Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

A morality question.


  • Please log in to reply
203 replies to this topic

#136 Bronn

Bronn

    Sellsword

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,022 posts

Posted 11 August 2011 - 11:21 AM

lol yet all religious argument and evidence comes from just that... books...

#137 Jase

Jase

    Kuechold Fantasies

  • Administrators
  • 17,481 posts
  • LocationMatthews, NC

Posted 11 August 2011 - 11:22 AM

yes, faith is...

There is a big difference in faith and fact. You've even pointed this out already, yet it seems you still argue for the sake of faith.

Faith is fine and well by me, so long as someone's personal faith has no bearing on our society as a whole.



My entire point was that we all hold unverifiable opinions, it is logically unfair to make someone try to use concrete evidence to explain their faith.

As unfair as asking you for concrete evidence for why you think chicken nuggets are good food.

Have I been defending the premise of faith itself? No, I don't think I have.

Oh me of little faith.

#138 Bronn

Bronn

    Sellsword

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,022 posts

Posted 11 August 2011 - 11:25 AM

My entire point was that we all hold unverifiable opinions, it is logically unfair to make someone try to use concrete evidence to explain their faith.

As unfair as asking you for concrete evidence for why you think chicken nuggets are good food.

Have I been defending the premise of faith itself? No, I don't think I have.

Oh me of little faith.


please show me where I have ever said that chicken nuggets are good food... If I did, I will repent for that sin...

you are portraying my beliefs for me... didn't you just accuse Cat of that?

;)

#139 Chimera

Chimera

    Membrane

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,201 posts

Posted 11 August 2011 - 11:26 AM

lol yet all religious argument and evidence comes from just that... books...


I was asking her opinions. Not asking for evidence.
The only thing I remember that she answered was when I asked if adaptations occur with foresight. She said no.
Everything else was an effort to give me someone else's opinion.

#140 Cat

Cat

    Terminally bored

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,957 posts

Posted 11 August 2011 - 11:29 AM

My entire point was that we all hold unverifiable opinions, it is logically unfair to make someone try to use concrete evidence to explain their faith.

As unfair as asking you for concrete evidence for why you think chicken nuggets are good food.

Have I been defending the premise of faith itself? No, I don't think I have.

Oh me of little faith.


The difference is we don't hold those "opinions" as absolute truths. Where as their religious "opinions" are held as absolute truths.

#141 Cat

Cat

    Terminally bored

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,957 posts

Posted 11 August 2011 - 11:30 AM

I was asking her opinions. Not asking for evidence.
The only thing I remember that she answered was when I asked if adaptations occur with foresight. She said no.
Everything else was an effort to give me someone else's opinion.


I know it's crazy I learned science from science professors. :rofl:

I'm not going to explain the entire theory of evolution on a message board. Thats why i recommend you go read a fuging book.

#142 Bronn

Bronn

    Sellsword

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,022 posts

Posted 11 August 2011 - 11:31 AM

I was asking her opinions. Not asking for evidence.
The only thing I remember that she answered was when I asked if adaptations occur with foresight. She said no.
Everything else was an effort to give me someone else's opinion.


I wonder if we could have a thread where people give their opinions on life without fear of someone responding...

I doubt it would last very long, but it could be interesting and eye opening...

#143 Bronn

Bronn

    Sellsword

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,022 posts

Posted 11 August 2011 - 11:35 AM

The difference is we don't hold those "opinions" as absolute truths. Where as their religious "opinions" are held as absolute truths.


I think, from his arguments, that Jase just doesn't believe our (since I share it too) opinions of religious folks' absolution are accurate, or fair... He stated that he thinks that most religious people when backed into a corner would cave in and admit to simply having faith in the accuracies of their belief system...

I don't think that is accurate from our experiences so much so as it is from his... It is a fair argument, but it doesn't hold true to everyone...

#144 Kral

Kral

    Internet Legend

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,934 posts

Posted 11 August 2011 - 11:35 AM

I would like to address where another poster mentioned that there must be some sort of moral standard common in all humans and that he hypothesizes that it originates "from God."

There is no moral standard, people throughout the world developed quite different social morals separately. Might makes right, and it really is a make it up as we go along sort of situation. If it were not so then you would have seen the same set of social morals develop separately across the world. There would be no cannibals or everyone would be cannibals for instance.

#145 Cat

Cat

    Terminally bored

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,957 posts

Posted 11 August 2011 - 11:37 AM

I think, from his arguments, that Jase just doesn't believe our (since I share it too) opinions of religious folks' absolution are accurate, or fair... He stated that he thinks that most religious people when backed into a corner would cave in and admit to simply having faith in the accuracies of their belief system...

I don't think that is accurate from our experiences so much so as it is from his... It is a fair argument, but it doesn't hold true to everyone...



Gotcha.

Of course they admit to it being based somewhat on faith (the amount will vary from person to person) but even when they admit that they still believe their religion is absolute truth. Faith is a virtue not a flaw in their belief system. (i'm sure not all are this way but the majority of debatorss, theologians, pastors that and I have heard do)

Edited by Cat, 11 August 2011 - 11:39 AM.


#146 Jase

Jase

    Kuechold Fantasies

  • Administrators
  • 17,481 posts
  • LocationMatthews, NC

Posted 11 August 2011 - 11:38 AM

The difference is we don't hold those "opinions" as absolute truths. Where as their religious "opinions" are held as absolute truths.


What they are held as is of no consequence to the point.

As a third party observer would see it, you are applying an unfair standard.

Now quit trying to shoehorn this into an argument that I cannot win. I hate those. :cheers2:

#147 Kral

Kral

    Internet Legend

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,934 posts

Posted 11 August 2011 - 11:40 AM

Why does religion require critical thought? By definition, it exists outside the realm of it. Is there critical thinking behind what you favorite color is? Why you love your wife? Why you cheer for the panthers when there are clearly better teams out there? Why you like chicken nuggets when they are clearly not even food?


People should think critically about everything. I think we can agree that the majority of people do not do so about almost anything however.

Things like why you love your wife are actually very important to understand for a variety of reasons that I don't have the time to get into here.

#148 Kral

Kral

    Internet Legend

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,934 posts

Posted 11 August 2011 - 11:44 AM

Gotcha.

Of course they admit to it being based somewhat on faith (the amount will vary from person to person) but even when they admit that they still believe their religion is absolute truth. Faith is a virtue not a flaw in their belief system. (i'm sure not all are this way but the majority of debatorss, theologians, pastors that and I have heard do)


In my view the "faith clause" as I like to refer to the faith based argument eschewing the necessity of evidence and information is something that was invented by the powerful elite long ago to control the stupid masses. Not on topic but just a random thought I'd share.

Of course my view on this could change at any moment just throwing something out there for no real reason.

#149 rodeo

rodeo

    Keelah se'lai

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,259 posts

Posted 11 August 2011 - 11:48 AM

I have never seen a religious person disregard science anywhere close to the caricature that is painted by the internet agnostic.


orly

The theory of evolution is already being proved wrong and many smart atheist scientists are saying it doesnt hold water at all.



#150 Jase

Jase

    Kuechold Fantasies

  • Administrators
  • 17,481 posts
  • LocationMatthews, NC

Posted 11 August 2011 - 11:52 AM

sonofabitch


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com