tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8716347331682132223.post3141047906761238059..comments2023-10-20T02:08:39.524-07:00Comments on Atheism: Proving The Negative: Knowing More than ScienceMatt McCormickhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17071078570021986664noreply@blogger.comBlogger26125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8716347331682132223.post-70430335998466555662009-07-19T04:24:54.700-07:002009-07-19T04:24:54.700-07:00最近TVや雑誌で紹介されている家出掲示板では、全国各地のネットカフェ等を泊り歩いている家出娘のメッセ...最近TVや雑誌で紹介されている家出掲示板では、全国各地のネットカフェ等を泊り歩いている家出娘のメッセージが多数書き込みされています。彼女たちはお金がないので掲示板で知り合った男性の家にでもすぐに泊まりに行くようです。あなたも書き込みに返事を返してみませんか家出http://ruby.iwatukisan.netnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8716347331682132223.post-64698311785421557632009-07-17T08:01:46.625-07:002009-07-17T08:01:46.625-07:00最近仕事ばかりで毎日退屈してます。そろそろ恋人欲しいです☆もう夏だし海とか行きたいな♪ k.c.07...最近仕事ばかりで毎日退屈してます。そろそろ恋人欲しいです☆もう夏だし海とか行きたいな♪ k.c.0720@docomo.ne.jp 連絡待ってるよ☆メル友募集noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8716347331682132223.post-13887848774901580912009-07-06T06:49:56.132-07:002009-07-06T06:49:56.132-07:00みんなの精神年齢を測定できる、メンタル年齢チェッカーで秘められた年齢がズバリわかっちゃう!かわいいあ...みんなの精神年齢を測定できる、メンタル年齢チェッカーで秘められた年齢がズバリわかっちゃう!かわいいあの子も実は精神年齢オバサンということも…合コンや話のネタに一度チャレンジしてみよう精神年齢http://new.haaaasagasou.netnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8716347331682132223.post-91315667798760745462009-07-04T05:38:02.995-07:002009-07-04T05:38:02.995-07:00さあ、今夏も新たな出会いを経験してみませんか?当サイトは円助交際の逆、つまり女性が男性を円助する『逆...さあ、今夏も新たな出会いを経験してみませんか?当サイトは円助交際の逆、つまり女性が男性を円助する『逆円助交際』を提供します。逆円交際を未経験の方でも気軽に遊べる大人のマッチングシステムです。年齢上限・容姿・経験一切問いません。男性の方は無料で登録して頂けます。貴方も新たな出会いを経験してみませんか逆円助http://new.googlejuku-navi.netnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8716347331682132223.post-14379866339805055952009-02-28T11:31:00.000-08:002009-02-28T11:31:00.000-08:00This blog is the top Google hit for "sensus atheis...This blog is the top Google hit for "sensus atheistus." Congrats.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8716347331682132223.post-56579204144221149462009-02-27T12:39:00.000-08:002009-02-27T12:39:00.000-08:00Steve Martin: We have to trust that they are true....Steve Martin: <I>We have to trust that they are true.</I><BR/><BR/>No we don't.<BR/><BR/><I>Same for so-called scientific theories such as big bang...</I><BR/><BR/>No, it's not the same. There is actual scientific evidence for the big bang.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8716347331682132223.post-76468688756429914782009-02-27T12:10:00.000-08:002009-02-27T12:10:00.000-08:00I guess if I have a teeny quibble, it's about this...I guess if I have a teeny quibble, it's about this suggested "sensus atheistus." (Wrong construction, BTW. "Atheistus" would be Greek, not Latin, but with a Latin declension.) What would be the source of this sense? Wouldn't it have to be extra-natural? Wouldn't it, then, be to some degree evidence contrary to what it's trying to tell you?mikespeirhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05397674737999065117noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8716347331682132223.post-34665186230757340492009-02-25T17:45:00.000-08:002009-02-25T17:45:00.000-08:00Anon,"Surely Tully you dont "know" that the scient...Anon,<BR/><BR/>"Surely Tully you dont "know" that the scientific method is correct because it is scientific?"<BR/><BR/>I'm not even positive I know what your getting at but I'll give an explanation a shot.<BR/><BR/>Explanatory and predictive power does not define the scientific methods. It is rather a goal. A goal I also agree with but that has nothing to do with whether or not it is scientific. Although scientific methodologies will vary some due to field and circumstances, the overall process is generally along the line of observations, question development, hypothesis generation, testing, repeatability and falsification.<BR/><BR/>Now I also agree with that general framework, but only because it has been the most effective at reaching my goals. However, If "a better way of knowing" came along, which better met my goals of explanatory and predictive power, I would dump scientific methodology for that "other way."M. Tullyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06056410184615941086noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8716347331682132223.post-75235851921296200162009-02-25T17:30:00.000-08:002009-02-25T17:30:00.000-08:00Anon,"Atheist have just as much faith in their pos...Anon,<BR/><BR/>"Atheist have just as much faith in their position as due theist."<BR/><BR/>OK, maybe we're into semantics. My definition of Faith: Believing in something without and / or despite credible verifiable evidence.<BR/><BR/>So, no my lack of god belief requires no faith, just as my lack of anal probing alien abductor belief requires no faith. I find insufficient evidence to give credence to either of them.M. Tullyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06056410184615941086noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8716347331682132223.post-24193350542448590992009-02-25T08:22:00.000-08:002009-02-25T08:22:00.000-08:00Guys and Gals, I'll stick to one name on my comm...Guys and Gals,<BR/><BR/> I'll stick to one name on my comments since that seems to have been a distraction for some.Sorry for that.<BR/><BR/> Here is a very short post on another blog that I thought you scientists types might find interesting:<BR/>http://extranos.blogspot.com/2009/02/scientific-bias.html<BR/><BR/> I'd love to know what you think about it.