|
|
Post by sdrew13163 on Mar 6, 2018 15:04:29 GMT
My claim was that you were being an asshole who insulted over three quarters of the world's population. If you want evidence, then there's nothing. Nothing for either side. If there is no solid scientific evidence for the afterlife--and there is none, personal anecdotes from people who have been close to death are garbage--then belief in the afterlife is irrational, and I don't give a flying fuck how insulted people are when I say so. Truth matters and idiots are idiots. Truth? What truth do you have? You have no evidence either. Not even a sliver of it. Once again, you think you are above everyone else. But whatever. I'm not changing your mind and you obviously have no idea why I've said any of this to begin with. |
|
|
|
Post by faustus5 on Mar 6, 2018 18:02:52 GMT
Truth? What truth do you have? You have no evidence either. Not even a sliver of it. Once again, you think you are above everyone else. Sorry if you are both scientifically and philosophically illiterate, but there is an overwhelming body of evidence from cognitive neuroscience that our minds are nothing above physical processes occurring in our bodies. The idea that we have souls that could live on after death has itself been a dead, rejected idea for many, many decades among the vast majority of experts qualified to opine on the subject. This isn't even up for debate anymore.In the face of such a consensus, anyone who claims that there is an afterlife has the burden of proving their case. The case for materialism has already been made. |
|
|
|
Post by faustus5 on Mar 6, 2018 18:11:16 GMT
If you knew the first thing about how science works, you'd know that anecdotes are never reliable scientific evidence for anything under the sun. People are self-deceptive and extremely unreliable, and the scientific method is actually nothing more than a series of practices to combat the basic unreliability of humans and how they arrive at their beliefs. First of all, Lawrence is forever making exaggerated, hyperbolic comments and you are just being ridiculous taking the comment about narcissism literally. Nevertheless, she does have a point about belief in the afterlife persisting despite a complete lack of credible evidence being due to the cognitive flaws of human beings. She's actually expressing an opinion about the origin of religious belief generally that is entirely mainstream among scientists who try to understand where religious beliefs come from. |
|
|
|
Post by sdrew13163 on Mar 6, 2018 18:49:28 GMT
Truth? What truth do you have? You have no evidence either. Not even a sliver of it. Once again, you think you are above everyone else. Sorry if you are both scientifically and philosophically illiterate, but there is an overwhelming body of evidence from cognitive neuroscience that our minds are nothing above physical processes occurring in our bodies. The idea that we have souls that could live on after death has itself been a dead, rejected idea for many, many decades among the vast majority of experts qualified to opine on the subject. This isn't even up for debate anymore.In the fact of such a consensus, anyone who claims that there is an afterlife has the burden of proving their case. The case for materialism has already been made. Thanks for providing no evidence. You. Don't. Know. Shit. |
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Mar 6, 2018 21:10:13 GMT
The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, a scientific version of an ancient idea that goes back to the Tao, is basically that not everything can be known.
Secularists and Theists make the same mistake--they attempt to make absolutes concrete (God is the creator of everything, a single atom is the final source of everything). Any time you define an absolute you can question it (where did God come from, why does that atom have such and such characteristics), if you can question it, how can it be absolute? An absolute would have to be, by definition, a final answer. Classic Eastern religions leave the ultimate as a mystery (mysticism) to avoid that problem.
I think George Carlin's Religion is Bullshit skit is funny but he dumbs down the reason why people turn to religion.
If your child is tortured to death by someone, it is pretty difficult to get them to cope by saying "well it was just a machine that is shut off."
|
|
|
|
Post by faustus5 on Mar 7, 2018 15:51:08 GMT
Thanks for providing no evidence. You. Don't. Know. Shit. As I explained to your ignorant ass, the burden of providing evidence is entirely upon you. The adults in the room--the community of scientists and philosophers who study the mind body problem--have already made up their minds. So you have a tough job ahead of you. And you will fail, pure and simple. |
|
|
|
Post by faustus5 on Mar 7, 2018 15:55:27 GMT
The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, a scientific version of an ancient idea that goes back to the Tao, is basically that not everything can be known. It says very specific, mathematically precise things about how much we can know about very narrow properties in a very narrow context. You cannot turn it into a cosmic principle that says anything meaningful about religion, secularism, or materialism. |
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Mar 7, 2018 17:26:32 GMT
It says very specific, mathematically precise things about how much we can know about very narrow properties in a very narrow context. You cannot turn it into a cosmic principle that says anything meaningful about religion, secularism, or materialism. Yes you can. Extrapolation works wonders. BTW I thought you were dead. |
|
|
|
Post by salomonj on Mar 7, 2018 17:27:09 GMT
My God is faustus5 an arrogant pretentious little douchbag. |
|
|
|
Post by faustus5 on Mar 7, 2018 18:35:13 GMT
My God is faustus5 an arrogant pretentious little douchbag. I also happen to have all the facts on my side, which matters far more in my value system. I'm sorry, but if you have any familiarity with the subject, you know dualism is a dead and defeated metaphysical position and the materialists won the debate a while ago. |
|
|
|
Post by NewtJorden on Mar 7, 2018 18:38:29 GMT
If it gets her some attention, she'll do anything. Thats true |
|
|
|
Post by salomonj on Mar 7, 2018 19:54:59 GMT
