Members stevesherbert Posted February 6, 2011 Members Share Posted February 6, 2011 Sorry, but this is pretty much bull{censored}. Lots of brilliant people discuss theoretical issues that can't be definitely supported by fact all the time-issues of climate, the origins of the universe, the roots of the psyche, social problems, and so on. Are you saying these things shouldn't be discussed unless you have proof that what you'res saying about them is fact? Good luck. Why do you assume that not being able to convince someone else of matters of faith is 'losing'? If, for instance, I lay out a case for faith and you reject it, would you rather I keep haranguing you about it until you change your mind, or just say "I can see we aren't ever going to agree, so let's drop it and play some music?" I would think it far more childish to keep arguing an unwinnable argument until I get capitulation than to be mature enough to realize not everyone is going to agree and it's okay. of course nothing in the world can be known with absolute certainty, except logical constructs like 2+2=4. any inductive argument, e.g. flipping this light switch will cause the light to turn on, is based upon a certain level of faith based upon past experience, but in no way does flipping the switch 99999 times guarantee that the same thing will happen the next time. the goal of science is not to be 'right', but to discover the truth about the world. a scientist discussing climate change or evolution, or a social scientist talking about social problems is required to present EVIDENCE supporting their position, or else their arguments are destroyed by their peers. there is no room for faith-based assumptions in these debates; what you say is judged by the validity of your evidence and the soundness of your logic. the beauty of the scientific method is that it is DOUBT-based, which is the complete opposite of faith. note that science allows for change: as new theories debunk older ones, scientists revise their position and continue their work. what's the point of having a discussion unless you're willing to change your position, given enough evidence? what i'm saying is that people who start logical arguments but then revert to faith-based assertions are disingenuous and childish. don't start playing by one set of rules and then finish with another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members stevesherbert Posted February 6, 2011 Members Share Posted February 6, 2011 I am curious, if the love of your life did not meet the traditional modern standards of beauty, and you were to say something positive about her, it would be appropriate, and mature of me to berate her/him until you admitted he/she was ugly? Perhaps you are not as mature as you think you are. It is clearly very important to you to "win". It is unfortunate that this "victory" is so important to you. It would appear the only proper end to a discussion to you results in one capitulating. Either you must be converted, or they must abandon their beliefs. Would it be appropriate for your "opponent" to next start a discussion of your boorish, or churlish behavior? if you presented an argument based upon a measurable standard of beauty, e.g. the Golden Ratio, and then demonstrated that the love of my life didn't fit that standard, then i would admit that, according to that standard, you are correct and she is not beautiful. i'm not out to 'win' arguments, i'm out to make sure that the people who start discussions play by the rules. if an argument gets too heated and you want to stop, i'd much rather you be honest and say something like 'well, i haven't considered that point before, so i'd like time to reconsider my position' instead of putting your hands over your ears and saying 'it's a matter of faith'. it's pretty insulting and dishonest to dismiss other people's arguments in this way, without even considering whether they may or may not be correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members BlueStrat Posted February 6, 2011 Members Share Posted February 6, 2011 what i'm saying is that people who start logical arguments but then revert to faith-based assertions are disingenuous and childish. don't start playing by one set of rules and then finish with another. On that point, we can agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members wades_keys Posted February 6, 2011 Members Share Posted February 6, 2011 Gawd, anything, ANYTHING but the Internet Logisticians. Please, God: anything but that. What's with the faux-scientists coming out of the woodwork everytime anything remotely religious is discussed? And here's how that usually goes: one guy throws up a post, replete with logic-related terms, such as "assertion", "induction", "deduction", etc. Another guy responds, but he doesn't use the same 2 cent words. Poster A goes into "quibble mode", immediately nitpicking any perceived omission or fault. And at the end of the day? WHO CARES. What's funny about these kinds of debates, is rarely do the background and qualifications of the posters come into focus. So you can have one guy who actually works with logic every day be "beaten down" or ridiculed by somebody who knows the basics and likes to throw around the same tired-ass 2 cent words and arguments. In all of this we tend to forget: those that can, DO. Those that can't, TEACH. The prize doesn't get awarded to the person who elucidates his ideas better. There is no prize. This isn't the debate club. Keep that in mind please before you "engage" your awesome intellect and flowing river of wit. You know who you are. What I'm saying is: I'll admit I'm no C.S. Lews after YOU admit that you are no Richard Dawkins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mumpfic1 Posted February 6, 2011 Members Share Posted February 6, 2011 Wow Religion. It just really brings out the worst in people. Ya just knew this thread would get heated. Im really suprised its remained as civil as it has. That's why tend I to hate religion. Not religious people per se but the whole my faith is THE only true faith thing.And then on the other side you got people that knock people that have a faith. My thing is whatever makes YOU happy. If going to church every sunday and reading your bible or koran or whatever daily makes you happy GREAT! If you never go to church don't have a faith and you like to go out drinking with the boys and bang chicks. If that makes ya happy thats GREAT too. I just don't understand why people need to control and make people think as they do. If everbody was the same the world would be a pretty boring place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ChordGirl Posted February 6, 2011 Members Share Posted February 6, 2011 I just don't understand why people need to control and make people think as they do. If everbody was the same the world would be a pretty boring place. +1 ...on that note, I'm praying for this thread to end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators BATCAT Posted February 7, 2011 Moderators Share Posted February 7, 2011 +1 ...on that note, I'm praying for this thread to end. Sometimes prayer works! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.