| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"." |
| Date: |
19 Dec 2003 11:10:13 PM |
| Object: |
Are you a determinist? |
If not, what's your position on the question of free will?
--
Regards,
..
.
|
|
| User: "Therion Ware" |
|
| Title: Re: Are you a determinist? |
20 Dec 2003 10:13:36 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 16:10:13 +1100 in alt.atheism, . (.
<sdf329ds93s999990sx@yahoo.co.uk>) said, directing the reply to
alt.atheism
If not, what's your position on the question of free will?
I think that events are determined but unpredictable in principle.
--
"Do Unto Others As You Would Have Them Do Unto You."
- Attrib: Pauline Reage.
Inexpensive VHS & other video to CD/DVD conversion?
See: <http://www.Video2CD.com>. 35.00 gets your video on DVD.
all posts to this email address are automatically deleted without being read.
** atheist poster child #1 ** #442.
.
|
|
|
| User: "B. Corporel" |
|
| Title: Re: Are you a determinist? |
20 Dec 2003 12:58:51 PM |
|
|
"Therion Ware" <autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote in message
news:33t8uvsi22s8edptlb0q3p1njpbfrtl8hd@4ax.com...
On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 16:10:13 +1100 in alt.atheism, . (.
<sdf329ds93s999990sx@yahoo.co.uk>) said, directing the reply to
alt.atheism
If not, what's your position on the question of free will?
I think that events are determined but unpredictable in principle.
Animal behavior is predicted and/or controlled all the time. We can do this
kind of engineering because we know what determines behavior: the
contingencies of reinforcement. Millions are made on Madison Ave. doing
that.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=behavior+analysis
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Popelish" |
|
| Title: Re: Are you a determinist? |
20 Dec 2003 01:15:09 PM |
|
|
Animal behavior is predicted and/or controlled all the time. We can do this
kind of engineering because we know what determines behavior: the
contingencies of reinforcement. Millions are made on Madison Ave. doing
that.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=behavior+analysis
Karl Rove is also a master at predicting and manipulating behavior.
It is a shame he is using those talents only to make money getting
people elected, instead of contributing to the knowledge base of the
species.
--
John Popelish
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "." |
|
| Title: Re: Are you a determinist? |
20 Dec 2003 09:18:54 PM |
|
|
B. Corporel wrote...
Animal behavior is predicted and/or controlled all the time. We can do this
kind of engineering because we know what determines behavior: the
contingencies of reinforcement. Millions are made on Madison Ave. doing
that.
Although from what I understand, IIUC, quantum physics dictates that by
observing an event you are actually influencing an event, so you can
never actually predict what the event will be...
--
Regards,
..
.
|
|
|
| User: "B. Corporel" |
|
| Title: Re: Are you a determinist? |
20 Dec 2003 09:53:52 PM |
|
|
"." <sdf329ds93s999990sx@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.1a4fbc2aa7e0e01898968f@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
B. Corporel wrote...
Animal behavior is predicted and/or controlled all the time. We can do
this
kind of engineering because we know what determines behavior: the
contingencies of reinforcement. Millions are made on Madison Ave. doing
that.
Although from what I understand, IIUC, quantum physics dictates that by
observing an event you are actually influencing an event, ...
Events concerning subatomic particles at the quantum level. But we don't
study animal behavior at the quantum level, since animals aren't subatomic
particles. 8^) At the normal everyday level, the one in which we operate all
the time, the one we are discussing here, you and I can observe a horse
running around a race track, even time it with a stop watch, without
noticeably influencing the horse's behavior at all.
Although from what I understand, IIUC, quantum physics dictates that by
observing an event you are actually influencing an event, ...
... so you can
never actually predict what the event will be...
If we know what the determinants of behavior are, then we can predict what
the behavior of an animal shall be. If we have control of the determinants
of behavior (the rewards, so to speak), then we can control the behavior in
any case. Evidence training a dog to roll over or jump through hoops,
training young men to go into battle as cannon fodder, etc.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: Are you a determinist? |
19 Dec 2003 11:31:47 PM |
|
|
"." <sdf329ds93s999990sx@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.1a4e84c1e5e8c6f5989688@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
If not, what's your position on the question of free will?
I'm a determinist. I can't imagine how there COULD be free will.
But the illusion of free will is so complete and compelling that it suits me
to behave as if I have it.
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
| User: "." |
|
| Title: Re: Are you a determinist? |
20 Dec 2003 01:14:53 AM |
|
|
Denis Loubet wrote...
But the illusion of free will is so complete and compelling that it suits me
to behave as if I have it.
That's my view also.
--
Regards,
..
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "methodios" |
|
| Title: Re: Are you a determinist? |
20 Dec 2003 07:11:11 PM |
|
|
Denis Loubet wrote:
"." <sdf329ds93s999990sx@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.1a4e84c1e5e8c6f5989688@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
If not, what's your position on the question of free will?