My God is faustus5 an arrogant pretentious little douchbag. I also happen to have all the facts on my side, which matters far more in my value system. I'm sorry, but if you have any familiarity with the subject, you know dualism is a dead and defeated metaphysical position and the materialists won the debate a while ago. Whatever gets you to sleep at night, pal. All I see is a thin skinned cuck who freaks the fuck out every time someone even remotely criticizes Jennifer Lawrence. |
|
|
|
Post by sdrew13163 on Mar 7, 2018 21:30:07 GMT
Thanks for providing no evidence. You. Don't. Know. Shit. As I explained to your ignorant ass, the burden of providing evidence is entirely upon you. The adults in the room--the community of scientists and philosophers who study the mind body problem--have already made up their minds. So you have a tough job ahead of you. And you will fail, pure and simple. You have nothing. Your best argument is "some smart people probably think I'm right so I must be." Let's just say that you are right about everything. Let's just pretend. That still wouldn't change the fact that you disrespected the beliefs of a huge amount of people in the world just so you could kiss the ass of another out-of-touch celebrity. I guess I expect nothing more from you anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by faustus5 on Mar 8, 2018 11:50:12 GMT
You have nothing. Your best argument is "some smart people probably think I'm right so I must be." The rallying call of know-nothings across the world, whether the subject is the reality of evolution, climate change, or any other inconvenient truth that must be denied to preserve one delusion or another. |
|
|
|
Post by sdrew13163 on Mar 8, 2018 15:16:15 GMT
You have nothing. Your best argument is "some smart people probably think I'm right so I must be." The rallying call of know-nothings across the world, whether the subject is the reality of evolution, climate change, or any other inconvenient truth that must be denied to preserve one delusion or another. I find it hilarious that you literally just cut out the whole last part of my last post. I guess that was a bit of an "inconvenient truth" about you that was just too much for you to handle. It's also hilarious that you bring up evolution and climate change as if they were ever even mentioned. Don't put words in my mouth, you know-nothing. |
|
|
|
Post by faustus5 on Mar 8, 2018 17:53:52 GMT
I find it hilarious that you literally just cut out the whole last part of my last post. I guess that was a bit of an "inconvenient truth" about you that was just too much for you to handle. The rest of your post was utterly meaningless and inconsequential. No one with any intelligence bases their views of reality or what they say about it on the potential hurt feelings of the ignorant and uneducated. They were brought up for the very relevant reason that people like you deny objective reality when objective reality clashes with what you want to believe. You are no better than a creationist or climate change denier when it comes to your understanding of human consciousness and the non-existence of the soul. |
|
|
|
Post by sdrew13163 on Mar 8, 2018 21:19:24 GMT
I find it hilarious that you literally just cut out the whole last part of my last post. I guess that was a bit of an "inconvenient truth" about you that was just too much for you to handle. The rest of your post was utterly meaningless and inconsequential. No one with any intelligence bases their views of reality or what they say about it on the potential hurt feelings of the ignorant and uneducated. They were brought up for the very relevant reason that people like you deny objective reality when objective reality clashes with what you want to believe. You are no better than a creationist or climate change denier when it comes to your understanding of human consciousness and the non-existence of the soul. You might be the most narrow-minded and ignorant poster on this entire board. Congrats! |
|
|
|
Post by salomonj on Mar 8, 2018 21:40:40 GMT
The rest of your post was utterly meaningless and inconsequential. No one with any intelligence bases their views of reality or what they say about it on the potential hurt feelings of the ignorant and uneducated. They were brought up for the very relevant reason that people like you deny objective reality when objective reality clashes with what you want to believe. You are no better than a creationist or climate change denier when it comes to your understanding of human consciousness and the non-existence of the soul. You might be the most narrow-minded and ignorant poster on this entire board. Congrats! He certainly gives mikef6 a run for his money |
|
|
|
Post by sdrew13163 on Mar 8, 2018 22:25:11 GMT
You might be the most narrow-minded and ignorant poster on this entire board. Congrats! He certainly gives mikef6 a run for his money At least Mike understands that there are those that have different views and opinions from his own. He is passionate, but not an absolute dick. |
|
|
|
Post by bluerisk on Mar 8, 2018 22:26:14 GMT
If there is no solid scientific evidence for the afterlife--and there is none, personal anecdotes from people who have been close to death are garbage--then belief in the afterlife is irrational, and I don't give a flying fuck how insulted people are when I say so. Truth matters and idiots are idiots. First of all that is mighty 'scientific' of you to dismiss the anecdotes of various of hundreds of thousands of people of all walks of life and backgrounds as nothing but "garbage" without a second (or first) look; but more importantly J-Law's response is not a matter of evidence of the afterlife, but a matter of whether such a belief or hope is "narcissistic." I can understand how in the delusional Hollywood den of material opulence, where the main event of one's year is giving each other golden statues, it could be seen as "narcissistic," but it in no way shape or form corresponds with the vast majority of humankind throughout the ages, where the afterlife is the only hope that dreams, justice, mercy, restoration and redemption will not be defeated by death for all time. Sge only said that she doesn't know but that SHE tends to belief rather not. And she is free to think whatever she likes in this matter. When we were asked this question (20 years ago by our English teacher) nobody raised his hand. |
|
