Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 127
  1. #61
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    1,645
    Quote Originally Posted by Crovash View Post
    1. The scientific method is the best tool we have at our disposal to explain what is and to help predict what may be. Admittedly, its starting point is a definitive materialism what you see (hear, touch, taste, smell) is what you get.

    2. Purpose or meaning is an illusion a necessary illusion perhaps, but an illusion nonetheless.

    3. And morality is determined by the guy with the biggest gun.
    Quote Originally Posted by fanofclendennon View Post
    Lol.

    I'd be more comfortable saying purpose is subjective which is kinda the same as what you said, only softer. And while your number 3 might have been tongue-in-cheek, I'm going to respond seriously to say no. It's not that simplistic.

    The guy with the biggest gun can lose his weapon at any time. Kings get beheaded. Mafia chiefs get assassiinated. Whole regimes get toppled. Ultimately, the rules are made by society as a whole. To your point,. though, that dude with the gun can wield an awful lot of influence.
    Quote Originally Posted by kevin13697 View Post
    1. we've already established and agreed

    2. Purpose is the reason something is done, a cause

    3. morality can be determined by value and principle, a chain of reasoning
    1. No argument here.

    2. It might be helpful to clarify what I mean by "purpose or meaning". My life, and everything I do is, when all else is stripped away, fundamentally meaningless -- without any real purpose, at least from the perspective of the larger picture (the cosmos). Now, I give myself meaning or purpose, and that's okay; I need to in order to press on with my existence -- I believe that that self-affirming attitude is what FoC labels "subjective." But, I know it's really just an illusion.

    3. Indeed, kings get beheaded and tyrants on occasion are overthrown, but in those cases, the act would still be considered a violation of the morality which that king or tyrant imposed for however long he/she was able to hold power. What happens next? The usurpers or rebels or freedom fighters (call them what you will), having established control, will simply impose by force (the figurative gun* here) their own morality. And, as Vonnegut, Jr. wrote: "and so it goes."

    *the gun could literally be a weapon, but it could be money; it could even be an idea (see religion).

    NOTE: Edited to include post quotes since we went to the top of a new page.
    Last edited by Crovash; 05-07-2018 at 03:51 PM.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    38,852
    Quote Originally Posted by Crovash View Post
    1. No argument here.

    2. It might be helpful to clarify what I mean by "purpose or meaning". My life, and everything I do is, when all else is stripped away, fundamentally meaningless -- without any real purpose, at least from the perspective of the larger picture (the cosmos). Now, I give myself meaning or purpose, and that's okay; I need to in order to press on with my existence -- I believe that that self-affirming attitude is what FoC labels "subjective." But, I know it's really just an illusion.

    3. Indeed, kings get beheaded and tyrants on occasion are overthrown, but in those cases, the act would still be considered a violation of the morality which that king or tyrant imposed for however long he/she was able to hold power. What happens next? The usurpers or rebels or freedom fighters (call them what you will), having established control, will simply impose by force (the figurative gun* here) their own morality. And, as Vonnegut, Jr. wrote: "and so it goes."

    *the gun could literally be a weapon, but it could be money; it could even be an idea (see religion).

    NOTE: Edited to include post quotes since we went to the top of a new page.
    Its an illusion to think theres an inherent purpose in ones life or in things in general. But we get to arbitrarily assign a purpose to those things so in that sense its subjective.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    21,884
    Quote Originally Posted by fanofclendennon View Post
    Its an illusion to think theres an inherent purpose in ones life or in things in general. But we get to arbitrarily assign a purpose to those things so in that sense its subjective.
    I would call reproducing an inherit purpose in our life.
    RAIDERS, SHARKS, WARRIORS

    "i don't believe in mysteries but still i pray for my sister, when speaking to the higher power that listens, to the lifeless vision of freedom everytime we're imprisoned, to the righteous victims of people of a higher position" - planet asia, old timer thoughts