I'm a determinist. I can't imagine how there COULD be free will.
But the illusion of free will is so complete and compelling that it suits me
to behave as if I have it.
How long can one live one's life on the basis of an illusion? How is
this different from theists who say that the experience (read
'illusion') of God is so complete and compelling that it suits them to
behave as if He exists.
methodios
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: Are you a determinist? |
20 Dec 2003 10:35:38 PM |
|
|
"methodios" <dgillesp@pemtel.net> wrote in message
news:3FE4F32F.93C0F653@pemtel.net...
Denis Loubet wrote:
"." <sdf329ds93s999990sx@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.1a4e84c1e5e8c6f5989688@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
If not, what's your position on the question of free will?
I'm a determinist. I can't imagine how there COULD be free will.
But the illusion of free will is so complete and compelling that it
suits me
to behave as if I have it.
How long can one live one's life on the basis of an illusion?
As long as necessary.
How is
this different from theists who say that the experience (read
'illusion') of God is so complete and compelling that it suits them to
behave as if He exists.
Because they DON'T say that. They DON'T say the experience is an illusion.
They say the god character REALLY DOES exist.
I've never heard a theist say they know there's no god, but that they just
pretend there is. There's a word for that position, it's called atheist. A
bizarre and confused atheist perhaps, but an atheist just the same.
I'm a determinist pretending to have free will, and I'm AWARE that I'm
pretending.
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
| User: "B. Corporel" |
|
| Title: Re: Are you a determinist? |
21 Dec 2003 01:37:47 AM |
|
|
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:uq9Fb.149683$Ek.104848@twister.austin.rr.com...
"methodios" <dgillesp@pemtel.net> wrote in message
news:3FE4F32F.93C0F653@pemtel.net...
Denis Loubet wrote:
"." <sdf329ds93s999990sx@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.1a4e84c1e5e8c6f5989688@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
If not, what's your position on the question of free will?
I'm a determinist. I can't imagine how there COULD be free will.
But the illusion of free will is so complete and compelling that it
suits me
to behave as if I have it.
How long can one live one's life on the basis of an illusion?
As long as necessary.
How is
this different from theists who say that the experience (read
'illusion') of God is so complete and compelling that it suits them to
behave as if He exists.
Because they DON'T say that. They DON'T say the experience is an illusion.
They say the god character REALLY DOES exist.
Might exist. It is all hypothetical (speculative, 'might be') imaginings
with no basis in fact that anyone can point out, remember?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: Are you a determinist? |
21 Dec 2003 12:36:24 PM |
|
|
"B. Corporel" <bcorp39874@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:f5cFb.104362$8y1.322715@attbi_s52...
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:uq9Fb.149683$Ek.104848@twister.austin.rr.com...
"methodios" <dgillesp@pemtel.net> wrote in message
news:3FE4F32F.93C0F653@pemtel.net...
Denis Loubet wrote:
"." <sdf329ds93s999990sx@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.1a4e84c1e5e8c6f5989688@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
If not, what's your position on the question of free will?
I'm a determinist. I can't imagine how there COULD be free will.
But the illusion of free will is so complete and compelling that it
suits me
to behave as if I have it.
How long can one live one's life on the basis of an illusion?
As long as necessary.
How is
this different from theists who say that the experience (read
'illusion') of God is so complete and compelling that it suits them to
behave as if He exists.
Because they DON'T say that. They DON'T say the experience is an
illusion.
They say the god character REALLY DOES exist.
Might exist.
That's not what theists claim. They claim it DOES exist.
It is all hypothetical (speculative, 'might be') imaginings
with no basis in fact that anyone can point out, remember?
I'm perfectly aware of that, but the theist isn't.
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
| User: "B. Corporel" |
|
| Title: Re: Are you a determinist? |
21 Dec 2003 01:28:20 PM |
|
|
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:IKlFb.75747$HH.13775@fe1.texas.rr.com...
"B. Corporel" <bcorp39874@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:f5cFb.104362$8y1.322715@attbi_s52...
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:uq9Fb.149683$Ek.104848@twister.austin.rr.com...
"methodios" <dgillesp@pemtel.net> wrote in message
news:3FE4F32F.93C0F653@pemtel.net...
Denis Loubet wrote:
"." <sdf329ds93s999990sx@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.1a4e84c1e5e8c6f5989688@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
If not, what's your position on the question of free will?
I'm a determinist. I can't imagine how there COULD be free will.
But the illusion of free will is so complete and compelling that
it
suits me
to behave as if I have it.
How long can one live one's life on the basis of an illusion?
As long as necessary.
How is
this different from theists who say that the experience (read
'illusion') of God is so complete and compelling that it suits them
to
behave as if He exists.
Because they DON'T say that. They DON'T say the experience is an
illusion.
They say the god character REALLY DOES exist.
