- This topic is empty.
- Posts
A detailed knowledge of the infontrigular is the entirely new thing I have conceived from nothing.
There is no empirical evidence for any gods, so gods are literally a concept from nothing.
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Dec. 30 2009,08:12) A detailed knowledge of the infontrigular is the entirely new thing I have conceived from nothing. There is no empirical evidence for any gods, so gods are literally a concept from nothing.
Stuart
How is it you used letters? They are not an original concept and if I asked you to describe the infotrigular how would you do it? What is it knowing that “it” is a concept as well.Have you ever played video games or dealt with any form of AI how do you think it occurs? On its own or by design?
It is a fact that if a baby is left without interaction its brain development would be stunted so tell me how was knowledge developed unless there was interaction from an intelligent lifeform to the first Humans?
Quote (bodhitharta @ Dec. 30 2009,11:27) Quote (Stu @ Dec. 30 2009,08:12) A detailed knowledge of the infontrigular is the entirely new thing I have conceived from nothing. There is no empirical evidence for any gods, so gods are literally a concept from nothing.
Stuart
How is it you used letters? They are not an original concept and if I asked you to describe the infotrigular how would you do it? What is it knowing that “it” is a concept as well.Have you ever played video games or dealt with any form of AI how do you think it occurs? On its own or by design?
It is a fact that if a baby is left without interaction its brain development would be stunted so tell me how was knowledge developed unless there was interaction from an intelligent lifeform to the first Humans?
I just used letters to give a name to the entirely new concept; the name of the concept is not the same thing as the concept.AI is designed by humans. So what?
I have seen others of islamic persuasion ask a similar question elsewhere, specifically it was how did the first human learn to talk if there was no one to teach it. Did you go to the same Madrassa or something?
The answer of course is all to do with human evolution, and the intelligent life forms that were our distant ancestors however if you are really a fundie creationist with a belief that human intelligence magically appeared overnight, then there will be no answer to your question that will satisfy you. So I may as well just say it was magic that you cannot possibly understand.
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Dec. 30 2009,14:37) Quote (bodhitharta @ Dec. 30 2009,11:27) Quote (Stu @ Dec. 30 2009,08:12) A detailed knowledge of the infontrigular is the entirely new thing I have conceived from nothing. There is no empirical evidence for any gods, so gods are literally a concept from nothing.
Stuart
How is it you used letters? They are not an original concept and if I asked you to describe the infotrigular how would you do it? What is it knowing that “it” is a concept as well.Have you ever played video games or dealt with any form of AI how do you think it occurs? On its own or by design?
It is a fact that if a baby is left without interaction its brain development would be stunted so tell me how was knowledge developed unless there was interaction from an intelligent lifeform to the first Humans?
I just used letters to give a name to the entirely new concept; the name of the concept is not the same thing as the concept.AI is designed by humans. So what?
I have seen others of islamic persuasion ask a similar question elsewhere, specifically it was how did the first human learn to talk if there was no one to teach it. Did you go to the same Madrassa or something?
The answer of course is all to do with human evolution, and the intelligent life forms that were our distant ancestors however if you are really a fundie creationist with a belief that human intelligence magically appeared overnight, then there will be no answer to your question that will satisfy you. So I may as well just say it was magic that you cannot possibly understand.
Stuart
Names are concepts to describe something or label it, I already told you that you cannot conceive of something new you can only utilize tools or concepts already in existence.How would something just “become” intelligent? Have you ever seen such a thing in nature? Ever?
You will never find a first generation adaptation.
Your logic would assume the first infant comes before the first parent but how can that be?
I am telling you that concepts and names for concepts are different things. Gravity is not the word gravity. That is one 'telling' each. Does that constitute a draw, or will you be just asserting that I am wrong again without a supporting rationale?
Your wide-eyed mock astonishment at the origins of intelligent is actually a good question, but you are not interested in the answer, you just like the sound of your own rhetoric so I see little point in engaging. If you really wanted to know something about it you could research it for yourself. Actually you are as disinterested in the subject as I am in discussing it with you. That is no concession, by the way.
Are you trying to engage me in a chicken and egg argument regarding human evolution?
Like I said, why don't you learn something about evolutionary biology first, then we could have a real discussion.