    "God is Universal he is the Ruler Universal" - gangstarr (rip guru), robbin hood theory

    "don't gain the world and lose your soul, wisdom is better than silver and gold" - bob marley, zion train

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    38,852
    Quote Originally Posted by nastynice View Post
    I would call reproducing an inherit purpose in our life.
    Im gonna agree with you on the general, macro level. But not necessarily on the micro, individual level. Not everyone has a purpose to reproduce.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    1,645
    Quote Originally Posted by nastynice View Post
    I would call reproducing an inherit purpose in our life.
    Quote Originally Posted by fanofclendennon View Post
    Im gonna agree with you on the general, macro level. But not necessarily on the micro, individual level. Not everyone has a purpose to reproduce.
    And Id say that reproduction as purposeful is a comforting illusion on both levels.

    On the micro: what he said.

    On the macro, human reproduction is no more or less meaningful than reproduction for any live organism, plant or animal (or virus, fungus, whatever). Its what we do.

    At some point, our species will be extinct, thus rendering all that we deem or have deemed purposeful, meaningless.

    Until that time, of course, I am happy to live with my illusions. On this account, I tend to agree with Shakespeare, who wrote: We are such stuff as dreams are made on, and our little life is rounded with a sleep.

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    38,852
    Quote Originally Posted by Crovash View Post
    And Id say that reproduction as purposeful is a comforting illusion on both levels.

    On the micro: what he said.

    On the macro, human reproduction is no more or less meaningful than reproduction for any live organism, plant or animal (or virus, fungus, whatever). Its what we do.

    At some point, our species will be extinct, thus rendering all that we deem or have deemed purposeful, meaningless.

    Until that time, of course, I am happy to live with my illusions. On this account, I tend to agree with Shakespeare, who wrote: We are such stuff as dreams are made on, and our little life is rounded with a sleep.
    It depends on how you're using the word purpose, I suppose. Healthy human beings, all life forms, really, include the capability to reproduce. You're right, it's kind of what we do, unless we choose not to. To your point, though, we also breath. So I suppose reproducing is no more a purpose than breathing.

    Carry on.
    "Ain't got the call no more. Got a lot of sinful idears but they seem kinda sensible...."

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    East of the Sun, West of the Moon
    Posts
    26,553
    Quote Originally Posted by kevin13697 View Post
    Scientists don't tend to believe in anything until they have proof of its existence/reality. Yet many scientists believe that it is likely that there are other forms of life in the universe, but that is not the same thing as believing.

    "When a man stops believing in God he doesnt then believe in nothing, he believes anything."
    That seems true. Good quote!


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Baseball Maverick: How Sandy Alderson Revolutionized Baseball and Revived the Mets
    I am that Daddy Cool

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    38,852
    Quote Originally Posted by Dugmet View Post
    That seems true. Good quote!


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Disagree vehemently. One of the dumbest quotes Ive ever read. People who dont believe in God tend to be more skeptical in their beliefs. They set their bar higher, not lower.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    1,645
    Quote Originally Posted by kevin13697 View Post
    Scientists don't tend to believe in anything until they have proof of its existence/reality. Yet many scientists believe that it is likely that there are other forms of life in the universe, but that is not the same thing as believing.

    "When a man stops believing in God he doesnt then believe in nothing, he believes anything."
    Quote Originally Posted by Dugmet View Post
    That seems true. Good quote!


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Quote Originally Posted by fanofclendennon View Post
    Disagree vehemently. One of the dumbest quotes Ive ever read. People who dont believe in God tend to be more skeptical in their beliefs. They set their bar higher, not lower.
    I am enjoying this discussion.

    And...so? Lets take this back to the original question: the virgin birth.

    Now, there are two facets of the virgin birth at issue: (1) that which is offered in The Bible (generated by God i.e. with God, all things are possible.) and (2) the 21st century possibility of artificial insemination in a woman who is a virgin.