Might exist.
That's not what theists claim. They claim it DOES exist. ...
Might exist. It is all hypothetical (speculative, 'might be') imaginings
with no basis in fact that anyone can point out, remember?
See the term, 'hypothesis' in the following theist argument for their
hypothetical (speculative, 'might be') imaginings?
---
<quote>
Famous in the history of science is the argument _ad ignorantiam_ given in
criticism of Galileo, when he showed leading astronomers of his time the
mountains and valleys on the moon that could be seen through his telescope.
Some scholars of that age, absolutely convinced that the moon was a perfect
sphere, as theology and Aristotelian science had long taught, argued against
Galileo that, although we see what appear to be mountains and valleys, the
moon is in fact a perfect sphere, because all its apparent irregularities
are filled in by an invisible crystalline substance. And this *HYPOTHESIS*,
which saves the perfection of the heavenly bodies, Galileo could not prove
false!
</quote>
(Copi and Cohen, _Introduction to Logic_, p. 117)
---
[emphasis on HYPOTHESIS added]
.
|
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: Are you a determinist? |
21 Dec 2003 03:17:23 PM |
|
|
"B. Corporel" <bcorp39874@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ovmFb.608606$HS4.4455929@attbi_s01...
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:IKlFb.75747$HH.13775@fe1.texas.rr.com...
"B. Corporel" <bcorp39874@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:f5cFb.104362$8y1.322715@attbi_s52...
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:uq9Fb.149683$Ek.104848@twister.austin.rr.com...
"methodios" <dgillesp@pemtel.net> wrote in message
news:3FE4F32F.93C0F653@pemtel.net...
Denis Loubet wrote:
"." <sdf329ds93s999990sx@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.1a4e84c1e5e8c6f5989688@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
If not, what's your position on the question of free will?
I'm a determinist. I can't imagine how there COULD be free will.
But the illusion of free will is so complete and compelling that
it
suits me
to behave as if I have it.
How long can one live one's life on the basis of an illusion?
As long as necessary.
How is
this different from theists who say that the experience (read
'illusion') of God is so complete and compelling that it suits
them
to
behave as if He exists.
Because they DON'T say that. They DON'T say the experience is an
illusion.
They say the god character REALLY DOES exist.
Might exist.
That's not what theists claim. They claim it DOES exist. ...
Might exist.
Do you have a reading comprehension problem? Theists do not claim god might
exist, they claim it does exist.
Are you seriously going to argue that that is their claim?
It is all hypothetical (speculative, 'might be') imaginings
with no basis in fact that anyone can point out, remember?
Yes. I ALREADY AGREED WITH THAT. Are you daft or stupid?
See the term, 'hypothesis' in the following theist argument for their
hypothetical (speculative, 'might be') imaginings?
And is that term used with respect to their god? No? Then shut the ***** up.
---
<quote>
Famous in the history of science is the argument _ad ignorantiam_ given in
criticism of Galileo, when he showed leading astronomers of his time the
mountains and valleys on the moon that could be seen through his
telescope.
Some scholars of that age, absolutely convinced that the moon was a
perfect
sphere, as theology and Aristotelian science had long taught, argued
against
Galileo that, although we see what appear to be mountains and valleys, the
moon is in fact a perfect sphere, because all its apparent irregularities
are filled in by an invisible crystalline substance. And this
*HYPOTHESIS*,
which saves the perfection of the heavenly bodies, Galileo could not prove
false!
</quote>
(Copi and Cohen, _Introduction to Logic_, p. 117)
---
[emphasis on HYPOTHESIS added]
Since the context is irrelevant to my point about what theists say about
their god, you've wasted you time constructing a non-sequiter.
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
| User: "B. Corporel" |
|
| Title: Re: Are you a determinist? |
21 Dec 2003 05:34:09 PM |
|
|
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:D5oFb.244701$do1.126796@twister.austin.rr.com...
"B. Corporel" <bcorp39874@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ovmFb.608606$HS4.4455929@attbi_s01...
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:IKlFb.75747$HH.13775@fe1.texas.rr.com...
"B. Corporel" <bcorp39874@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:f5cFb.104362$8y1.322715@attbi_s52...
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:uq9Fb.149683$Ek.104848@twister.austin.rr.com...
"methodios" <dgillesp@pemtel.net> wrote in message
news:3FE4F32F.93C0F653@pemtel.net...
Denis Loubet wrote:
"." <sdf329ds93s999990sx@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.1a4e84c1e5e8c6f5989688@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
If not, what's your position on the question of free will?
I'm a determinist. I can't imagine how there COULD be free
will.
But the illusion of free will is so complete and compelling
that
it
suits me
to behave as if I have it.
How long can one live one's life on the basis of an illusion?
As long as necessary.
How is
this different from theists who say that the experience (read
'illusion') of God is so complete and compelling that it suits
them
to
behave as if He exists.
