqued. Someone who does something like that stands out from the crowd, in my books. Most others have never prepared a document of their own like that. Yes, he promotes his "Truths" often, but so what? Some of you people have been on this forum for over a decade and I'm sure you've repeated yourselves many times.
It isn't a case of throwing 'one of our own' (Learn me is his own person rather than 'on our side', so far as i have gathered) under anything, but at looking at what makes sense, never mind whose 'side' the argument is on. I can well see that to you Which Side (never mind pointing the finger at those nasty atheists turning on their own)is the basis of the argument rather than 'what's true'. I have just preferred to apply the logic of debate however it needs to be, rather than taking some codified Ten point template to be placed over every argument.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Itzpapalotl
In the past some members here suggested imagining these kind of arguments as set in court, so I'm thinking how would a litigator approach it? First, you set out what the claim is supposed to be evidencing. In your example, I would imagine that the only thing that can be tested/evidenced is the person's knowledge of Napoleon as a subject and the strength of their conviction, which could be empirically measured.
If, for instance, a person's belief that they used to be Napoleon was meant to evidence reincarnation then I'm not sure how this could be tested directly, at least not until reincarnation is established as a scientific fact and mechanisms for testing soul's DNA developed (can't believe I just wrote that). Until then, however, this subjective belief would be inadmissible in court as evidence.
I hope this makes sense. It's been a long week. I'm knackered and my brain is fried so in my head I feel like this is making perfect sense but I'm not convinced I'm communicating it in a legible way.
I'm no expert in Law but I imagine if this was some court case involving reincarnation -claims (say an inheritance case rather than just claiming to be some ancient character reborn) , it wouldn't even get off the ground. You'd need to find some evidence that could be validated. There's the similar example of the Anastasia claim, and that isn't rebirth but someone claiming to actually be her, having escaped the Bolsheviks.So far as i know, these cases remain 'unproven', so you couldn't make a court case out of them.
I do know that one 'reincarnation' case (a revenue officer of Charles' IInd's time) came in for some questions and rather than producing evidence that it had to be true was trying to find excuses as to why the problems with the story didn't prove that it was imaginary (that smuggling was a problem during the Napoleonic blockade rather than in Charles' time was one objection).
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 09-21-2019 at 06:22 PM..
I'm no expert in Law but I imagine if this was some court case involving reincarnation -claims (say an inheritance case rather than just claiming to be some ancient character reborn) , it wouldn't even get off the ground.
Pretty much. Courts are very strict on evidence. Claims must be stated in factual terms and no opinion other than that of an expert is admissible. (Of course, I can't speak for what exceptions there might be outside of the UK.)
It isn't a case of throwing 'one of our own' (Learn me is his own person rather than 'on our side', so far as i have gathered) under anything, but at looking at what makes sense, never mind whose 'side' the argument is on. I can well see that to you Which Side (never mind pointing the finger at those nasty atheists turning on their own)is the basis of the argument rather than 'what's true'. I have just preferred to apply the logic of debate however it needs to be, rather than taking some codified Ten point template to be placed over every argument.
If someone seeks out a Religion and Spirituality forum to ridicule religious and spiritual people, then he's on "your side", IMO.
What qualifications are required to gain inclusion on "your side"? Does one need to consistently demonstrate their willingness to treat the "other side" as an enemy, and to ridicule religious and spiritual people on a Religion and Spirituality forum? One of the most important things you've done in your life? Something's wrong with this picture.
If someone seeks out a Religion and Spirituality forum to ridicule religious and spiritual people, then he's on "your side", IMO.
What qualifications are required to gain inclusion on "your side"? Does one need to consistently demonstrate their willingness to treat the "other side" as an enemy, and to ridicule religious and spiritual people on a Religion and Spirituality forum? One of the most important things you've done in your life? Something's wrong with this picture.
Yes. That you used the term 'One of your own'; You talked about 'sides'. I used the term 'His own person'.
Yes. That you used the term 'One of your own'; You talked about 'sides'. I used the term 'His own person'.
Nice deflect.
"Learn me is his own person rather than 'on our side', so far as i have gathered."
How do you gather who is on "your side" and who is not?
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.