Stuart
BD I don’t feel this debate is going very well for you. I think you would be more convincing to me if you could actually answer questions in a bit more depth before flitting off onto another topic. I think you might earn some credibility if you were to answer these questions of mine, which I think raised worthwhile points:
Did you chance upon this god [belief] without reference to any members of your family or community?
How is god worship actually demonstrably beneficial, as opposed to simply ignoring the god if it exists?
If it is wrong to marry prepubescent girls today, but it was fine in Mohammad’s time, then what is the point of religion?
Would you like to have the right to kill people to defend your faith?
Why could I not believe in a brutal and hence guilty god?
What is your idea of the link between brutality and morality?
Regarding your claim that the koran says it is wrong to kill the innocent, who are the ‘innocent’? Those who are believers? Who are the non-combatants in jihad?
Setting aside mythological descriptions, what is the difference between allah and Zeus?
AI is designed by humans. So what?
Since studying ‘the creation’ could only reasonably lead you to evolution by natural selection, but you say it leads you to some other conclusion (of which you do not seem able to give details), what is your other source of god-knowledge that overturns ‘study of the creation’?
Do you have a proper scientific disproof of Darwin?
I would be happy to do the same for any questions you feel I have not adequately addressed, of course.
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Dec. 30 2009,20:05) BD I don’t feel this debate is going very well for you. I think you would be more convincing to me if you could actually answer questions in a bit more depth before flitting off onto another topic. I think you might earn some credibility if you were to answer these questions of mine, which I think raised worthwhile points: Did you chance upon this god [belief] without reference to any members of your family or community?
How is god worship actually demonstrably beneficial, as opposed to simply ignoring the god if it exists?
If it is wrong to marry prepubescent girls today, but it was fine in Mohammad’s time, then what is the point of religion?
Would you like to have the right to kill people to defend your faith?
Why could I not believe in a brutal and hence guilty god?
What is your idea of the link between brutality and morality?
Regarding your claim that the koran says it is wrong to kill the innocent, who are the ‘innocent’? Those who are believers? Who are the non-combatants in jihad?
Setting aside mythological descriptions, what is the difference between allah and Zeus?
AI is designed by humans. So what?
Since studying ‘the creation’ could only reasonably lead you to evolution by natural selection, but you say it leads you to some other conclusion (of which you do not seem able to give details), what is your other source of god-knowledge that overturns ‘study of the creation’?
Do you have a proper scientific disproof of Darwin?
I would be happy to do the same for any questions you feel I have not adequately addressed, of course.
Stuart
Quote Did you chance upon this god [belief] without reference to any members of your family or community? Yes!
Quote How is god worship actually demonstrably beneficial, as opposed to simply ignoring the god if it exists? the lack of depression or resignation
Quote If it is wrong to marry prepubescent girls today, but it was fine in Mohammad’s time, then what is the point of religion? The question is not only cultural but actually there is no problem if it is marriage because marriage is not pedophelia. Also may people were promised to each other from birth. There is no prohibition of age of marriage in any Holy book and nature determines if a woman is ready for motherhood.
Quote Would you like to have the right to kill people to defend your faith? No, Faith defends itself but yes to the defense of my person or persons I am the caretaker of
Quote Why could I not believe in a brutal and hence guilty god? Guilt can only come from violating a superior rule therefore God could not be guilty as His rule is Law
Quote What is your idea of the link between brutality and morality? There is no link Morality is the way one should conduct themselves according to the instructions given, if the violation of those instructions result in a punishment you consider the punishment as brutal because you don't accept punishment as a detterent and or just effect of violating such rule. The correct focus should be on the beauty of the morality and its freedom from punishment.
Punishment is better than corrupt morality that could injure the whole
Should thieves be allowed to steal from you
rape your spouse
kill your childrenThese are brutalities would you allow these things to go on unpunished and unchecked if so that would make you the most brutal of all.
Quote Regarding your claim that the koran says it is wrong to kill the innocent, who are the ‘innocent’? Those who are believers? Who are the non-combatants in jihad? Jihad is not related to terrorism Jihad is the inner spiritual struggle and outer spiritual struggle. The innocent are those not fighting you that you purposely kill or injure
Quote Setting aside mythological descriptions, what is the difference between allah and Zeus? There are no different descriptions there is only one God, whatever you know the name of that God to be there is still only one God even if you conceive of multiple gods there is still only One God you would be referring to for there is no god but God.
