Go Back   AFA Forums > Religion, Unreason and Similar Tropes > Belief Central

Belief Central A place for the discussion of belief or a colony for repeated logical fallacies or misrepresentations.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
  #1231  
Old 15th March 2017, 10:47 PM
pipbarber pipbarber is online now
AFA Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,920
Default Re: Dissecting ptutt's assertions

Quote:
ptutt said View Post
Possibly if receive a diagnosis that I have a mental illness and cannot determine reality. This could explain and counter my personal experience and perception of the world and God's presence.

I think primarily the basis for belief in God is within.
Right, so its faith?
  #1232  
Old 15th March 2017, 11:52 PM
ptutt ptutt is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 240
Default Re: Dissecting ptutt's assertions

Quote:
Spearthrower said View Post
What a truly amazing non-response to the post you quoted.

What happened to all the other bits of my post you cited? You know, like acknowledging that you just demanded we abandon logic to give you a free pass?

It's that kind of behavior which doesn't result in good things for you or anyone.

No, your assertion is NOT accepted as historical fact, and you asserting the position then, when challenged, asserting it is historical fact and this just looks like bullshit.

Next up, regardless of whether you think something is too dumb to entertain is not really an issue - there are plenty of dumb things you've made other people entertain. In fact, the majority of things you've written here could fall firmly under that heading - so perhaps you could try and give a little back?

Finally, I will fucking believe what I like, whether you give me permission or no. What you need to do, though, if you want me to accept your assertions about reality is provide evidence to support your claims. Can't do that? Consider them rejected.

So let's look at what you originally wrote:




Setting aside the arrant hubris here, you don't get to demand that your assertions are correct and that other people are history deniers because they don't genuflect to your assertions. That's not a very pleasant method of interaction at all.

If you want to make a point about anything other than your subjective feelings, its your fucking responsibility to support your claims. You certainly don't get to paint people as deniers when its you not doing the fucking legwork.

If you don't get how this is crossing the line of honest discourse, then I once again question whether that moral compass of yours you speak so highly of is actually a functioning compass at all.
Here's 3 historical references to Christians being persecuted for their faith. There are many more, but they shouldn't be needed.

1. Tacitus (109 A.C.E)
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_A...us)/Book_15#44

Tacitus states that Nero put the blame for the fire of Rome on the christians because they were hated by the people.

"...an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired."

So you've got Christians explicitly chosen to be ripped apart, crucified and burned alive...but people converted from Judaism because they were cowards. Makes sense.

2. Pliny the Younger details trials for Christians in PLINY'S LETTER TO TRAJAN. If they refused to denounce their faith they would be executed.
http://www.vroma.org/~hwalker/Pliny/Pliny10-096-E.html
"...I interrogated them whether they were Christians; if they confessed it I repeated the question twice again, adding the threat of capital punishment; if they still persevered, I ordered them to be executed."

3. Stephen's Martyrdom and great persecution. Acts 7-8
  #1233  
Old 16th March 2017, 12:00 AM
ptutt ptutt is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 240
Default Re: Dissecting ptutt's assertions

Quote:
pipbarber said View Post
Right, so its faith?
Depends what you mean by faith. Here, people will say it is belief without evidence. However, my view of faith is that it is an extrapolation of evidence that takes you to belief, a point of practical acceptance despite uncertainty. Humans could not operate in this world without belief as nearly all (if not all) our interactions involve varying degrees of uncertainty.

I would say that the personal experience is the primary evidence for belief in God.
  #1234  
Old 16th March 2017, 12:08 AM
Stubby's Avatar
Stubby Stubby is offline
Omu'sata
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 2,058
Default Re: Dissecting ptutt's assertions

Quote:
ptutt said View Post
No, you didn't say that morality has evolved, you said improved.
I first said it in post 1069.

Without actually using the word “evolve” I also made several points about the changing of morals over time in post 1094.

Again, without using the word “evolve” I referred to morality being understood through new learning in post 1189.

In post 1197, I expressly stated that morality evolves. In fact, what I said was “I contend that what is considered moral evolves over time as we as a race learn stuff.”

In fact, it was you who asked me if morality had improved, in post 1215, just yesterday.

In reply to that question, I said, “Of course morality has improved – at the very least we as a species now accept that the whole planet shouldn’t be killed off for not following arbitrary rules”: Post 1218

You are misquoting me or misrepresenting the context of the quote. I do not respect that. Please apologise.

Quote:
ptutt said View Post
The difference being is improvement implies movement towards a goal, whereas evolve just implies change
“Improvement” is defined as: “a thing that makes something better or is better than something else.” I have no idea where you get your definitions from. Anyway, your whole thinking is flawed here. I think the fact that humans now understand that slavery, raping your enemies' daughters and killing children in the name of religion are immoral means morality has improved. Don't you?

Quote:
ptutt said View Post
So are you moving away from saying morality has improved?
Not at all.

Quote:
ptutt said View Post
How do you use "wisdom" to measure moral actions?
Again with the quote mining. Why is that apologists always resort to this?

My exact quote was: “The collective wisdom of tens of thousands of years of information and understanding.”

To answer the question – which I have repeatedly done over the entire thread – I will refer you back to one of my comments (in post 862 and dated 2 August 2016) when I answered your question about caveman Bob and caveman Barry.