Because they DON'T say that. They DON'T say the experience is an
illusion.
They say the god character REALLY DOES exist.
Might exist.
That's not what theists claim. They claim it DOES exist. ...
Might exist.
[Snipping all the argument _ad hominem_ ]
Might exist.
It is all hypothetical (speculative, 'might be') imaginings
with no basis in fact that anyone can point out, remember?
Yes. I ALREADY AGREED WITH THAT.
Why don't you settle down, get a drink of cool water, and stop shouting all
over the place? Aren't you capable of having a little calm, quite,
reasonable discussion?
If you agree with that, then we agree that theists argue that all their
hypothetical (speculative, 'might be') imaginings might exist. That's what
the term, 'hypothetical' means, speculative, 'might be' imaginings.
See the term, 'hypothesis' in the following theist argument for their
hypothetical (speculative, 'might be') imaginings?
And is that term used with respect to their god?
Yes, certainly, the following is just another argument for the hypothetical
(speculative, 'might be' imagining) magic invisible sky pixie theists refer
to as "God" who hypothetically filled all the valleys of the moon with this
hypothetical magic invisible substance. Who'd you think this was about,
Dubya Bush maybe?
---
<quote>
Famous in the history of science is the argument _ad ignorantiam_ given
in
criticism of Galileo, when he showed leading astronomers of his time the
mountains and valleys on the moon that could be seen through his
telescope.
Some scholars of that age, absolutely convinced that the moon was a
perfect
sphere, as theology and Aristotelian science had long taught, argued
against
Galileo that, although we see what appear to be mountains and valleys,
the
moon is in fact a perfect sphere, because all its apparent
irregularities
are filled in by an invisible crystalline substance. And this
*HYPOTHESIS*,
which saves the perfection of the heavenly bodies, Galileo could not
prove
false!
</quote>
(Copi and Cohen, _Introduction to Logic_, p. 117)
---
[emphasis on HYPOTHESIS added]
Since the context is irrelevant to my point about what theists say about
their god, you've wasted you time constructing a non-sequiter.
Check spelling. Should be non sequitur, right?
Read the theist argument again, slowly please, so that you might pick up on
the fact that this is just another lame theist argument that their
hypothetical (speculative, 'might be' imagining) "God" thingy might exist in
spite of the dearth of evidence of any such of a thing. Let me know if you
ever wise up, Mr. Losebet.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: Are you a determinist? |
21 Dec 2003 06:10:32 PM |
|
|
"B. Corporel" <bcorp39874@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:R5qFb.622823$Fm2.559789@attbi_s04...
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:D5oFb.244701$do1.126796@twister.austin.rr.com...
"B. Corporel" <bcorp39874@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ovmFb.608606$HS4.4455929@attbi_s01...
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:IKlFb.75747$HH.13775@fe1.texas.rr.com...
"B. Corporel" <bcorp39874@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:f5cFb.104362$8y1.322715@attbi_s52...
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:uq9Fb.149683$Ek.104848@twister.austin.rr.com...
"methodios" <dgillesp@pemtel.net> wrote in message
news:3FE4F32F.93C0F653@pemtel.net...
Denis Loubet wrote:
"." <sdf329ds93s999990sx@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.1a4e84c1e5e8c6f5989688@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
If not, what's your position on the question of free will?
I'm a determinist. I can't imagine how there COULD be free
will.
But the illusion of free will is so complete and compelling
that
it
suits me
to behave as if I have it.
How long can one live one's life on the basis of an illusion?
As long as necessary.
How is
this different from theists who say that the experience (read
'illusion') of God is so complete and compelling that it suits
them
to
behave as if He exists.
Because they DON'T say that. They DON'T say the experience is an
illusion.
They say the god character REALLY DOES exist.
Might exist.
That's not what theists claim. They claim it DOES exist. ...
Might exist.
[Snipping all the argument _ad hominem_ ]
Might exist.
It is all hypothetical (speculative, 'might be') imaginings
with no basis in fact that anyone can point out, remember?
Yes. I ALREADY AGREED WITH THAT.
Why don't you settle down, get a drink of cool water, and stop shouting
all
over the place? Aren't you capable of having a little calm, quite,
reasonable discussion?
Not when you rudely ignore what I write, and simply repeat yourself. Then
you deserve all the contempt I can heap upon you.
If you agree with that, then we agree that theists argue that all their
hypothetical (speculative, 'might be') imaginings might exist.
No. I have NEVER heard a theist say their god might exist. They always say
it DOES exist. What theists have you been talking to that insist their god
is hypothetical? Do they say their god is hypothetical in so many words? Do
they use the term hypothetical? Do they say their god "might exist."?
I'm an atheist. I agree that the god theists claim "really really exists" is
likely only a product of their fevered imaginations. But THEY don't think
that, and THEY don't say that.