Quote AI is designed by humans. So what? It demonstrates that intelligence has to be created or “input” put in, unless you can show me otherwise in nature
Quote Since studying ‘the creation’ could only reasonably lead you to evolution by natural selection, but you say it leads you to some other conclusion (of which you do not seem able to give details), what is your other source of god-knowledge that overturns ‘study of the creation’? The book of Nature, Physics, Bodhitharta's Law of sexual reproduction which is: two opposing genders must be compatible reproductively within a single lifetime for reproduction to occur, this could not happen randomly over time because Mutations are not synchronized in different organisms this is a fact. Not only that you would need SRMs across the entire spectrum of the range of all species.
Quote Do you have a proper scientific disproof of Darwin? No need, the theory is helpful just like Paul of tarsus
Now, what will happen to a child that is left untaught and unnurtured from birth?
Now how could this ever be overcome without the nurterer and teacher arising before the nurtured and taught?
Please don't try to wiggle just answer and by the way the
Chicken came first.Did you chance upon this god [belief] without reference to any members of your family or community?
Quote Yes! So can I ask how you came to believe what you do?
Stuart
How is god worship actually demonstrably beneficial, as opposed to simply ignoring the god if it exists?
Quote the lack of depression or resignation So you would expect that, for example, lapsed Catholics would have greater rates of depression and ‘resignation’ (what sense of that word do you mean?) than regularly worshipping Catholics? Muslims with god belief but living a Western, essentially god-ignoring secular life should be expected to show a similar difference compared to those who submit entirely and face Mecca five times a day?
Is there a definition of ‘resignation’, and any data of which you are aware to support this view?
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Dec. 30 2009,21:54) Did you chance upon this god [belief] without reference to any members of your family or community? Quote Yes! So can I ask how you came to believe what you do?
Stuart
Curiosity about life and God allowing me to know He was there even as a young boy I felt connected to God.Quote (Stu @ Dec. 30 2009,22:00) How is god worship actually demonstrably beneficial, as opposed to simply ignoring the god if it exists? Quote the lack of depression or resignation So you would expect that, for example, lapsed Catholics would have greater rates of depression and ‘resignation’ (what sense of that word do you mean?) than regularly worshipping Catholics? Muslims with god belief but living a Western, essentially god-ignoring secular life should be expected to show a similar difference compared to those who submit entirely and face Mecca five times a day?
Is there a definition of ‘resignation’, and any data of which you are aware to support this view?
Stuart
A survey by Kosmin & Lachman (1993), also cited in this handbook, indicates that people with no religious affiliation appear to be at greater risk for depressive symptoms than those affiliated with a religion.[2] The Legatum Prosperity Index reflects the repeated finding of research on the science of happiness that there is a positive link between religious engagement and wellbeing: people who report that God is very important in their lives are on average more satisfied with their lives, after accounting for their income, age and other individual characteristics.[3]If it is wrong to marry prepubescent girls today, but it was fine in Mohammad’s time, then what is the point of religion?
Quote The question is not only cultural but actually there is no problem if it is marriage because marriage is not pedophelia. Also may people were promised to each other from birth. There is no prohibition of age of marriage in any Holy book and nature determines if a woman is ready for motherhood. I found this here:
Islam, unlike other religions is a strong advocate of marriage. There is no place for celibacy like, for example the Roman Catholic priests and nuns. The prophet (pbuh) has said “there is no celibacy in Islam.
Marriage acts as an outlet for sexual needs and regulate it so one does not become a slave to his/ her desires.
Marriage serves as a means to emotional and sexual gratification and as a means of tension reduction. It is also a form of Ibadah because it is obeying Allah and his messenger – i.e. Marriage is seen as the only possible way for the sexes to unite. One could choose to live in sin, however by choosing marriage one is displaying obedience to Allah.
Do you agree with the sentiments of this writer? If you do then you would seem to be advocating pedophilia: if you are not then there is no way this definition of marriage is OK for the relationship that Mohammad allegedly formed with an underage girl.
