Greatest Rilvalry of all time

Originally posted by Cartesian Doubt
Most rational internal beliefs (not external like sensory data) are based on the opinions of others.

Or have you actually observed the earth from Space to see that its round, or tried heroine to see that its dangerous ?

And no im not stating it as a fact, its just a very rational opinion, i.e. similar to the notion that the sun will probably rise tomorrow.

You seem to have a hard time differentiating opinion from fact. It's not some random person's accepted opinion on Earth's form as seen from space or the effects of heroine. It's a proven fact. For somebody who tries to pass off as smart, you've made an awfully stupid comparison.

I'm not going to argue your opinion, simply because I do not care for it. I was just calling your reponse, stating that rationality and religion as the greatest rivalry of all time, ignorant and quite frankly not having anything to do with a comic book forum.

Originally posted by Philosophía
You seem to have a hard time differentiating opinion from fact. It's not some random person's accepted opinion on Earth's form as seen from space or the effects of heroine. It's a proven fact. For somebody who tries to pass off as smart, you've made an awfully stupid comparison.

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epistemology/

This might sound a little idiosyncratic but You cannot "know" anything for sure. Hence my examples.

Brain In Vats, World Wide Conspiracy's etc.

Originally posted by Cartesian Doubt
P.S. Calvin, the founder of most of the nmodern forms of Christianity, regarded rationality as the work of the Devil.

Which is funny because there are lots of modern Christians who thing Calvin was completely out of his mind about many things. Also funny because rational people would known that Calvin represents . . . well Calvin himself and really nobody else.

Originally posted by Cartesian Doubt
I suppose David Hume, Frederick Nietzsche, Jean Paul Sartre, Bertrand Russel are all ignorant then ?

Definitely, to name but one of their faults. ✅

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Which is funny because there are lots of modern Christians who thing Calvin was completely out of his mind about many things. Also funny because rational people would known that Calvin represents . . . well Calvin himself and really nobody else.

Agreed ✅

I'm a Christian and whilst Calvin had many interesting arguments, I don't subscribe to Calvinism. In fact many Christian's don't.

Originally posted by Cartesian Doubt
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epistemology/

This might sound a little idiosyncratic but You cannot "know" anything for sure. Hence my examples.

Brain In Vats, World Wide Conspiracy's etc.

Just like you can't know that the attitude of not being able to really know anything is correct, either.

Originally posted by willRules

Just like you can't know that the attitude of not being able to really know anything is correct, either.

That's is easily one of the cleverest responses i have ever read on this forum. But skepticism is one of the only analytical truths one can know, hence Descartes only decent contribution to philosophy "One can know one is doubting because this thought process is a form of doubting itself". Cogito I'l Sum, I think therefore I am.

Originally posted by willRules
Definitely, to name but one of their faults. ✅

David Hume and Betrand Russel are arguably two of the cleverest people to have ever existed. Suggesting they are ignorant is like saying happiness is bad. There are cases in which you can argue that happiness is infact bad (pedophillia etc), but the general consensus is that it is a really good thing.

Originally posted by willRules
Agreed ✅

I'm a Christian and whilst Calvin had many interesting arguments, I don't subscribe to Calvinism. In fact many Christian's don't.

Yeah ... but if you don't take the Calvanist perspective you get into deep water into clarifying which parts of the bible are symbolism and metaphorical.

Originally posted by Cartesian Doubt
David Hume and Betrand Russel are arguably two of the cleverest people to have ever existed. Suggesting they are ignorant is like saying happiness is bad. There are cases in which you can argue that happiness is infact bad (pedophillia etc), but the general consensus is that it is a really good thing.

Happiness is a bad thing considering that attempts to make oneself happy are usually ineffective and damaging in the long run. Also cleverness and ignorance are not mutually exclusive.

Originally posted by Cartesian Doubt
Yeah ... but if you don't take the Calvanist perspective you get into deep water into clarifying which parts of the bible are symbolism and metaphorical.

Sadly for you this doesn't happen in practice.

angolena jolie and jennifer anderston

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos

Sadly for you this doesn't happen in practice.

Sadly for you ... as if I prefer the Aithiest option ?

And yes it does all the time ... One of the main reason that secularization has become so prominent since the 1950's is because the church started moving away from its conservative routes. Churches started becoming really ambiguous about which parts of the bible to take literally and which parts to interpret metaphorically. Hence why the Western world lives is in a prominently secularized state.

Hence the controversy surrounding issues such as Homosexuality and sex before marriage. If its so obvious how one is supposed to interpret the bible, how do you interpret very controversial verses such as; Exodus 34; 13 - 17, Genesis 20; 2-5, Judges 19 chapter 11? Or how do you explain how the Vatican only yesterday recognized the compliance of Darwinian science with creation? Even the most senior, educated members of the Churches constituency can't see the apparent transparency of the bibles definitive meaning, let alone the masses who still believe in it.

So no you are wrong. Stating something and actually showing are very different things, matey.

Well this thread went off - track fast

Anyway Martin Luther was the one who said that reason was evil, IIRC

And solipsism is just annoying

And as an atheist I would like to say that this discussion has no place here and should be taken to the general discussion forum

Originally posted by Endless Mike
And as an atheist I would like to say that this discussion has no place here and should be taken to the general discussion forum

There's also a religion forum where he can go dicking around and discover that he isn't alone.

Originally posted by Philosophía
You seem to have a hard time differentiating opinion from fact. It's not some random person's accepted opinion on Earth's form as seen from space or the effects of heroine. It's a proven fact. For somebody who tries to pass off as smart, you've made an awfully stupid comparison.

I'm not going to argue your opinion, simply because I do not care for it. I was just calling your reponse, stating that rationality and religion as the greatest rivalry of all time, ignorant and quite frankly not having anything to do with a comic book forum.

Shit like this is why you're one of my favourite posters ever to grace this forum.

So few people ever seem willing to call out Cartesian as the pretentious wanker he is.

Originally posted by willRules
Definitely, to name but one of their faults. ✅

You're a hot peice of ass too.

Donald Trump - Good haircut

Originally posted by Martian_mind
[b] Shit like this is why you're one of my favourite posters ever to grace this forum.

So few people ever seem willing to call out Cartesian as the pretentious wanker he is.

You're a hot peice of ass too. [/B]

Pretentious ... yes

Wanker ... yes

Smarter than you ... yes

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
There's also a religion forum where he can go dicking around and discover that he isn't alone.

How is it dicking around ?

A lot of others tried to shift the thread off topic previously and few were met with the same hostility. Its funny how I can back up my responses, where as like most religious Zealots (Note that im not implying that you are a religious zealot, just that you are responding ina similar fashion), make refutable claims and then don't back them up. There's a diffrence between responding to a claim and actually refuting it.

Originally posted by Endless Mike
Well this thread went off - track fast

Anyway Martin Luther was the one who said that reason was evil, IIRC

And solipsism is just annoying

And as an atheist I would like to say that this discussion has no place here and should be taken to the general discussion forum

Im not advocating solipsism, and Im not an Aithest. I see myself more as a trans-humanist Deist. i was simply highlighting the fact that rationalism and empiricism have generally been at odds with religion since Aristotle. You cannot really claim otherwise without ignoring 2 000 years of history.

Originally posted by Cartesian Doubt
Pretentious ... yes

Wanker ... yes

Smarter than you ... yes

Never claimed otherwise.

Though fortunately,I have several other redeeming features.

Originally posted by Martian_mind
Never claimed otherwise.

Though fortunately,I have several other redeeming features.

Im glad we agree. 🙂

You seem like a nice chap. 🙂