That's what
the term, 'hypothetical' means, speculative, 'might be' imaginings.
Not to the theist. The theist claims the god is real, and not hypothetical.
We presumably know better, but that's irrelevant.
See the term, 'hypothesis' in the following theist argument for their
hypothetical (speculative, 'might be') imaginings?
And is that term used with respect to their god?
Yes, certainly, the following is just another argument for the
hypothetical
(speculative, 'might be' imagining) magic invisible sky pixie theists
refer
to as "God" who hypothetically filled all the valleys of the moon with
this
hypothetical magic invisible substance. Who'd you think this was about,
Dubya Bush maybe?
DO THE THEISTS THEMSELVES DESCRIBE THEIR GOD AS "HYPOTHETICAL", "IMAGINARY",
OR "SPECULATIVE"? A simple yes or no will do. If you answer yes, then we can
continue to communicate. If you answer no, then I must bid you farewell.
--
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
| User: "B. Corporel" |
|
| Title: Re: Are you a determinist? |
21 Dec 2003 07:10:30 PM |
|
|
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:YDqFb.76201$HH.36192@fe1.texas.rr.com...
... I have NEVER heard a theist say their god might exist.
Does it matter to the rest of us what people with delusional disorder
believe about the actual state of affairs?
In reality, theist stuff is all hypothetical (speculative, 'might be')
imaginings. You have already agreed to that, remember?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: Are you a determinist? |
21 Dec 2003 08:41:34 PM |
|
|
"B. Corporel" <bcorp39874@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:awrFb.421199$Dw6.1300690@attbi_s02...
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:YDqFb.76201$HH.36192@fe1.texas.rr.com...
... I have NEVER heard a theist say their god might exist.
Does it matter to the rest of us what people with delusional disorder
believe about the actual state of affairs?
Yes. Of course it does. You might want to ask the same question of the
survivors of 9/11, Jonestown, or Heaven's Gate. I think you'll get a big fat
yes from them too.
Delusional people are unpredictable and dangerous.
In reality, theist stuff is all hypothetical (speculative, 'might be')
imaginings. You have already agreed to that, remember?
No, you lying turd. I agreed to no such thing. I agreed that their GOD was a
figment of their imagination. The results of "theist stuff" like 9/11,
jonestown, and Heaven's Gate, are definitely NOT hypothetical. Such "theist
stuff" has direct, real-world consequences.
And you failed to answer my question. Noted.
--
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
| User: "B. Corporel" |
|
| Title: Re: Are you a determinist? |
22 Dec 2003 01:29:41 AM |
|
|
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote :
... The results of "theist stuff" ...
But we are not discussing the _results_ of theist stuff, we are discussing
the theist stuff itself, like their hypothetical deities, hypothetical
virgin births, people hypothetically being resurrected from the grave. All
that theist stuff is purely hypothetical (speculative, 'might be')
imaginings, which is a fact you have already agreed with.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: Are you a determinist? |
22 Dec 2003 12:16:35 PM |
|
|
"B. Corporel" <bcorp39874@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:F3xFb.423836$Dw6.1308690@attbi_s02...
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote :
... The results of "theist stuff" ...
But we are not discussing the _results_ of theist stuff, we are discussing
the theist stuff itself, like their hypothetical deities, hypothetical
virgin births, people hypothetically being resurrected from the grave.
I would consider "theist stuff" to include the behavior of theists, wouldn't
you? That includes flying airplanes into buildings, poisoning Koolaid,
molesting children, etc.
But now that I know your narrow definition of theist stuff, we'll go with
that.
All
that theist stuff is purely hypothetical (speculative, 'might be')
imaginings, which is a fact you have already agreed with.
Yes. Again you have phrased it in a way I can agree with, given your
definition of "theist stuff itself", that ignores the behavior of theists.
But, wouldn't you agree that the results of theist stuff, such as 9/11,
Jonestown, etc, are NOT hypothetical, and a good reason to try to understand
the delusions of the deluded?
--
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mekkala" |
|
| Title: Re: Are you a determinist? |
22 Dec 2003 11:55:22 AM |
|
|
On 22 Dec 2003, "B. Corporel" <bcorp39874@hotmail.com> screwed up his
face, groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:F3xFb.423836$Dw6.1308690@attbi_s02:
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote :
... The results of "theist stuff" ...
But we are not discussing the _results_ of theist stuff, we are
discussing the theist stuff itself, like their hypothetical deities,
hypothetical virgin births, people hypothetically being resurrected
from the grave. All that theist stuff is purely hypothetical
(speculative, 'might be') imaginings, which is a fact you have already
agreed with.
You are very stupid, Septic. Furthermore, I happen to have solid
psychic confirmation that you regularly masturbate while sniffing your
landlady's panties. And she's old, fat, and crabby.