The question remains: marriage would appear to REQUIRE a sexual relationship is islam. To not consummate the marriage would appear to be against islamic teaching. There is always the option of NOT MARRYING, to make it clear what the situation is! By today’s standards Mohammad was a pedophile: there is no reason to think otherwise. If that was OK then, are you saying it is OK now? If you are, what are the timeless values that islam upholds? Is this the only exception or are there more? If there are many exceptions, what is the point of religion at all?
Stuart
Quote (bodhitharta @ Dec. 30 2009,22:10) Quote (Stu @ Dec. 30 2009,22:00) How is god worship actually demonstrably beneficial, as opposed to simply ignoring the god if it exists? Quote the lack of depression or resignation So you would expect that, for example, lapsed Catholics would have greater rates of depression and ‘resignation’ (what sense of that word do you mean?) than regularly worshipping Catholics? Muslims with god belief but living a Western, essentially god-ignoring secular life should be expected to show a similar difference compared to those who submit entirely and face Mecca five times a day?
Is there a definition of ‘resignation’, and any data of which you are aware to support this view?
Stuart
A survey by Kosmin & Lachman (1993), also cited in this handbook, indicates that people with no religious affiliation appear to be at greater risk for depressive symptoms than those affiliated with a religion.[2] The Legatum Prosperity Index reflects the repeated finding of research on the science of happiness that there is a positive link between religious engagement and wellbeing: people who report that God is very important in their lives are on average more satisfied with their lives, after accounting for their income, age and other individual characteristics.[3]
That is not exactly what I suggested to you. I was asking whether there is any difference between those who believe in gods but ignore them and those who believe in gods but worship them. Note that this study does not articulate any causal relationships; I would give credence to a measurable placebo effect in relation to the difference between believers and non-believers.Stuart
Quote (bodhitharta @ Dec. 30 2009,22:01) Quote (Stu @ Dec. 30 2009,21:54) Did you chance upon this god [belief] without reference to any members of your family or community? Quote Yes! So can I ask how you came to believe what you do?
Stuart
Curiosity about life and God allowing me to know He was there even as a young boy I felt connected to God.
How did 'god allow [you] to know he was there'?What questioning did you do after you reached early adolescence, the time you first were able to think properly in an abstract sense?
Stuart
Would you like to have the right to kill people to defend your faith?
Quote No, Faith defends itself but yes to the defense of my person or persons I am the caretaker of So, when you said: if someone seeks to oppress and suppress faith through violence it is prescribed to fight them to defend your community and self you are now saying that when someone seeks to oppress though violence it is prescribed to fight them to defend your community and self, but NOT to defend faith by violence.
I am glad to hear you be clear about that and wish that you would express that publicly to those such as the rent-a-crowd Danish cartoon protesters hired by various cowardly anonymous islamist leaders who most certainly were not mounting a personal or community defense but a defense of faith through violent means.
Stuart
Why could I not believe in a brutal and hence guilty god?
Quote Guilt can only come from violating a superior rule therefore God could not be guilty as His rule is Law Well that would not be the god I would believe in. It would be the petulantly violent Jewish god of the OT (or allah) who morphed into the seemingly loving but actually just as brutal NT Judeo-christian god (or still allah) that inspired layer upon layer of contradictions in scriptures and is guilty of genocide.
Unless you think divine genocide is different from Pol Pot’s genocide.
I think it is not only a guilty god, but a jealous guilty god, for it did not kill as many as Stalin managed.
Now let’s just think for a moment about your statement regarding divine law. By what principle are those laws just? Will you just appeal to Aquinas or the islamic apologetical equivalent and claim that the god you have in mind is the uber-just, he who is most just of anything (and the smelliest of the smelly and also the most corrupt of all the corrupt?)
There has to be one who is most guilty of all the guilty too. What else could you call that but god?
I can see why polytheism makes more sense now. You could not have a god that was simultaneously most corrupt and most honest. Unless that is one of the absurd omniscience paradoxes…
Stuart
What is your idea of the link between brutality and morality?
Quote There is no link Morality is the way one should conduct themselves according to the instructions given, if the violation of those instructions result in a punishment you consider the punishment as brutal because you don't accept punishment as a detterent and or just effect of violating such rule. The correct focus should be on the beauty of the morality and its freedom from punishment.
So you would accept any instructions given?Quote Punishment is better than corrupt morality that could injure the whole Should thieves be allowed to steal from you
If I have more than I can even keep track of, and those thieves have been forced into stealing to feed their children, what then?Quote kill your children
If killing my children was the only way to stop them blowing up an airliner as a retaliation for what they saw as westerners oppressing their faith, what then?Are the rules ‘laid down’ adaptable or absolute?