I respectfully suggest that you now admit that you have failed to prove that morality is objective.
__________________
"Send me money, send me green, heaven you will meet. Make your contribution and you'll get a better seat" - Metallica, Leper Messiah

Last edited by Stubby; 16th March 2017 at 12:13 AM.
  #1235  
Old 16th March 2017, 12:08 AM
Strato's Avatar
Strato Strato is offline
Tanto Nomini Nullum par Elogium
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: The Bellarine, Geelong.
Posts: 4,721
Default Re: Dissecting ptutt's assertions

You must have intellectual potential, ptutt.

You hardly deserve it.

I'll recommend Homo Deus, a Brief History of Tomorrow, 2015.

'Faith must trample under foot all reason, sense and understanding.'
Martin Luther
__________________
It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried.
Winston Churchill.
  #1236  
Old 16th March 2017, 12:10 AM
Svadifari's Avatar
Svadifari Svadifari is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Pretoria, South Africa
Posts: 403
Default Re: Dissecting ptutt's assertions

Quote:
ptutt said View Post
Depends what you mean by faith. Here, people will say it is belief without evidence. However, my view of faith is that it is an extrapolation of evidence that takes you to belief, a point of practical acceptance despite uncertainty. Humans could not operate in this world without belief as nearly all (if not all) our interactions involve varying degrees of uncertainty.

I would say that the personal experience is the primary evidence for belief in God.
My personal experience is the primary evidence for non-belief in god.
The fact that our personal experiences lead us to different conclusions should make you question why god would do that?
__________________
Almost any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so. Robert A. Heinlein
  #1237  
Old 16th March 2017, 06:04 AM
The Irreverent Mr Black's Avatar
The Irreverent Mr Black The Irreverent Mr Black is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: The quaint hamlet of Abject Penury
Posts: 364
Default Re: Dissecting ptutt's assertions

Quote:
ptutt said View Post
Depends what you mean by faith. Here, people will say it is belief without evidence. However, my view of faith is that it is an extrapolation of evidence that takes you to belief, a point of practical acceptance despite uncertainty. Humans could not operate in this world without belief as nearly all (if not all) our interactions involve varying degrees of uncertainty.

I would say that the personal experience is the primary evidence for belief in God.
So, A,B, therefore Z? Please clarify if that's how you're going. (Include accounting for confirmation bias, if you can, just to be helpful.)

I've been down that road, ptutt. Some of the longer-established posters here are aware of how I became a believer, and what followed.
__________________

  #1238  
Old 16th March 2017, 10:29 AM
pipbarber pipbarber is online now
AFA Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,920
Default Re: Dissecting ptutt's assertions

Quote:
ptutt said View Post

I would say that the personal experience is the primary evidence for belief in God.
...therefore, why on earth are you attempting to justify that belief through reason and the machinations of physical reality?
  #1239  
Old 16th March 2017, 12:45 PM
stevebrooks stevebrooks is offline
AFA Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,492
Default Re: Dissecting ptutt's assertions

Quote:
pipbarber said View Post
...therefore, why on earth are you attempting to justify that belief through reason and the machinations of physical reality?
It's quite common for delusional people to have a firm understanding that the outside world works according to the inner machinations of their heads, when they are in this condition it is pointless trying to argue with them because their understanding of reality tells them that other people who don't think like them are the delusional ones. They don't usually try and argue other people into thinking the same as them.

When the delusion starts to break down is when they start arguing with other people. I suspect in a few years ptutt will be around somewhere arguing against the very same points he is using to support his position, he's not as delusional as a devout believer, whether he agrees with that or not is irrelevant, at the moment it's simply not possible for him to think like that.

The true believers come here, spout nonsense and when they find they are having no effect quote scripture until they get told to stop or get banned, then they leave and never comeback, ptutt is still here, he's a waverer, he argues because he is not sure, not because he is sure.
__________________
From the mouth of a seven year old: "When you're you're dead, you don't go anywhere!"
Like wolty, pipbarber, Strato liked this post
  #1240  
Old 16th March 2017, 01:26 PM
The Irreverent Mr Black's Avatar
The Irreverent Mr Black The Irreverent Mr Black is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: The quaint hamlet of Abject Penury
Posts: 364
Default Re: Dissecting ptutt's assertions

Quote:
stevebrooks said View Post
It's quite common for delusional people to have a firm understanding that the outside world works according to the inner machinations of their heads, when they are in this condition it is pointless trying to argue with them because their understanding of reality tells them that other people who don't think like them are the delusional ones. They don't usually try and argue other people into thinking the same as them.

When the delusion starts to break down is when they start arguing with other people. I suspect in a few years ptutt will be around somewhere arguing against the very same points he is using to support his position, he's not as delusional as a devout believer, whether he agrees with that or not is irrelevant, at the moment it's simply not possible for him to think like that.

The true believers come here, spout nonsense and when they find they are having no effect quote scripture until they get told to stop or get banned, then they leave and never comeback, ptutt is still here, he's a waverer, he argues because he is not sure, not because he is sure.
(My boldage)
I wouldn't make any claim to be a mind-reader, but I do hope ptutt has the drive to "examine all things", like his sourcebook says.

Indeed, I suggested ptutt check out confirmation bias, because that (along with a condition that sideswiped my critical thinking faculties somewhat) was foundational to my belief.

The "two or more ... gathered in my name" meme is, in itself, a call to mutual reinforcement of confirmation bias.

Luckily, I wound up alone, realising just how alone I was.
__________________

Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +11. The time now is 09:09 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.