• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Fact vs Belief?

Interesting... According to a 'friend', Jung only had it half-right... but won't explain it to me unless I buy some licquor for him and leave it out back (in a wide dish, of course) overnight.

(sigh)

Dragons are such a hassle...

At any rate, it seems I need to read some Jung. Luckily, between our housemate and her dad, I think every important book of the last two centuries is within reach. Unluckily, half of them came straight from Poland, and I'm terrible with reading Slavic tongues.
 
zaayrdragon said:

Interesting... According to a 'friend', Jung only had it half-right... but won't explain it to me unless I buy some licquor for him and leave it out back (in a wide dish, of course) overnight.

(sigh)

Dragons are such a hassle...

At any rate, it seems I need to read some Jung. Luckily, between our housemate and her dad, I think every important book of the last two centuries is within reach. Unluckily, half of them came straight from Poland, and I'm terrible with reading Slavic tongues.
I know enough about Jung to suggest his theories were much closer to the nature of mythology and myth, and does little to discount their meaning, much unlike the way modern psychology does today. And, while Jung brings up the notion of the collective unconscious, and how these myths crop up time after time throughout the world, with no apparent connection except their striking similarities, I'm not sure that he makes a connection with the spiritual world. This is what Piscivore sites me for having said (no doubt I did) and wishes to take issue with me on. However, if a spiritual reality does exist, as I suggest, then the whole thing becomes moot, because the two must be one and the same.
 
Iacchus said:



And how long did it take them to figure out the world wasn't flat? :D :D :D


Very good point!
Yesterday's facts are today's inanities.

Unfortunately, blind believers in science are oblivious to the constant changing nature of what they feel is absolute certainty.

True scientists don't think that way.
A true scientist knows and admits that today's theories might very well turn out to be tomorrow's absurdities.

So a true scientist keeps an open mind.
So do the nonscientists who have sufficient scientific knowledge to realize on what unsure shifting grounds the present scientific knowledge is based.


Unfortunately, not everyone has the sufficient understanding of science to realize this basic fact. Especially the frustrated or wannabe scientist or scientist admirers and scientist sycophants. These are the ones who are notorious for blindly believing in the inviolable permanence of present scientific theories.


Of course such a belief flies in the face of scientific history which is replete with theories discarded and now considered completely inane. But what is history to those that hoist with their own petard have an emotional necessity to believe such things?

It is a confirmation of what a certain philosopher said.
That man is not truly a creature of reason but merely a creature of irrationality buttressed by reason to justify it.
 
Radrook said:

Unfortunately, blind believers in science are oblivious to the constant changing nature of what they feel is absolute certainty.

True scientists don't think that way.
A true scientist knows and admits that today's theories might very well turn out to be tomorrow's absurdities.

So a true scientist keeps an open mind.

EVERYONE STAND BACK! That strawman is on FIRE!

Burn, baby BURN!!
 
Even an 'open-minded' scientist wouldn't point at one book as truth, and all others as the 'work of Satan'.

Hot dogs are good on an open fire like this one...
 
Marquis de Carabas said:
I'm making s'mores.

Great stuff those smores Marquis de Carabas.
Great name they gave em too.
Try this:

Mash up some cornflakes with marshmallows and chocolate chips.
Role them up into balls. Man that there is good stuff!
 
Radrook said:



Very good point!
Yesterday's facts are today's inanities.

Unfortunately, blind believers in science are oblivious to the constant changing nature of what they feel is absolute certainty.

True scientists don't think that way.
A true scientist knows and admits that today's theories might very well turn out to be tomorrow's absurdities.

So a true scientist keeps an open mind.
So do the nonscientists who have sufficient scientific knowledge to realize on what unsure shifting grounds the present scientific knowledge is based.


Unfortunately, not everyone has the sufficient understanding of science to realize this basic fact. Especially the frustrated or wannabe scientist or scientist admirers and scientist sycophants. These are the ones who are notorious for blindly believing in the inviolable permanence of present scientific theories.


Of course such a belief flies in the face of scientific history which is replete with theories discarded and now considered completely inane. But what is history to those that hoist with their own petard have an emotional necessity to believe such things?

It is a confirmation of what a certain philosopher said.
That man is not truly a creature of reason but merely a creature of irrationality buttressed by reason to justify it.

Radrook to the front desk please. Your hay wagon is on fire.
 
Radrook said:
Bad appetite again--huh? :D
Its your hay wagon. It has nothing to do with the people you are actually conversing with here. I just did a JREF forum search on myself as author using the term "provisional", and found 16 posts in which I discussed the provisional nature of science.