<BR/><BR/> Thanks!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8716347331682132223.post-70462332488060293372009-02-25T03:50:00.000-08:002009-02-25T03:50:00.000-08:00"But the truth is I'm not. I would dump the scient..."But the truth is I'm not. I would dump the scientific methods in a heartbeat if "another way of knowing" was demonstrated to describe the world as we see it and make predictions about future states with more accuracy."<BR/><BR/>Surely Tully you dont "know" that the scientific method is correct because it is scientific?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8716347331682132223.post-61112430585389835212009-02-25T03:05:00.000-08:002009-02-25T03:05:00.000-08:00Hello Friends I Have founded the great link on Th...Hello Friends I Have founded the great link on <A HREF="http://soulcurrymagazine.com/sc/the-tantra-secret-to-transcend-sex.html" REL="nofollow">The Tantra Secret to Transcend Sex</A> Understand that sex can never fulfil your mind - love can. Love should be the foundation of marriagePrateekhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01055967152472975452noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8716347331682132223.post-72733127836252970702009-02-25T02:50:00.000-08:002009-02-25T02:50:00.000-08:00"But the truth is I'm not. I would dump the scient..."But the truth is I'm not. I would dump the scientific methods in a heartbeat if "another way of knowing" was demonstrated to describe the world as we see it and make predictions about future states with more accuracy."<BR/><BR/>Surely Tully you dont "know" that the scientific method is correct because it is scientific?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8716347331682132223.post-84100133995465478072009-02-25T02:45:00.000-08:002009-02-25T02:45:00.000-08:00Josh may good point. But is the razors edge always...Josh may good point. But is the razors edge always a way to determine wether X is a rational belief? There are many scientifc theories (evolution for instance) that are quite complex.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8716347331682132223.post-80964178057110336272009-02-25T02:40:00.000-08:002009-02-25T02:40:00.000-08:00Atheist have just as much faith in their position ...Atheist have just as much faith in their position as due theist. Both are firmly planted in their views. And both intially need some form of ground to plant their feet...<BR/><BR/>But of course this seems to beg the professors point...which one is BS and how do we determine this?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8716347331682132223.post-76587069029734714432009-02-25T02:37:00.000-08:002009-02-25T02:37:00.000-08:00Yes professor you make a good point. How do we wee...Yes professor you make a good point. How do we weed BS metaphysical claims? Well this seems to lead us into wether reality as we know it is human constructed or discovered. If the former than it is by the conventions of thought in a given era. If the latter than we must rely on intial conventions of thought...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8716347331682132223.post-50237730879530506482009-02-24T20:12:00.000-08:002009-02-24T20:12:00.000-08:00M. Tulley, I really do just change up the name on...M. Tulley,<BR/><BR/> I really do just change up the name on different posts (usually) for fun.<BR/><BR/> I don't nee any more hits on my site.<BR/><BR/> In fact, it's getting to be too much for me. I'm thinking about taking a little break from it.<BR/> <BR/> This blogging thing can get out of hand if you let it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8716347331682132223.post-45592534396338369592009-02-24T20:07:00.001-08:002009-02-24T20:07:00.001-08:00Your right that science is "the shit". I think so ...Your right that science is "the shit". I think so far that both science and reason demolish reasons for belief in God via "rational scrutiny". Both science and reason are entangled in "rationalism" which empiricism relies. They both compliment each other when demolishing belief if God or the possibility of God existing. <BR/><BR/>Science is our great tool, and rationalism is a tool that supports it and does not go against it. <BR/><BR/>Ah well, I need sleep since I had to work and exam and be up for over 27 hours.<BR/><BR/>I'll come back and exercise some more, maybe get a clearer view after (especially after hearing the varied arguments in time).Jonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02877962468047811190noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8716347331682132223.post-31667208775025745022009-02-24T20:07:00.000-08:002009-02-24T20:07:00.000-08:00Carbon Based, I do use diferent names depending o...Carbon Based,<BR/><BR/> I do use diferent names depending on the the post, or the issue. Just for fun. No ulterior motive.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8716347331682132223.post-27376424482800996362009-02-24T19:30:00.000-08:002009-02-24T19:30:00.000-08:00"That’s not a scientific bias. That’s not scientif..."That’s not a scientific bias. That’s not scientific dogmatism. The need for justification in order to achieve knowledge is a demand of reason itself."<BR/><BR/>And that is one of things I have the hardest time discussing with my theistic friends. They'll tell me, "You're just as dogmatic as I am with your scientific methods."<BR/><BR/>But the truth is I'm not. I would dump the scientific methods in a heartbeat if "another way of knowing" was demonstrated to describe the world as we see it and make predictions about future states with more accuracy.