Logic?

Status
Not open for further replies.

DMNknight

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2003
Messages
3,272
I was so hopeful that this thread would be about logic, not belief or faith. Not it has devolved into the age old religious vs non-religious vomit.

To bring us back on track: Would it be illogical to state that majority of debates are a farce due to, IMHO, majority of people's inability to have their minds changed?
The fundamental flaw in the above is that YOU cannot change the mind of OTHERS.
A person is either receptive to having new thoughts and change their mind along with it, or they become entrenched in their previous thoughts and refuse to budge.

Trying to change someone else's mind is like trying to change a wall into a horse. While not completely impossible, and somewhere there's a very surprised spontaneous horse, it is very very unlikely.

Some people mistakenly think that changing someone else's mind is a win of some sort :rolleyes:
 

DMNknight

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2003
Messages
3,272
Natural selection can be at least one of three things.
1) A cause or force (force being a subset of causes).
2) An outcome of causes.
3) A process.

I don't have an answer as to which one is correct. I am leaning towards 2). I understand your position to be 3) so let's analyze that possibility shall we?
Why can't it be all three? (or more actually) Why does it just have to be one?

We live in a universe where every fundamental particle of our being is being controlled by a plethora of laws that govern the universe, at the same time.
 

Techne

Honorary Master
Joined
Sep 28, 2008
Messages
11,475
:thumbsup:
Why can't it be all three? (or more actually) Why does it just have to be one?

We live in a universe where every fundamental particle of our being is being controlled by a plethora of laws that govern the universe, at the same time.
Yeah sure, let something be a cause, an outcome of a cause and a process, all in one. Brilliant:thumbsup:
 

Cray

Honorary Master
Joined
Oct 11, 2010
Messages
19,967
Note that Atheism is not a non-belief, its a belief.
How can you possibly view Atheism as not being a religion if it is by its very definition purely a belief?
If you adhere/ascribe to a belief, are you not by definition practicing religion?
How can you have a low tolerance for religion if you are yourself a practitioner thereof?
This argument is as old as it is stupid....
 

Mista_Mobsta

Expert Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2015
Messages
1,042
The fundamental flaw in the above is that YOU cannot change the mind of OTHERS.
A person is either receptive to having new thoughts and change their mind along with it, or they become entrenched in their previous thoughts and refuse to budge.

Trying to change someone else's mind is like trying to change a wall into a horse. While not completely impossible, and somewhere there's a very surprised spontaneous horse, it is very very unlikely.

Some people mistakenly think that changing someone else's mind is a win of some sort :rolleyes:
That's exactly my point. Why enter into a debate about something illogical then? It is important to try and change someones mind if it helps to ensure their kids are vaccinated or to ensure they understand the concept of cause and effect or that certain rules in life are a necessity even if they seem trivial at first glance.

In a nutshell, as long as the topic being debated is not be steeped in philosophy then people should be able to make logical connections to differing views.
 

Ponderer

Expert Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2019
Messages
2,188
<monday morning brick wall talk waste of time>
Again with this horse ****... Its non-belief, the absence of belief. Its not 'believing'(religious belief) in no gods, its the lack of belief in gods. This isn't difficult, yet you still can't grasp it, no matter how many times its explained. You continue to assign religion to 'belief'. I'll try with crayons again(was going to just copy/paste, but seems my last 'crayon' post has vanished from a few weeks back, so either I didn't click 'post'(is possible), or someone got offended /shrug).. anyway, crayons 2.0(simplified version)
I believe you're a moron - 'believe' usage here is 'statement' believe, 'truth' believe, not 'religion' believe, believing you're a moron does not make it a religion... understand? There is no religious belief system attached to it
I don't believe in gods - again, 'statement' believe, not 'religion' believe, believing there are no gods does not make it a religion.... understand? There is no religious belief system attached to it
I believe in aliens - statement believe, truth believe, **** all to do with religion believe
I really can't make it simpler. You keep assigning religious belief systems to it as you're confusing the context of the words being used, ie 'believe' and 'belief' like 'I believe you' belief is not religious belief.
Again, I believe you still won't understand this. Statement 'belief', not a religious 'god created the world in 6 days and then murdered everything and sent his son to visited me on my toast' belief. Get it yet?
</monday morning brick wall talk waste of time>
Your personal definition of Atheism has absolutely nothing to do with it.
Atheism is no different than any other religion.
It is by definition a belief, and not a non-belief.
You can rant and rave as much as you want with regards to that, but that won't change a damn thing.

So how does that make you feel huh?
 

Geoff.D

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
10,751
Isn't it amazing how condescending and arrogant some of you are when it comes to questions about evolution but as soon as someone asks about natural selection then it is like cockroaches running away from a light, waiting in the dark... to pounce again when it is safe.:X3:

Here is a question again.
Geoff.D, what is your understanding of the concept of natural selection? Do you understand it as some cause or force? Describe what you think natural selection is, using your own thoughts and writing.
So I think I know where you are coming from, despite your attempts at disguising your stance on the TOE, Creationism and its latest manifestation of Intelligent Design.

Apart from your arrogance in that you seem to have decided you are some or superior authority appointed by a higher authority to question and set examinations for others in this debate, I will answer your rather ridiculous questions about what "Natural Selection" is.

Before I do that, I am going to question YOU on what the words "cause" and "force" mean in the context of the above question. Define them properly by defining if they are Nouns, or Verbs as applied in your question.

[Hint: this is a trap, in case you think it is just a casual question, just as is your question}.

Note if you refuse to reply, I will NOT proceed with an explanation in "my own words" of your rather sanctimonious question.
 
