|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: In defense of incomplete proof [The existance of God] [Re: shaggyp]
#17612451 - 01/26/13 02:33 AM (11 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
shaggyp said: What's a more ridiculous assumption:
That something you can't perceive definitely exists
OR
That something you can't perceive definitely does not exist
?
True and you can change definitely to likely with the same result.
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
Aiko Aiko



Registered: 05/13/05
Posts: 6,409
Loc: Lazy River Road
Last seen: 9 hours, 59 minutes
|
Re: In defense of incomplete proof [The existance of God] [Re: MushroomTrip]
#17616181 - 01/26/13 09:16 PM (11 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
MushroomTrip said: Just a load of fallacies! 
You say a load of fallacies but yet you didn't give 1 example.. please elaborate on said fallacies.
-------------------- Easily test the dosage of your tabs at home! qtests.org Man says, "God, show me and I will believe." God says, "Believe and I will show you."
|
Aiko Aiko



Registered: 05/13/05
Posts: 6,409
Loc: Lazy River Road
Last seen: 9 hours, 59 minutes
|
Re: In defense of incomplete proof [The existance of God] [Re: shaggyp]
#17616322 - 01/26/13 09:44 PM (11 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
shaggyp said: Trying to prove or disprove God with science or logic is like trying to look at the stars with your butthole.
You can't just raise your asscrack to the sky and go "it doesn't see any stars. They're not there."
And I know it's fallacious to say "Well since we can't measure it, it must exist", but my point is this whole "science vs God" argument is kinda dumb since they aren't mutually exclusive. It's like having a shirt vs pants argument. You can wear both, you can wear one, you can wear neither.
I would agree in the sense that science in itself can only explain the natural world around us so it must not be expected to explain the super-natural. That being said you also can not expect science to disprove the super natural as well.
-------------------- Easily test the dosage of your tabs at home! qtests.org Man says, "God, show me and I will believe." God says, "Believe and I will show you."
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup



Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 5,388
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 2 months, 2 days
|
Re: In defense of incomplete proof [The existance of God] [Re: Aiko Aiko]
#17620726 - 01/27/13 07:55 PM (11 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Just wanted to post in this thread.
|
dustinthewind.13
nuisance
Registered: 01/28/13
Posts: 112
Loc: dead gone forgotten
Last seen: 10 years, 11 months
|
Re: In defense of incomplete proof [The existance of God] [Re: Mr.Al]
#17626295 - 01/28/13 09:23 PM (11 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
|
BlueCoyote
Beyond


Registered: 05/07/04
Posts: 6,697
Loc: Between
Last seen: 3 years, 1 month
|
Re: In defense of incomplete proof [The existance of God] [Re: shaggyp]
#17630191 - 01/29/13 04:44 PM (11 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
shaggyp said: What's a more ridiculous assumption:
That something you can't perceive definitely exists
OR
That something you can't perceive definitely does not exist
?
But what if I 'feel' it exists ? Feelings can be wrong, that's why I go after them...
|
xFrockx


Registered: 09/17/06
Posts: 10,455
Loc: Northeast
Last seen: 26 days, 19 hours
|
Re: In defense of incomplete proof [The existance of God] [Re: Aiko Aiko]
#17630561 - 01/29/13 05:36 PM (11 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Hey shut the fuck up. Your posts are garbage.
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup


Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 5,388
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 2 months, 2 days
|
Re: In defense of incomplete proof [The existance of God] [Re: xFrockx]
#17634597 - 01/30/13 11:34 AM (11 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
xFrockx said: Hey shut the fuck up. Your posts are garbage.
What is Character.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: In defense of incomplete proof [The existance of God] [Re: xFrockx]
#17634698 - 01/30/13 11:54 AM (11 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
xFrockx said: Hey shut the fuck up. Your posts are garbage.
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
xFrockx


