Social Degradation and Religious Decay (Split from "Life on Europa")
Pages
| Author | Topic: Social Degradation and Religious Decay (Split from "Life on Europa") |
|---|---|
|
...b10010b...
Member # 869
|
written Monday, July 16 2007 22:48
Profile
Homepage
quote:The proportion of people who die is 100%, same as it's always been. -------------------- The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure! Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00 |
|
Electric Sheep One
Member # 3431
|
written Tuesday, July 17 2007 02:21
Profile
quote:Wait, h-bar is atheist? But it shows up on all sorts of Christian priestly vestments, sandwiched between those two other profound symbols, i and c.  -------------------- We're not doing cool. We're doing pretty. Posts: 3335 | Registered: Thursday, September 4 2003 07:00 |
|
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Tuesday, July 17 2007 04:48
Profile
Homepage
quote:Regulation is what we're talking about. Your argument against evolution was that we haven't seen new organs develop from nothing in the present day and therefore we shouldn't think that such a thing ever happened. But now you're saying that not having seen something happen in the present day isn't a reason to dismiss that it could have ever happened at all. -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
|
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
|
written Tuesday, July 17 2007 05:58
Profile
If there were no record of such a thing and I simply felt that it happened because it fit my worldview better then you'd have a point. In this case we have an actual eyewitness making a matter of fact statement as if it's no big deal, and even as if it's actually a small thing - calling 70-80 years 'quick.' It's also not farfetched because we see basically the same thing now. This is the situation we had on the other thread and we're in the same positions. I think things are the same, you think they work differently. If that somehow makes me a hypocrite or stupid in your eyes, so be it. I don't know why you can't just leave the past in the past. I don't have any bad feelings toward you because we disagreed. I actually enjoyed the discussion and feel I grew from it. Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00 |
|
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Tuesday, July 17 2007 06:59
Profile
Homepage
quote:You were arguing that it was reasonable to think that people lived for 400+ years back in Biblical times. Are you really saying that we see basically the same thing now? -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
|
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
|
written Tuesday, July 17 2007 07:52
Profile
No, but we have an eyewitness account. I don't feel that some people lived to 400 based off of theory. I'm trusting a historical record. It is not unreasonable to me just because we don't see it now. If someone believed something for which there was no record of ever and not observable now I would think that was unreasonable. Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00 |
|
Agent
Member # 2759
|
written Tuesday, July 17 2007 09:48
Profile
Homepage
An eyewitness account that misread could have been. -------------------- "Blink and you're dead... Don't turn your back, don't look away and don't blink." Geneforge 4 stuff. Also, everything I know about Avernum | Avernum 2 | Avernum 3 | Avernum 4 Posts: 1104 | Registered: Monday, March 10 2003 08:00 |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Tuesday, July 17 2007 09:59
Profile
I got an eyewitness account of Bigfoot I'll sell you. Cheap. -------------------- WWtNSD? Synergy - "I don't get it." Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
|
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
|
written Tuesday, July 17 2007 10:23
Profile
Believability depends on the veracity of the source. I'm convinced that the Bible comes from someone very honest. If you are not convinced that the source exists or cares of course you'll have doubts. If yo mamma told you that she clearly saw a large bipedal hairy primate through her bedroom window rummaging through her garbage for 30 minutes not more than four feet from her that could not possibly have been a man in a costume, might you think twice? Let's give her a PhD in zoology with a specialty in primate studies. Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00 |
|
Shaper
Member # 73
|
written Tuesday, July 17 2007 10:40
Profile
Only if she provided convincing evidence of it (say, capturing it or at least getting some hair with intact roots or a tissue sample of some sort), otherwise she'd lose her good reputation as a scientist and people would call her a quack. Other quacks might be less strict about standards of proof, however. [ Tuesday, July 17, 2007 10:42: Message edited by: The Almighty Do-er of Stuff ] -------------------- My Myspace, with some of my audial and visual art The Lyceum - The Headquarters of the Blades designing community The Louvre - The Blades of Avernum graphics database Alexandria - The Blades of Exile Scenario database BoE Webring - Self explanatory Polaris - Free porn here Odd Todd - Fun for the unemployed (and everyone else too) They Might Be Giants - Four websites for one of the greatest bands in existance -------------------- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Posts: 2957 | Registered: Thursday, October 4 2001 07:00 |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Tuesday, July 17 2007 10:43