We recognize the provisional nature of science. But we also recognize your charicature of this as "unsure shifting grounds" is absurd. More importantly, however, you wish to construct a ridiculous argument from ignorance here. "Scientists don't know with certainty, therefore this Holy Book is TRUE!"

No sale. Science offers us the best available knowledge of the universe. When that knowledge has been amended, it has always been done through science, and not the silly argument from ignorance you try to construct.

It is your haywagon, having nothing to do with what we are writing here. It is on fire.
 
zaayrdragon said:
Question - could it be that one of the problems with those who have such powerful faith in things like religion be that they regard fact as another form of belief, rather than as fact?

I know, for example, that I don't have to believe in a fact for the fact to be true; and therefore, if I'm shown wrong about a fact, I concede myself to be wrong.

Yet it often feels to me like those who argue for their beliefs tend to ignore or downplay fact as if it were merely a conflicting belief.

I'm sorry if I'm not clear - the thought only just occured to me, and is still sitting in a hypothetical pool of essential amniotic fluid...

I could be wrong but I think they regard religion, god, moses, abraham, etc, as fact. I believe that people are programmed at a young age to accept religion as fact.

Mom and dad believe, grammy and grampy believe, aunt joan and uncle frank believe, my neighbors are in church every sunday, my school teacher and classmates believe, my friends parents believe, mr jones, who runs the local store believes, so why should I question it? It has to be fact if so many people believe, right? Nobody say's "We believe that God created the world." They say "God created the world and all living things in it." That's a fact statement programmed into the brain.

When you start questioning their fact you'd best duck! When you make them question it, duck again!

I do not mean any disrespect to anybody but how many of you believe in God because you had proof of his existance?

How many of you believe in God because it is what you have been taught since birth?

I believed because I had been taught since birth. I accepted God as fact because I was taught that way. When I was made to question my beliefs I was first angry, then curious. Then I went on a soul searching quest for truth.

I've discovered that God, religion the whole kit and kaboodle is not a scientific proven fact.

Does this cause me to dis-believe it now? Guess that is not important for ya'll to know.

Yep, it was a big shock when I discovered that all the religious facts about god, moses, jesus, and noah's ark, could not be proven. Finding that there was no santa or tooth fairy wasn't that devasting because I didn't hear about them that often, but God, Noah's Ark, the burning bush, Abraham and Isaac! They were in my home on a daily basis so that was a little more devastating.

I've always been one to question everything, but with religion the number one thing pounded into my head was "Don't question it."

Honestly, how many others who are firm believers in God, have been taught since infancy to believe?
 
Evolutionists are not programmed?

Bwahhhhhhhhhhhhaaaaahhahahahaha!

Tell me another joke cause that one was pretty good.
 
Radrook said:
Evolutionists are not programmed?

Bwahhhhhhhhhhhhaaaaahhahahahaha!

Tell me another joke cause that one was pretty good.

I can't speak for evolutionists I was not programmed to be one ;)
 
Here we go again, folks, we're about to be regaled with more "Tales from the Closed-Minded Skeptiscientist Crypt." Might even have time for "randibot" aspersions.

You make a claim, we ask for evidence. You cough and shuffle your feet. Then come back with this pap. Excelllent reasoning and debating skills.
 
BillHoyt said:

Here we go again, folks, we're about to be regaled with more "Tales from the Closed-Minded Skeptiscientist Crypt." Might even have time for "randibot" aspersions.

You make a claim, we ask for evidence. You cough and shuffle your feet. Then come back with this pap. Excelllent reasoning and debating skills.
Yes, but in all seriousness ... :D
 
Iacchus,

Please stop spamming this board. Please get serious yourself. Until you do, I am joining others in the call for you to stop this nonsense and for us to stop responding to your nonsense.

If you wish to seriously discuss any of your claims, there are plenty here willing to engage in that dialogue. Until you change your posting behavior here, however, you are merely sophomorically irksome.
 
BillHoyt said:

Iacchus,

Please stop spamming this board. Please get serious yourself. Until you do, I am joining others in the call for you to stop this nonsense and for us to stop responding to your nonsense.

If you wish to seriously discuss any of your claims, there are plenty here willing to engage in that dialogue. Until you change your posting behavior here, however, you are merely sophomorically irksome.
Yes, but why take yourself so seriously, when in fact meaning doesn't exist? Do you know what I think? You're full of baloney! :p
 
IN the spirit of such things - I hereby believe that Iacchus no longer exists.

And that Nelson is probably in a mental ward somewhere by now... :)
 

Back
Top Bottom