Used2BMarkoh wrote:
. . . you have no rational reasoning behind what you're fired up at. You're basically an intellectual drunk, knowing how strongly you feel about stuff but having no real idea why. You feel strongly about truth, for instance, while steadfastly denying any real meaning for the concept.
Says the guy who thinks the invisible, extraterrestrial humanoid super-being from another dimension is real, with no rational basis for that belief.
Pretty funny stuff ! ! !
Used2BMarkoh wrote:
Zig al-din wrote:-- human beings are not rational and I'm not convinced that the universe is either. I think whatever philosophy or 'religion' we subscribe to should take that into account and treat it with a certain amount of seriousness. What we have now in the contemporary paradigm is an (irrational) insistence on rationality as the only acceptable mode for describing reality.May I say (non-combatitively in this case :-) - that I think this is self -contradictory? We can't take anything seriously unless we can be rational.
It may be the universe is irrational, but if so, we can never know that. We can only know if we can know.
True - we can frame the irrationality in a rational manner, which is a different thing from saying that all irrationality should be dismissed out of hand.
For everything it has going for it, the post-Enlightenment/scientific era has unleashed some of the worst atrocities and horrors the world has ever seen, yet there is still an irrational insistence that rationality has all the best answers, and the only admissable ones. 
Zig al-din wrote:
Used2BMarkoh wrote:
Zig al-din wrote:-- human beings are not rational and I'm not convinced that the universe is either. I think whatever philosophy or 'religion' we subscribe to should take that into account and treat it with a certain amount of seriousness. What we have now in the contemporary paradigm is an (irrational) insistence on rationality as the only acceptable mode for describing reality.May I say (non-combatitively in this case :-) - that I think this is self -contradictory? We can't take anything seriously unless we can be rational.
It may be the universe is irrational, but if so, we can never know that. We can only know if we can know.
True - we can frame the irrationality in a rational manner, which is a different thing from saying that all irrationality should be dismissed out of hand.
For everything it has going for it, the post-Enlightenment/scientific era has unleashed some of the worst atrocities and horrors the world has ever seen, yet there is still an irrational insistence that rationality has all the best answers, and the only admissable ones.
Well, ok, I don't think we really disagree on that. I'd frame it as reason being inadequate, though, is how I'd put it. I don't think Hitler or the abortionist is necessarily irrational - it's a failure of morals rather than a failure of reason. I mean, killing others to suit yourself, that's not irrational, if you can get away with it. But it's certainly immoral. To put it back in thread context, the killer fails to see the overall plan, only his own private interests.
Used2BMarkoh wrote:
dblazer wrote:
Says the guy who thinks the invisible, extraterrestrial humanoid super-being from another dimension is real, with no rational basis for that belief.
Pretty funny stuff ! ! !
No, I don't believe any such thing. We've been through this, quit pretending to be so clueless. I've seen you be reasonable on other subjects.
You can see God? Or is He invisible? Do you think God created the Earth while standing on it, or from somewhere else? Do you think God looks like man, or rather than man was created in His image, or not? Do you believe that God has abilities beyond those of humans, or is He limited to the same rather ineffectual powers as the rest of us? Do you believe here's from "here", or that he exists in some other manner of time/space? And don't you believe that He is involved in our lives?
Which of the above don't you believe?
Help Desk