Profile
See, ADoS knows I originally hail from Massachusetts, and we all know that there is no Bigfoot living there. I mean, duh!!! Edit - And who stores their garbage four feet from the bedroom window? That right there would cause credibility to leak away from the story. [ Tuesday, July 17, 2007 10:45: Message edited by: Jumpin' Sarcasmon ] -------------------- WWtNSD? Synergy - "I don't get it." Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 6785
|
written Tuesday, July 17 2007 11:45
Profile
There used to be incredibly old people living in the former Soviet Union till well over 120. They could even provide documentation in the form of birth certificates from the times of the tsars. It turned out that the birth certificates were from deceased relatives with the same names and the people were only in their sixties and seventies. Proof is only as good as what can be verified. Posts: 4643 | Registered: Friday, February 10 2006 08:00 |
|
Shaper
Member # 73
|
written Tuesday, July 17 2007 12:07
Profile
Another thing: If we did believe our hypothetical zoologist mothers about Bigfoot without the evidence I mentioned or some other equally convincing evidence, we would be committing an ipse dixit fallacy. Science doesn't work that way, no matter what religious zealots (I'm not saying that includes you so don't address that and ignore everything else) may tell you. By the way, Stillness, it's easy to fake honesty and believability. The Bible seems honest because it admits things, according to you, but believing or asserting things because of that is a common fallacy as well. I can't find it on the Fallacy Files (which I link to not because of a belief that it's an absolute authority, but because I find that it provides good proofs and counterproofs, examples, etc.), so I'll try to give an example from my own head. Don't expect it to make sense, but don't expect it not to either. I'm not good at explaining things sometimes, but sometimes I get lucky. Take it on its own merits, in other words. Before I give the example, I will, for purposes of this example, define the word "prophet" as "a being who delivers spiritual, divine, and/or supernatural truths from a conventionally imperceptible realm (for instance, in Christianity, God) to the perceptible realm (the world we live in and observe directly)." Let's say there's an ancient religion whose prophets tell us that it's an abhorrent act to kill any insect, and that you must carry a broom at all times and sweep the ground where you walk to brush aside any insects you might otherwise step on. Would you believe this religion? Now, let's take that same scenario, and add to it that the prophets admit that they have killed insects in the past, but that it was wrong and they don't do it anymore (as of the times of the deliverance of their messages). The prophets were being honest. Now would you believe that killing an insect is abhorrent, and now would you believe that you must carry a broom to sweep the ground you walk on? Would you believe the religion? -------------------- My Myspace, with some of my audial and visual art The Lyceum - The Headquarters of the Blades designing community The Louvre - The Blades of Avernum graphics database Alexandria - The Blades of Exile Scenario database BoE Webring - Self explanatory Polaris - Free porn here Odd Todd - Fun for the unemployed (and everyone else too) They Might Be Giants - Four websites for one of the greatest bands in existance -------------------- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Posts: 2957 | Registered: Thursday, October 4 2001 07:00 |
|
Shaper
Member # 6292
|
written Tuesday, July 17 2007 12:18
Profile
quote:Why? This is the linchpin of a huge amount of your belief system. I'd be most interested to hear what you base your undying faith in the technical perfection of a collection of ancient disparate texts upon—texts which are clearly influenced and evolved by surrounding cultures of the era, if you have eyes to see it. Much of Christendom does not and has not had this belief system of the infallibility of the Bible, amazingly. Why do you? ... I was not saying the Bible has nothing to say and advise about marriage. I was saying there was no law in the OT to create a one-man, one-woman marriage, which Christians see as a sacred law in the NT. There is a fair bit said about love and treatment of others, but not any rules about how many wives you are to have or that one way is sacred and another profane. What is profane to me is women being regarded as property in some of the very scriptures you quote. How enlightened "God" was three+ millennia ago. How odd that He so perfectly patterns his attitudes after the cultures of men and beliefs of the day. Surely He had something more enlightened to give ancient Israel than a variation of the Code of Hammurabi? That is my simple point, so let's not obscure it, because Christendom has made the tradition of marriage as we still largely know and practice it one of the hugest sacred cows of its devising in the last two millennia. ... Are you saying per capita death, bloodshed, and suffering has increased compared to B.C. times or medieval times? Because that's the only statistic that matters in this context, and I would contend the suggestion strongly. ... Why do I demonstrate healthy skepticism and disdain toward much of the silliness that is promoted in the name of God, while not being atheist or opposed to the belief in God? I don't think this requires any explanation, but the definition of insanity and the application of Ockham's Razor coupled with a lifetime of personal experience all figure in. -S- -------------------- A4 Items • A4 Singleton • G4 Items • G4 Forging • G4 Infiltrator • NR Items • The Lonely Celt Posts: 2009 | Registered: Monday, September 12 2005 07:00 |