Not only so, but I heard you peed in your neighbor's trash can and
DIDN'T TELL HIM YOU DID IT. You also apparently shat in it, but that
rumor is, as yet, unconfirmed. The ***** might have been dog *****; we're
still awaiting the results.
Lately we've been getting reports that you eat your boogers, and we're
investigating before we pass any final judgements. We know for a fact
that you regularly snort earwax and occasionally cocaine.
We've got quite the file on you, Septic. You'd better watch out.
--
Mekkala, Atheist #2148
"Atheism is ... the bed-rock of sanity in a world of madness."
--Emmett F. Fields
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "B. Corporel" |
|
| Title: Re: Are you a determinist? |
21 Dec 2003 10:50:43 PM |
|
|
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:yRsFb.152231$Ek.9535@twister.austin.rr.com...
"B. Corporel" <bcorp39874@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:awrFb.421199$Dw6.1300690@attbi_s02...
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:YDqFb.76201$HH.36192@fe1.texas.rr.com...
... I have NEVER heard a theist say their god might exist.
Does it matter to the rest of us what people with delusional disorder
believe about the actual state of affairs?
Yes. Of course it does. You might want to ask the same question of the
survivors of 9/11, Jonestown, or Heaven's Gate. I think you'll get a big
fat
yes from them too.
Those events are undoubtedly related to the theist delusion that their
hypothetical imaginings, their hypothetical deities might exist, undoubtedly
related to their impaired contact with reality, their psychotic delusional
disorder, don't you agree?
But the theist's deities are all hypothetical (speculative, 'might be')
imaginings, so they are just delusional. You have already said that you
agree with this.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: Are you a determinist? |
22 Dec 2003 11:57:50 AM |
|
|
"B. Corporel" <bcorp39874@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:DKuFb.174914$_M.798692@attbi_s54...
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:yRsFb.152231$Ek.9535@twister.austin.rr.com...
"B. Corporel" <bcorp39874@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:awrFb.421199$Dw6.1300690@attbi_s02...
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:YDqFb.76201$HH.36192@fe1.texas.rr.com...
... I have NEVER heard a theist say their god might exist.
Does it matter to the rest of us what people with delusional disorder
believe about the actual state of affairs?
Yes. Of course it does. You might want to ask the same question of the
survivors of 9/11, Jonestown, or Heaven's Gate. I think you'll get a big
fat
yes from them too.
Those events are undoubtedly related to the theist delusion that their
hypothetical imaginings, their hypothetical deities might exist,
undoubtedly
related to their impaired contact with reality, their psychotic delusional
disorder, don't you agree?
I will answer this question only if you will answer my question: Do theists
themselves describe their god as "a hypothetical imagining that might
exist"? A simple yes or no will do.
And to return to the context of this exchange: Do you agree that those
events are a good reason to care about what delusional people think?
But the theist's deities are all hypothetical (speculative, 'might be')
imaginings, so they are just delusional. You have already said that you
agree with this.
You've finally phrased it in a manner that I can agree with. The deities are
theistic delusions.
However, the behaviors of the theists in response to those delusions are NOT
hypothetical. Those behaviors have real-world effects. They affect your
life. That is why it is important to know what those delusions are.
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Popelish" |
|
| Title: Re: Are you a determinist? |
21 Dec 2003 11:00:05 PM |
|
|
Denis Loubet wrote:
(snip)
Delusional people are unpredictable and dangerous.
Letting the dangerous part pass, for the moment, I would say that
delusional people are unpredictable only to the extent that you try to
predict their behavior as if they were not delusional. If you study
their delusions, they may be more predictable than the average non
delusional person, because their attention is often so focussed on
their delusion to the exclusion of other potentially complicating
influences.
--
John Popelish
.
|
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: Are you a determinist? |
22 Dec 2003 11:59:05 AM |
|
|
"John Popelish" <jpopelish@rica.net> wrote in message
news:3FE67A99.306BF0B5@rica.net...
Denis Loubet wrote:
(snip)
Delusional people are unpredictable and dangerous.
Letting the dangerous part pass, for the moment, I would say that
delusional people are unpredictable only to the extent that you try to
predict their behavior as if they were not delusional.
That's true.
If you study
their delusions, they may be more predictable than the average non
delusional person, because their attention is often so focussed on
their delusion to the exclusion of other potentially complicating
influences.
I will grant that possibility.
Good point!
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mekkala" |
|
| Title: Re: Are you a determinist? |
22 Dec 2003 11:51:38 AM |
|
|
On 21 Dec 2003, John Popelish <jpopelish@rica.net> screwed up his face,
groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:3FE67A99.306BF0B5@rica.net:
Denis Loubet wrote:
(snip)
Delusional people are unpredictable and dangerous.
Letting the dangerous part pass, for the moment, I would say that
delusional people are unpredictable only to the extent that you try to
predict their behavior as if they were not delusional. If you study
their delusions, they may be more predictable than the average non
delusional person, because their attention is often so focussed on
their delusion to the exclusion of other potentially complicating
influences.
