Shit.sleeper;1389839 wrote:3+3 = 9? Christ.
My point is that if you have determined something to be true, that doesn't necessitate that you rule out all other options. You merely have to determine whether those options are the same as the initial something. I wasn't suggesting that it parallel in its simplicity, or even in the epistemology required to suggest either as true.sleeper;1389843 wrote:Also, 3+3 = 6 is a mathematical proof verifiable through logic and reason. You also don't devote your whole lifestyle around a simple equation nor indoctrinate your children with that knowledge through an ancient textbook. I mean the amount of logical leaps and stretches you have to go through to make this comparison would tire even a runner from Kenya.
Why even bother with science at all? Like I said, next time you are injured, don't go to the hospital just pray to god and see how that works out for you. :laugh:
No, the point of the exercise is to show that your beliefs are based on those handed down by your parents and indoctrinated through family pressure until you've completely lost your mind and have no basis for following a logical construct throughout your entire life. These people need to be institutionalized indefinitely.O-Trap;1389849 wrote:My point is that if you have determined something to be true, that doesn't necessitate that you rule out all other options. You merely have to determine whether those options are the same as the initial something. I wasn't suggesting that it parallel in its simplicity, or even in the epistemology required to suggest either as true.
However, I won't blame you for poking fun at me for the 3+3 comment. Hell, I'm not even editing it.
My beliefs are largely different from my parents' beliefs, and honestly, I have never had any desire to share my parents' beliefs, so there's no motivation or substantiation for the parental indoctrination claim. In truth, I'm surprised you'd even try to make such a claim, since there is zero scientific evidence to substantiate your assertion, since that's the only view of epistemology to which you subscribe (ironically).sleeper;1389852 wrote:No, the point of the exercise is to show that your beliefs are based on those handed down by your parents and indoctrinated through family pressure until you've completely lost your mind and have no basis for following a logical construct throughout your entire life. These people need to be institutionalized indefinitely.
I would never wish to place myself into a delusion, particularly with the foreknowledge of doing so. At some point, however, belief is no longer volitional, and as such, I was compelled to believe what I thought made the most sense. Had nothing to do with a crisis of any kind, and it didn't make life easier in any discernible way.sleeper;1389903 wrote:Oh certainly there are other ways for someone to suspend logic and reason and subscribe to an unproven belief system. Childhood indoctrination is certainly the most common method unless you find no correlation between an individual's beliefs with their parents belief(hint: there is, and its very strong). Other methods include those living in mediocrity, mid life crises, heavy ignorance, etc. God provides an easy way out to smooth over life's troubles since his message is largely about lacking personal accountability and having a mythical figure named god in control. Fairy tales are nice, but they aren't real and I don't know why you'd want to place yourself in that kind of delusion willingly.
There is zero empirical evidence to substantiate the statement that belief in non-physical, sentient entities is a disease or mental condition in any way. As such, if you consider yourself a strict empiricist, you are unable to hold such a view. Thus far, your only basis for asserting your theory on the cause is your default rejection of the legitimacy of the effect. In essence, you reject the premises of the syllogism, not based on evidence, but based on the conclusion to which they lead. It's almost like you're affirming the consequent, which is a formal fallacy.sleeper;1389903 wrote:As far as your comments regarding keeping believers out of mental hospitals, I disagree. If you say you are praying to god and god is talking to you and guiding you through life you are labeled sane. If you say the exact same sentence but replace god into his more notable form of "invisible and powerful unproven friend" you'd be sent to the asylum for medical attention. The massive institutionalization of religious believers would go a long way in correcting this disease and advancing humans into the next echelon.
Now that's funny!Devils Advocate;1389950 wrote:for the lulz
Hell, I meant every word of it.sleeper;1390000 wrote:I tried to rep you for that post o-trap, but it wouldn't let me. It was well written and hard to combat with only words. Nice job. :thumbup:
Only those things involving the spirit.sleeper;1389826 wrote:Do you use this methodology to validate anything else in your life? Say gravity?
????sleeper;1389852 wrote:No, the point of the exercise is to show that your beliefs are based on those handed down by your parents and indoctrinated through family pressure until you've completely lost your mind and have no basis for following a logical construct throughout your entire life. These people need to be institutionalized indefinitely.
Oh, you mean THAT thread...wait, which religion thread that sleeper started to "prove" people wrong about their beliefs?Con_Alma;1390020 wrote:????
My beliefs have nothgin to do with my parents. They certainly didn't have the beliefs that I do. ....but I explained that to you in another thread when this topic came up.
Yeah, that one, and that one and that one.OSH;1390031 wrote:Oh, you mean THAT thread...wait, which religion thread that sleeper started to "prove" people wrong about their beliefs?
To be a scam, typically you have to lose something. What does religion, in general, scam a person out of?End of Line;1390006 wrote:Religion to me is nothing but a scam. Yes I'm an Atheist.
Intellectual integrity.O-Trap;1390127 wrote:To be a scam, typically you have to lose something. What does religion, in general, scam a person out of?
I would suggest that believing in the claim that scientific evidence is the only way by which we may know something gives up the same.sleeper;1390129 wrote:Intellectual integrity.
Seems like you have lost that just fine on your own on this thread without religion.sleeper;1390129 wrote:Intellectual integrity.
I'd say giving 10% to an institution that mostly operates on 52 days of the year. That all goes to pay a church staff's salary, electric bills, sewage bills, and property taxes. There's a lot more that can be done than what a "tithe" typically goes to.O-Trap;1390127 wrote:To be a scam, typically you have to lose something. What does religion, in general, scam a person out of?
In regard to the overarching term used -- religion -- you're referring to a pretty small segment.OSH;1390223 wrote:I'd say giving 10% to an institution that mostly operates on 52 days of the year. That all goes to pay a church staff's salary, electric bills, sewage bills, and property taxes. There's a lot more that can be done than what a "tithe" typically goes to.
Free thinking and living your life by a book that should be in the fiction aisle.O-Trap;1390127 wrote:To be a scam, typically you have to lose something. What does religion, in general, scam a person out of?
Not all religions have "books" or necessarily require obedience, as I recall. As well, I know of some that advocate free thinking to a larger degree than even a naturalist worldview. Again, it seems like you're dealing with particulars within "religion" instead of religion as a whole.End of Line;1390354 wrote:Free thinking and living your life by a book that should be in the fiction aisle.
And what "pretty small segment" am I referring to?O-Trap;1390342 wrote:In regard to the overarching term used -- religion -- you're referring to a pretty small segment.