Last edited:

Cray

Honorary Master
Joined
Oct 11, 2010
Messages
19,967
Your personal definition of Atheism has absolutely nothing to do with it.
Atheism is no different than any other religion.
It is by definition a belief, and not a non-belief.
:X3:

atheism
Dictionary result for atheism
noun
disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/atheism

Definition of atheism
1a : a lack of belief or a strong disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods
Please quote and link your definition..
 

Ponderer

Expert Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2019
Messages
2,188
I find it depressing to be honest.


The only person who has been mocking other people's intelligence in this thread is Ponderer. You are the one who thinks he is more intelligent than everyone else while acting stupid. Go read your previous posts you hypocrite. I tried to engage with you on a serious level, only to be met with mocking and insults and a complete disinterest in learning anything, reading anything, researching anything. Once I realised you are simply trolling I gave up trying to discuss any issues with you.

I'm happy you believe the flying spaghetti monster is the supreme ruler and overlord of life on earth but that's about it.
You have not yet responded to post 1053.
Why are you ignoring it?
 

Ponderer

Expert Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2019
Messages
2,188
The fundamental flaw in the above is that YOU cannot change the mind of OTHERS.
A person is either receptive to having new thoughts and change their mind along with it, or they become entrenched in their previous thoughts and refuse to budge.

Trying to change someone else's mind is like trying to change a wall into a horse. While not completely impossible, and somewhere there's a very surprised spontaneous horse, it is very very unlikely.

Some people mistakenly think that changing someone else's mind is a win of some sort :rolleyes:
Well assessed.
 

Geoff.D

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
10,751
Dear pastor, please change the channel if you don't like what you are seeing.
Unbelievable reaction to one the most level headed people in this debate. I would suggest you go and read all the valuable posts made by DMNight in this debate.
 

C4Cat

Executive Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2015
Messages
8,726
You have not yet responded to post 1053.
Why are you ignoring it?
That's the point I realised you are just trolling and gave up on you. You could answer all those questions yourself with the most basic attempt at research or reading, but choose not to. You choose to mock and insult instead. You are not a baby that needs to be spoonfed every little bit of information. Go online and look at the existing research. If you seriously want to know more about any of the evidence I would be happy to discuss it, but show some initiative in following up on it. That's not what you want though, is it? You just want to dismiss everything so you can act superior, you have zero interest in actually investigating the evidence yourself.
 

Techne

Honorary Master
Joined
Sep 28, 2008
Messages
11,475
So I think I know where you are coming from, despite your attempts at disguising your stance on the TOE, Creationism and its latest manifestation of Intelligent Design.

Apart from your arrogance in that you seem to have decided you are some or superior authority appointed by a higher authority to question and set examinations for others in this debate, I will answer your rather ridiculous questions about what "Natural Selection" is.

Before I do that, I am going to question YOU on what the words "cause" and "force" mean in the context of the above question. Define the properly by defining if they are Nouns, or Verbs as applied in your question.

[Hint: this is a trap, in case you think it is just a casual question, just as is your question}.

Note if you refuse to reply, I will NOT proceed with an explanation in "my own words" of your rather sanctimonious question.
A force is a subset of the concept of causes. In the context of this discussion a cause is analogous to an efficient cause in Aristotelian terms. To give a few examples:
1) A force acting on an object can cause it to change its velocity. So the cause (in this case some force) results in some effect (change in velocity).
2) If we can think of natural selection as some force we can state it as follows:
Natural selection is a natural force that results in the propagation of certain alleles and the destruction of others. So natural selection is the cause of the the effect --> the propagation of certain alleles and the destruction of others .
 

Temujin

Executive Member
Joined
Apr 18, 2015
Messages
6,451
Your personal definition of Atheism has absolutely nothing to do with it.
Atheism is no different than any other religion.
It is by definition a belief, and not a non-belief.
You can rant and rave as much as you want with regards to that, but that won't change a damn thing.

So how does that make you feel huh?
:rolleyes: And you talk about 'athiests' believing they're more intelligent... Oh look, I used the word 'believing' in a sentence again, intelligence is therefore a religion... hint: your intelligence is showing again. I'm not the one using personal definitions;)

Edit: Here, maybe this will explain it better for you(although I doubt it)
Atheism is one thing: A lack of belief in gods.
Atheism is not an affirmative belief that there is no god nor does it answer any other question about what a person believes. It is simply a rejection of the assertion that there are gods. Atheism is too often defined incorrectly as a belief system. To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.
If atheism is a religion, then not collecting stamps is a hobby.
 
Last edited:

Ponderer

Expert Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2019
Messages
2,188
That's the point I realised you are just trolling and gave up on you. You could answer all those questions yourself with the most basic attempt at research or reading, but choose not to. You choose to mock and insult instead. You are not a baby that needs to be spoonfed every little bit of information. Go online and look at the existing research. If you seriously want to know more about any of the evidence I would be happy to discuss it, but show some initiative in following up on it. That's not what you want though, is it? You just want to dismiss everything so you can act superior, you have zero interest in actually investigating the evidence yourself.
Hahahaaaaa.
 

Geoff.D

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
10,751
That's the point I realised you are just trolling and gave up on you. You could answer all those questions yourself with the most basic attempt at research or reading, but choose not to. You choose to mock and insult instead. You are not a baby that needs to be spoonfed every little bit of information. Go online and look at the existing research. If you seriously want to know more about any of the evidence I would be happy to discuss it, but show some initiative in following up on it. That's not what you want though, is it? You just want to dismiss everything so you can act superior, you have zero interest in actually investigating the evidence yourself.
Spot on!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top