Precisely, and I believe this was the point Denis was trying to make.
See, Septic asked whether it really matters what delusional people
believe, and Denis argued that yes, of course it does, because
delusional people are unpredictable (implying that knowing their
delusions helps alleviate the danger).
--
Mekkala, Atheist #2148
"Atheism is ... the bed-rock of sanity in a world of madness."
--Emmett F. Fields
.
|
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: Are you a determinist? |
22 Dec 2003 01:14:52 PM |
|
|
"Mekkala" <joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:Xns945978DA0CD1DMekkala@199.45.49.11...
On 21 Dec 2003, John Popelish <jpopelish@rica.net> screwed up his face,
groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:3FE67A99.306BF0B5@rica.net:
Denis Loubet wrote:
(snip)
Delusional people are unpredictable and dangerous.
Letting the dangerous part pass, for the moment, I would say that
delusional people are unpredictable only to the extent that you try to
predict their behavior as if they were not delusional. If you study
their delusions, they may be more predictable than the average non
delusional person, because their attention is often so focussed on
their delusion to the exclusion of other potentially complicating
influences.
Precisely, and I believe this was the point Denis was trying to make.
See, Septic asked whether it really matters what delusional people
believe, and Denis argued that yes, of course it does, because
delusional people are unpredictable (implying that knowing their
delusions helps alleviate the danger).
DOH! Aargh! You're absolutely right. :-)
Somehow I missed that, as you'll see in my reply to John.
I missed my own point! :-P
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
| User: "Abner Mintz" |
|
| Title: Re: Are you a determinist? |
22 Dec 2003 05:32:50 PM |
|
|
Denis Loubet <dloubet@io.com> wrote:
DOH! Aargh! You're absolutely right. :-)
Somehow I missed that, as you'll see in my reply to John.
I missed my own point! :-P
Ow! That's got to be embarrassing ... That reminds me of
something that happened today. One of the secretaries at
the school I work at has a bee in her bonnet about good
spelling, so she circulated a memo asking us all to show
'dilegence' in checking our spelling. When I showed up
to tease her about it, she was almost to the point of banging
her head against the table in frustration - apparently
I wasn't the first person to notice the problem. :)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mekkala" |
|
| Title: Re: Are you a determinist? |
22 Dec 2003 11:44:33 AM |
|
|
On 21 Dec 2003, "B. Corporel" <bcorp39874@hotmail.com> screwed up his
face, groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:ovmFb.608606$HS4.4455929@attbi_s01:
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:IKlFb.75747$HH.13775@fe1.texas.rr.com...
"B. Corporel" <bcorp39874@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:f5cFb.104362$8y1.322715@attbi_s52...
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:uq9Fb.149683$Ek.104848@twister.austin.rr.com...
"methodios" <dgillesp@pemtel.net> wrote in message
news:3FE4F32F.93C0F653@pemtel.net...
Denis Loubet wrote:
"." <sdf329ds93s999990sx@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.1a4e84c1e5e8c6f5989688@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
If not, what's your position on the question of free will?
I'm a determinist. I can't imagine how there COULD be free
will.
But the illusion of free will is so complete and compelling
that
it
suits me
to behave as if I have it.
How long can one live one's life on the basis of an illusion?
As long as necessary.
How is
this different from theists who say that the experience (read
'illusion') of God is so complete and compelling that it suits
them
to
behave as if He exists.
Because they DON'T say that. They DON'T say the experience is an
illusion.
They say the god character REALLY DOES exist.
Might exist.
That's not what theists claim. They claim it DOES exist. ...
Might exist. It is all hypothetical (speculative, 'might be')
imaginings with no basis in fact that anyone can point out, remember?
I find this conversation fascinating, in that it has the potential for
infinite progression, since Septic's stupidity naturally contrives to
bring the discussion back to the beginning with each exchange, like so:
Septic: MIGHT exist.
Denis: Yes, yes, I know, but the THEISTS say it DOES exist.
Septic: No, they're wrong. MIGHT exist.
Denis: I know they're wrong. Nevertheless, they say it.
Septic: It's all a lie. MIGHT exist.
Denis: Uh-huh, I thought we were past that now, we all understand, you
know, no need to preach to the choir.
Septic: QUIT ARGUING AD IGNORANTIUM! MIGHT EXIST!
Denis: Ok now, you need to calm down. Nobody's arguing but you.
Septic: *starts spitting blood and going purple in the face* MIIIIGHT
EXIST! MIGHT EXIST I TELL YOU!!!
And so on...
See the term, 'hypothesis' in the following theist argument for their
hypothetical (speculative, 'might be') imaginings?
--
Mekkala, Atheist #2148
"Atheism is ... the bed-rock of sanity in a world of madness."