|
Shaper
Member # 73
|
written Tuesday, July 17 2007 12:29
Profile
I hate when people invoke Occam's Razor as evidence against God. It's not a law of physics, it's a piece of logic theory. It says "Don't make baseless assumptions", not "Anything without evidence is false". The former is useful for utilitarian purposes and for purposes of debate. The latter is a logical fallacy. EDIT: Whoops. I just realized that Synergy didn't invoke Occam's Razor as evidence against God, but simply said not making baseless assumptions about the nature of the universe is good for utilitarian purposes, which is what Occam's Razor is. I'll leave my post in place anyway just for future reference, in case anyone actually does use it the wrong way later on. [ Tuesday, July 17, 2007 12:33: Message edited by: The Almighty Do-er of Stuff ] -------------------- My Myspace, with some of my audial and visual art The Lyceum - The Headquarters of the Blades designing community The Louvre - The Blades of Avernum graphics database Alexandria - The Blades of Exile Scenario database BoE Webring - Self explanatory Polaris - Free porn here Odd Todd - Fun for the unemployed (and everyone else too) They Might Be Giants - Four websites for one of the greatest bands in existance -------------------- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Posts: 2957 | Registered: Thursday, October 4 2001 07:00 |
|
By Committee
Member # 4233
|
written Tuesday, July 17 2007 12:29
Profile
"But Synergy, it's the Bible!" Posts: 2242 | Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00 |
|
Shaper
Member # 73
|
written Tuesday, July 17 2007 12:39
Profile
By the way, in case anyone missed it, Salmon's post here: quote:is a blatant attempt to troll, and I never dismissed Bigfoot's existance in Massachusetts out of hand. I don't waste time believing it or wondering about it because I've never had any reason to, but I don't dismiss it out of hand. -------------------- My Myspace, with some of my audial and visual art The Lyceum - The Headquarters of the Blades designing community The Louvre - The Blades of Avernum graphics database Alexandria - The Blades of Exile Scenario database BoE Webring - Self explanatory Polaris - Free porn here Odd Todd - Fun for the unemployed (and everyone else too) They Might Be Giants - Four websites for one of the greatest bands in existance -------------------- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Posts: 2957 | Registered: Thursday, October 4 2001 07:00 |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Tuesday, July 17 2007 12:55
Profile
Actually, I was just pointing out that Stillness had supposed a very credible witness, a sighting that a lot of people want to have verified, and yet some small detail made the whole thing tumble like a house of cards. If that house had been in rural Washington state, and the garbage been "out by the garage," rather than under the bedroom window, it may have been something worth investigation. As is, it lacks veracity based on circumstances, and not the actual witness. In other words, you can have extremely credible witnesses in the Bible, but if what is being attributed to them is not factual, then I have a hard time believing other things as well. All it takes is one little mistruth to make the believable fall apart, which is what I read you (ADoS) describing above. Trolling... pschaw! -------------------- WWtNSD? Synergy - "I don't get it." Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
|
Shaper
Member # 73
|
written Tuesday, July 17 2007 13:04
Profile
I said nothing of mistruth. I spoke of lack of evidence, not evidence against. It's not impossible, even if it is foolish, to keep your garbage under your bedroom window. Not everyone has a front yard to separate their bedrooms from the sidewalk, you know. [ Tuesday, July 17, 2007 13:05: Message edited by: The Almighty Do-er of Stuff ] -------------------- My Myspace, with some of my audial and visual art The Lyceum - The Headquarters of the Blades designing community The Louvre - The Blades of Avernum graphics database Alexandria - The Blades of Exile Scenario database BoE Webring - Self explanatory Polaris - Free porn here Odd Todd - Fun for the unemployed (and everyone else too) They Might Be Giants - Four websites for one of the greatest bands in existance -------------------- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Posts: 2957 | Registered: Thursday, October 4 2001 07:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 335
|
written Tuesday, July 17 2007 13:17
Profile
Homepage
quote:That depends on your definition of religion. Of course atheism meets some criteria, but there are rather important differences between atheism and other religions. No liturgy. No clergy. No revealed truth. No ritual. No non-negotiable beliefs. No higher authority. Atheism is a religion defined by absences, if you really want to call it a religion. —Alorael, who was making another point entirely. Having his points missed is nothing new, though, and there's nothing to be accomplished by trying again. Posts: 14579 | Registered: Saturday, December 1 2001 08:00 |
|
...b10010b...