Registered: 09/17/06
Posts: 10,455
Loc: Northeast
Last seen: 26 days, 19 hours
|
Re: In defense of incomplete proof [The existance of God] [Re: Mr.Al]
#17635784 - 01/30/13 03:27 PM (11 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I don't know.
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup


Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 5,388
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 2 months, 2 days
|
Re: In defense of incomplete proof [The existance of God] [Re: xFrockx]
#17677869 - 01/31/13 05:22 PM (11 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
xFrockx said: I don't know.
Would you say that Character may effect decisions that you make.
This person would say that the following is a True Statement:
CHARACTER IS WHAT GIVES YOU SUBSTANCE MAN.
Would say that marijuana develops Character because folks obviously take things less personally when they are High.
|
Wise Toad

Registered: 06/08/10
Posts: 2,690
|
Re: In defense of incomplete proof [The existance of God] [Re: Mr.Al]
#17677997 - 01/31/13 05:43 PM (11 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
|
blingbling
what you chicken stew?

Registered: 09/04/10
Posts: 2,987
Last seen: 3 years, 3 months
|
Re: In defense of incomplete proof [The existance of God] [Re: Aiko Aiko]
#17679732 - 01/31/13 06:50 PM (11 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Aiko Aiko said: I would agree in the sense that science in itself can only explain the natural world around us so it must not be expected to explain the super-natural. That being said you also can not expect science to disprove the super natural as well.
what is the "super-natural"?
-------------------- Kupo said: let's fuel the robots with psilocybin. cez said: everyone should smoke dmt for religion. dustinthewind13 said: euthanasia and prostitution should be legal and located in the same building. White Beard said: if you see the buddha on the road, rape him, then kill him. then rape him again.
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup


Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 5,388
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 2 months, 2 days
|
Re: In defense of incomplete proof [The existance of God] [Re: blingbling]
#17682193 - 01/31/13 06:57 PM (11 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
When Character Standards are High the Individual Can See Higher Things.
If you have no Character no one will want to even smoke trees with you.
If a dog pisses on someone with low Character they might gain Virtue.
|
blingbling
what you chicken stew?

Registered: 09/04/10
Posts: 2,987
Last seen: 3 years, 3 months
|
Re: In defense of incomplete proof [The existance of God] [Re: Mr.Al]
#17723303 - 01/31/13 08:22 PM (11 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
-------------------- Kupo said: let's fuel the robots with psilocybin. cez said: everyone should smoke dmt for religion. dustinthewind13 said: euthanasia and prostitution should be legal and located in the same building. White Beard said: if you see the buddha on the road, rape him, then kill him. then rape him again.
|
xFrockx


Registered: 09/17/06
Posts: 10,455
Loc: Northeast
Last seen: 26 days, 19 hours
|
Re: In defense of incomplete proof [The existance of God] [Re: Mr.Al]
#17724914 - 02/01/13 02:42 AM (11 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
"Would you say that Character may effect decisions that you make."
I don't know if character exists in order to effect anything (the word you were looking for there was affect).
"This person would say that the following is a True Statement:
CHARACTER IS WHAT GIVES YOU SUBSTANCE MAN.
Would say that marijuana develops Character because folks obviously take things less personally when they are High. "
I don't think an abstract concept can give substance. Eating gives substance, surely (if one subscribes to the notion of a self and sees people as things). Eat KFC for a month and you'll probably have more substance.
And saying marijuana makes people take things less personally is a joke. Plenty of people don't take things personally when sober, let alone on many of the any other substances one might use.
|
dustinthewind.13
nuisance
Registered: 01/28/13
Posts: 112
Loc: dead gone forgotten
Last seen: 10 years, 11 months
|
Re: In defense of incomplete proof [The existance of God] [Re: blingbling]
#17725455 - 02/01/13 08:45 AM (11 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
blingbling said:
Quote:
Aiko Aiko said: I would agree in the sense that science in itself can only explain the natural world around us so it must not be expected to explain the super-natural. That being said you also can not expect science to disprove the super natural as well.
what is the "super-natural"?
It's a pretty cool show.
|
|