--Emmett F. Fields
.
|
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: Are you a determinist? |
22 Dec 2003 01:17:33 PM |
|
|
"Mekkala" <joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:Xns945977A6375D6Mekkala@199.45.49.11...
On 21 Dec 2003, "B. Corporel" <bcorp39874@hotmail.com> screwed up his
face, groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:ovmFb.608606$HS4.4455929@attbi_s01:
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:IKlFb.75747$HH.13775@fe1.texas.rr.com...
"B. Corporel" <bcorp39874@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:f5cFb.104362$8y1.322715@attbi_s52...
"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:uq9Fb.149683$Ek.104848@twister.austin.rr.com...
"methodios" <dgillesp@pemtel.net> wrote in message
news:3FE4F32F.93C0F653@pemtel.net...
Denis Loubet wrote:
"." <sdf329ds93s999990sx@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.1a4e84c1e5e8c6f5989688@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
If not, what's your position on the question of free will?
I'm a determinist. I can't imagine how there COULD be free
will.
But the illusion of free will is so complete and compelling
that
it
suits me
to behave as if I have it.
How long can one live one's life on the basis of an illusion?
As long as necessary.
How is
this different from theists who say that the experience (read
'illusion') of God is so complete and compelling that it suits
them
to
behave as if He exists.
Because they DON'T say that. They DON'T say the experience is an
illusion.
They say the god character REALLY DOES exist.
Might exist.
That's not what theists claim. They claim it DOES exist. ...
Might exist. It is all hypothetical (speculative, 'might be')
imaginings with no basis in fact that anyone can point out, remember?
I find this conversation fascinating, in that it has the potential for
infinite progression, since Septic's stupidity naturally contrives to
bring the discussion back to the beginning with each exchange, like so:
Septic: MIGHT exist.
Denis: Yes, yes, I know, but the THEISTS say it DOES exist.
Septic: No, they're wrong. MIGHT exist.
Denis: I know they're wrong. Nevertheless, they say it.
Septic: It's all a lie. MIGHT exist.
Denis: Uh-huh, I thought we were past that now, we all understand, you
know, no need to preach to the choir.
Septic: QUIT ARGUING AD IGNORANTIUM! MIGHT EXIST!
Denis: Ok now, you need to calm down. Nobody's arguing but you.
Septic: *starts spitting blood and going purple in the face* MIIIIGHT
EXIST! MIGHT EXIST I TELL YOU!!!
And so on...
I'm beginning to see a pattern... ;-)
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "B. Corporel" |
|
| Title: Re: Are you a determinist? |
20 Dec 2003 07:40:43 PM |
|
|
"methodios" <dgillesp@pemtel.net> wrote in message
news:3FE4F32F.93C0F653@pemtel.net...
Denis Loubet wrote:
"." <sdf329ds93s999990sx@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.1a4e84c1e5e8c6f5989688@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
If not, what's your position on the question of free will?
I'm a determinist. I can't imagine how there COULD be free will.
But the illusion of free will is so complete and compelling that it
suits me
to behave as if I have it.
How long can one live one's life on the basis of an illusion?
One can live that way for his whole life, as most people probably do, but
anyone's beliefs (subjective convictions) don't change the facts of the
matter. Wouldn't you rather learn the facts? That's what scientific
investigation is all about, and the scientific evidence tends to indicate
that behavior is determined, not by the individual himself, by force of his
own will, arbitrarily and capriciously, but by the contingencies of
reinforcement (the rewards, so to speak) in any particular case.
See the study of behavior analysis:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=behavior+analysis
How is
this different from theists who say that the experience (read
'illusion') of God is so complete and compelling that it suits them to
behave as if He exists.
It is still delusion (impaired contact with reality), and anyone's beliefs
(subjective convictions still don't change the facts of the matter. There
are still zero gods by my count. How many by yours?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
Are you missing out?
Are you claiming to be Heidi Klum's dad?
Are you laughing?
Negotiations? Are you serious?
Who Are You?
Re: Are you a resident atheist Troll in Christian NGs
Bud, bud, where are you. Just answer the challenge.
Where are the rotten veggies when you need them?
| Re: WHEN ARE YOU CHRISTIANS GOING TO GROW UP?
1520th GI Killed by AWOL's Big WMD Lie. Where Are All You Gutless ***** NeoCon Chickenhawk Cowards Now?
Are You Older Than Dirt?
Ta
Re: I want to ask you the most important question of your life. The question is: Are you saved? It is not a question of how good you are, nor if you are a church member, but are you saved? Are you sure you will go to Heaven when you die? The reason s
Are You An Atheist, A Druze, A Copt, A Uniate, A Methodist Or A Mormon?
Re: I want to ask you the most important question of your life. The question is: Are you saved? It is not a question of how good you are, nor if you are a church member, but are you saved? Are you sure you will go to Heaven when you die? The reason s
|
|
|