<BR/><BR/>Hey, come up with a better explanation of life on earth than evolution. Show that wishful thinking gives better patient outcomes than scientific medicine. Demonstrate the ability to predict the behavior of sub-atomic particles better than the standard model and quantum mechanics.<BR/><BR/>If any group does that, I'll flip in a NY minute (and no it doesn't count if these things get over turned by later science using more accurate instruments). <BR/><BR/>Now if that makes me scientistic, well so be it.M. Tullyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06056410184615941086noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8716347331682132223.post-50773531482423082642009-02-24T18:35:00.000-08:002009-02-24T18:35:00.000-08:00"well my sensus atheistus says that you're bullshi..."well my sensus atheistus says that you're bullshitting."<BR/><BR/>Matt S, that is hilarious. Can I use it or is there a copyright (I will of course give due credit).M. Tullyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06056410184615941086noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8716347331682132223.post-23600571492260157382009-02-24T18:31:00.000-08:002009-02-24T18:31:00.000-08:00"Just out of curiosity by clicking on "Steve Marti..."Just out of curiosity by clicking on "Steve Martin" in this thread and by clicking on "I believe that I can't Believe" on another thread it takes me to the same web site."<BR/><BR/>Yeah Carbon, you'll get the same thing if you click on "Head in the Sand." I think it's like the Union Army on Little Round Top. If he moves around enough, we'll think there are more of them.<BR/><BR/>Of course someone with a more suspicious mind set might think it was a deceitful tactic to get more hits on their blog. Not that I'm saying that but, I'm just saying.M. Tullyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06056410184615941086noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8716347331682132223.post-3428657973207331372009-02-24T13:56:00.000-08:002009-02-24T13:56:00.000-08:00I think you're right that the typical proposals of...I think you're right that the typical proposals of non-scientific knowledge from theists are usually quite bad. But I do think there are obviously pieces of knowledge that we have that aren't arrived at or due to science. <BR/><BR/>For example, I know that:<BR/>- today is February 24th,<BR/>- when there are two explanations of a phenomenon that equally well explain the phenomenon, it's reasonable for people to believe in the explanation that's simpler, <BR/>- all bachelors are unmarried,<BR/>- I get bad headaches sometimes,<BR/>- it's cruel to tease one's sister just to revel in her misery,<BR/>- the ontological argument sucks (is a bad argument).<BR/>- explaining the Knobe effect in terms of little men in our skulls that force us to say that the CEO harms the environment intentionally is a poor explanation.<BR/><BR/>Of course, I'm not trying to undercut science here or anything. And I'm not trying to push for some special metaphysical faculty of intuition. And I'm not saying that science can't be <I>a</I> route to these pieces of knowledge I've cited. (I'm just saying that science is not how <I>I</I> came to know them at least.) I'm just worried about the view that we only acquire knowledge by scientific/empirical investigation. That's <I>one</I> way to acquire knowledge about certain things (namely, things that are apt for that method of inquiry). But some things we can come to know in different ways. As you note, the religious person's proposal for a non-scientific route to religious truths needs to show that the route is a rational or reasonable one, not a scientific one. So the broader thing here is the idea of something's being a rational or reasonable route to a belief, not a scientific route. <BR/><BR/>I'm not trying to defend the theist here at all. I just get very worried about this extremely popular way of characterizing the theism-atheism debate in terms of science vs. religion. The real fight is between reason and religion. It's just not true that science is our only source of reasons. Thinking otherwise makes the theist think that the atheist has to provide a scientific account of <I>everything</I>. And if that were true, then maybe the theist would have a good argument against atheism. But it's not true, so it's all good.<BR/><BR/>But whatcha think? Thanks for the post!Josh Mayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13511130370992616940noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8716347331682132223.post-52195034078388826652009-02-24T10:24:00.000-08:002009-02-24T10:24:00.000-08:00Just out of curiosity by clicking on "Steve Martin...Just out of curiosity by clicking on "Steve Martin" in this thread and by clicking on "I believe that I can't Believe" on another thread it takes me to the same web site. Are you the same person? <BR/><BR/>This begs the question, why post under different names?Scarecrowhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15324151298399098144noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8716347331682132223.post-64211347452827499112009-02-24T06:24:00.000-08:002009-02-24T06:24:00.000-08:00This is genius! I'm going to try that one out: "we...This is genius! <BR/><BR/>I'm going to try that one out: "well my sensus atheistus says that you're bullshitting."Matt Shttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17476827778760803809noreply@blogger.com