Member # 869
|
written Tuesday, July 17 2007 19:05
Profile
Homepage
quote:My take on this is basically that a religion requires both a metaphysics and a mythology. Atheism is a metaphysics but with no mythology attached, whereas, say, Freudianism is a mythology, but with no metaphysics. [ Tuesday, July 17, 2007 19:06: Message edited by: Thuryl ] -------------------- The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure! Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00 |
|
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Tuesday, July 17 2007 20:50
Profile
Homepage
Stillness is again missing the point of the issue raised: the question is, how do we know that we can trust the Bible's ages of people? The answer given is circular: we can trust the Bible's figures because the Bible is something that we can trust. If you want to start by assuming that the Bible is true, fine, but that doesn't make for a very compelling argument. -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
|
By Committee
Member # 4233
|
written Wednesday, July 18 2007 04:12
Profile
"But Kelandon, it's the Bible!" Posts: 2242 | Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00 |
|
Shaper
Member # 73
|
written Wednesday, July 18 2007 04:19
Profile
Kel, I believe he said a while back that the reason it's believable is that he thinks it's open about its faults, hence my example, and that its rules make sense based on anecdotes, to which some people (Alo definitely, Salmon maybe but I can't remember) responded by saying that anecdotal evidence can be found for anything at all, although I don't remember Stillness's response to that. It's still not a very good reason, but it's more of a reason than the reason you're attributing to him. You're burning the straw man, it seems. -------------------- My Myspace, with some of my audial and visual art The Lyceum - The Headquarters of the Blades designing community The Louvre - The Blades of Avernum graphics database Alexandria - The Blades of Exile Scenario database BoE Webring - Self explanatory Polaris - Free porn here Odd Todd - Fun for the unemployed (and everyone else too) They Might Be Giants - Four websites for one of the greatest bands in existance -------------------- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Posts: 2957 | Registered: Thursday, October 4 2001 07:00 |
|
By Committee
Member # 4233
|
written Wednesday, July 18 2007 05:05
Profile
It's still not really a compelling argument, at least for those of us living in the age of reason and science. Asserting that the evidence that he's aware of is sufficient proof of the Bible's veracity is like me asserting that I can diagnose cancer based on what I've learned watching medical dramas. I am nothing close to a medical scholar, and everyone would rightly believe that I am absolutely unqualified to make any such claims. Similarly, I am fairly certain that Stillness is in no position to make a similar claim about the veracity of the Bible. Why do I assert this? Because I spent a lion's share of my time in undergrad studying classical languages so that I could learn more about the Bible (and this was while I was still a believer), and the sum of that experience is that there are far, far too many historical unknowns for the text to be vetted to the extent that Stillness claims. In other words, I learned enough to know that what I didn't know and couldn't confirm was substantial. Based on my experience, Stillness' assertions suggest to me that he has barely scratched the surface of the history behind what the Bible purports, and additionally is disinclined to, because he has no desire for his faith to be shaken. [ Wednesday, July 18, 2007 05:08: Message edited by: Drew ] Posts: 2242 | Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00 |