Quote These are brutalities would you allow these things to go on unpunished and unchecked if so that would make you the most brutal of all.
Maybe. You were going on about tigers before. Do you make any distinctions there?Stuart
Regarding your claim that the koran says it is wrong to kill the innocent, who are the ‘innocent’? Those who are believers? Who are the non-combatants in jihad?
Quote Jihad is not related to terrorism Jihad is the inner spiritual struggle and outer spiritual struggle. The innocent are those not fighting you that you purposely kill or injure Do you have a koranic reference for these two types of 'struggle'?
The example of jihad from Mohammad is one of outright warfare and conversion.
9:73 O Prophet! Strive against the disbelievers and the hypocrites! Be harsh with them. Their ultimate abode is hell, a hapless journey's end.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_of_Islamic_scholars_on_Jihad
Even if you have imams left and right of you pleading for what you are pleading for, all you need is a few to make a different interpretation, and just a quick look around the internet shows the profound disagreement about what jihad entails. Take these two for example:
Ramadan Buti, a contemporary Orthodox scholar from Syria, in his work on the subject Jihad in Islam says
Even before Muhammad conducted Jihad by sword against the unbelievers, there is no doubt the Prophet (s) invited these unbelievers peacefully, lodged protests against their beliefs and strove to remove their misgivings about Islam. When they refused any other solution, but rather declared a war against him and his message and initiated the fight, there was no alternative except to fight back”
Note it does not say that Mohammad was expected to reach an agreement, there was no question he would ever concede a peaceful compromise, the only possibility was his opponents’ conversion to islam or a state of warfare. He just played a game of brinkmanship with them until they got sick of his nonsense and declared war on him, giving him license to slaughter with the excuse of ‘defense against persecution’.
Mohammad Noor:[4]
In his paper “The Doctrine of Jihad: An Introduction”[5], Mohhammad Noor establishes the difference between Harb (secular war) and Jihad (to strive with one's power in God's (Allah's) path). Noor clearly states that scholars of Islam agree that secular wars are a condemnable evil that violate divine law.[6] He further states that Islam permits Jihad, and not Harb. The concept of Jihad, pertains to the Islamic way of pursuing God's purpose through the acts of the Heart, the Tongue, the Hand, and the Sword.
The most misconstrued way of accomplishing one's Jihad obligation to Allah is that of the Sword. Noor states that the early history of Islam, Jihad of the Sword was only applied full force when faced with pagans and polytheists, who where invited to join Islam or face war. People of the Book of Scriptures, however, were only subject to a moderate form of Jihad of the Sword, which required them to pay Jazia, a poll-tax that allowed them to practice their religion under Muslim polity.[7] Christians, Jews and Sabians are the recognised people of the Book, and are believed to be exempt from full Jihad because they followed a distorted message. But those who believe there is no God (atheists), and those who believe that there is more than one almighty God (polytheists) shall not be spared the power of the Sword should they refuse to convert to Islam.
No wonder islam has bloody borders.
Stuart
Setting aside mythological descriptions, what is the difference between allah and Zeus?
Quote There are no different descriptions there is only one God, whatever you know the name of that God to be there is still only one God even if you conceive of multiple gods there is still only One God you would be referring to for there is no god but God. So the difference is that you assert that there is only one god while others assert that you are wrong about your god.
Who are you to assert their error? Have they no place to assert yours?
Stuart
AI is designed by humans. So what?
Quote It demonstrates that intelligence has to be created or “input” put in, unless you can show me otherwise in nature Look in the mirror. There stands a man with intelligence whose only origins are exclusively explained in science by natural selection. Life begets life. Magic does not beget life. By tiny increments the large human brain came to be, and its cognitive abilities produce the effect we know as intelligence.
This is not a case of me showing you otherwise. You are the one making a claim about some supernatural being that cannot be seen or heard by sane people. You will have to show ME ‘otherwise’. Actually there is no other scientific model of how you came to be intelligent.
To claim AI means that intelligence has to be created is to make the logical fallacy of composition. Just because we designed AI does not mean that our intelligence was designed.
Stuart
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