    (1) Were I one who believes in the God of The Bible at least the God of the New Testament then it stands to reason that I would believe that with this God, as the angel Gabriel says to Mary: all things are possible. That roughly translates into I would have to believe anything [is possible].

    (2) Were I one who eschews said God and relies on the scientific method to define my reality, then Id have to contend that the virgin birth as recorded in The Bible is a false representation of that particular situation. I would say that a virgin birth in the 21st century is possible, but not in the 1st century. Therefore, I believe some things, but not anything.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    parts unknown
    Posts
    30,786
    If life originated from the primordial soup why is it thought impossible for a more complex life form to originate from different inanimate soup ingredients?
    Last edited by ewing; 05-10-2018 at 10:02 AM.
    Rep Power: 0




    Quote Originally Posted by Raps08-09 Champ View Post
    My dick is named 'Ewing'.

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    43,873
    It's sexist rubbish.

    If multitudes can pass through the same way as Christ, then why must he be the only one "blessed" in such a way.

    The enlightenment, not the Church, not God is responsible for human progress.
    I am not a con artist! I am a businessman! I have a big brain and I'm good at making deals! People are just jealous of my BIG BRAIN! BAD!

    Guess who? The future X-Presdent...

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    born and raised on the south side of Chicago.
    Posts
    11,657
    Quote Originally Posted by bagwell368 View Post
    It's sexist rubbish.

    If multitudes can pass through the same way as Christ, then why must he be the only one "blessed" in such a way.

    The enlightenment, not the Church, not God is responsible for human progress.
    You don't think there are any monks let's say who worked on genetics... or Brothers who kept alive philosophical thinking through the dark ages that have any part in human progress? Seriously there's a lot of credit to go around.

    Quote Originally Posted by MrPoon
    man with hair like fire can destroy souls with a twitch of his thighs.

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    38,852
    Quote Originally Posted by ewing View Post
    If life originated from the primordial soup why is it thought impossible for a more complex life form to originate from different inanimate soup ingredients?
    Why is it thought impossible? Because it's overly simplistic to just assert that "life originated from the primordial soup." We really don't know much at all about how life originated. But we know lots about the human reproduction process. Our knowledge in this area is quite comprehensive, so much so that we can now inseminate a virgin who can then give birth to a child. This was impossible in the First Century, as Crovash pointed out.
    "Ain't got the call no more. Got a lot of sinful idears but they seem kinda sensible...."

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    38,852
    Quote Originally Posted by Crovash View Post
    I am enjoying this discussion.

    And...so? Lets take this back to the original question: the virgin birth.

    Now, there are two facets of the virgin birth at issue: (1) that which is offered in The Bible (generated by God i.e. with God, all things are possible.) and (2) the 21st century possibility of artificial insemination in a woman who is a virgin.

    (1) Were I one who believes in the God of The Bible at least the God of the New Testament then it stands to reason that I would believe that with this God, as the angel Gabriel says to Mary: all things are possible. That roughly translates into I would have to believe anything [is possible].

    (2) Were I one who eschews said God and relies on the scientific method to define my reality, then Id have to contend that the virgin birth as recorded in The Bible is a false representation of that particular situation. I would say that a virgin birth in the 21st century is possible, but not in the 1st century. Therefore, I believe some things, but not anything.
    PRE-cisely! And very well articulated.
    "Ain't got the call no more. Got a lot of sinful idears but they seem kinda sensible...."

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    38,852
    Quote Originally Posted by flips333 View Post
    You don't think there are any monks let's say who worked on genetics... or Brothers who kept alive philosophical thinking through the dark ages that have any part in human progress? Seriously there's a lot of credit to go around.
    I'm sure there were. But it was their work in science that promoted human progress. The furthering of their spiritual beliefs did not promote anything but the growth of their church.
    "Ain't got the call no more. Got a lot of sinful idears but they seem kinda sensible...."

Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •