The practicing scientist that I know are not out, and they admit so,
to show proof...if that is what is meant by truth in that link.
They say they are trying to show a link, a high probabiliy, the
possible cause, etc. or to rule out a certain cause that we think
might be a cause. Not to give a
So far (I'm still watching it) at least Chris appears to be sober this
time.
On Oct 26, 10:14 pm, stem cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thoughts?
http://blog.92y.org/index.php/weblog/item/rabbi_shmuley_boteach_and_c...
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this
ha! wait till the end!
atemcell
On Oct 27, 2:56 am, ornamentalmind [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So far (I'm still watching it) at least Chris appears to be sober this
time.
On Oct 26, 10:14 pm, stem cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thoughts?
Sorry, BC, I was trying to keep it from repeating crossbow crossbow...it
felt uncomfortable.
it is fixed Lord BC of the Sith? or are you Jedi? Careful you should be
answering that!!
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 5:52 PM, BC [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You mustn't get too set with the C and the B,
b/c
Just a quick note - It was not specifically stated that these graduates from
MIT or CalTech drive the whole economy. Of course we need everyone
working 'competently'. For me, I cannot imagine the Manhattan project
without Feynman's quirky brain, and his work on the space shuttle
Challenger
Yes but... there are a lot of Chinese and Indian citizens at MIT, Cal-
Tech, Stanford and other prestigious scientific schools. Many of the
professors at these schools love to share high level information with
China, Japan, India and any other country that wants to help advance
the scientific
My definition of freethought:
free (from superstition) thought.
Hi y'all - this is a semantics issue and as Stem Cell pointed out, not
a black and white choice. My cousin sings in the church choir and
considers herself a christian, but she has read very little of the
bible
OK. But Popper?
Quote mining.
Science is certainly a quest for truth, but that doesn't mean that
truth can never be achieved. Isn't it possible that someday we will
have explained every observable aspect of nature, and all that's left
is engineering? The fact that we keep replacing
Hi y'all - from Rick's link, I cannot accept the following quote:
I will argue that totally correct knowledge -- truth -- is neither
the goal, nor the product, nor any part of the process of scientific
work.
Neither am I a fan of Popper - why is the quest for truth recklessly
critical?
On Oct
Hi y'all - it's about time I disagreed with you. I believe a
freethinker is free from no thoughts, but open to all. Naturally,
having thought about superstition and spiritualism, I reject it.
On Oct 27, 9:49 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Also: free (from supernaturalism) thought
free (from
Logic is not limited in scope, only the human use of it is. Logic is not
an isolated system because the brain is not structured that way. Crays or
thier ilk could be the only true isolated-logic producers we have. Our fat
little pinkish grey brain cells can make up some pretty interesting stuff
When I studied the philosophy of science in graduate school, the
scientists (and Ph.D.s) never claimed absolute truth or to be
completely logicalconceptual,logical, intuitive leaps are the way
of science...however, the yard stick of accepting or rejecting those
scientific concepts, logical
yes,YES, we agree the world is flat. Censor? wouldnt that be impossible
anyway? who said we should? CERN is about as collaborative an example that
I can think of. Though if you want to be a conspiracy nutjob, you could
suggest that our gov has secret thinktanks at area 51 plotting,
plotting. WE
When I say superstition, supernaturalism and spiritualism I am referring to
using these concepts in the form of a premise upon which to use thought to
reach a conclusion. Thought which is independent of premises provided by
tradition, authority or established belief.
J.
In a message
No, I can't point to a better verification system than logic. It is
the best verification system I know of. But that is not the same
thing as saying it is limited in scope. Anyone who has studied Quantum
physics even a little will realize that there are things in the
universe that seem to defy
When we react quickly to a stimulus, we
don't have time to think.
our brains are faster than you give them credit for and the hardwiring is
already in place from evolutionary standpoint,eh? Quantum realms are just
not fully explored yet to decide if they defy logic.
On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 10:39
Tower of Babel perfect example. Biblical texts were refined to prevent
cross-pollination around turn of AC/DC. Got to preserve that elitism
that allows Religion to survive!
nice use of christian mythology
your tag ornamental mind always makes me think of a christmas tree covered
in little
An interesting article I recently read said, in part, that today the
majority of physicians treating specific illnesses both prescribe and
believe it ethical and effective to prescribe placebos.
Somehow, this seemed relevant to this conversation.
On Oct 27, 9:51 am, ornamentalmind [EMAIL
Logic may be our only bridge - CB
Often I find that the person who presents the term 'logic' has a
specific method and/or dogma in mind. . . one that is assumed to be a
universal when, of course, it is not.
There are numerous types of 'logic' as a starting point here.
On Oct 27, 8:14 am, C
...your tag ornamental mind always makes me think of... - CB
AH!!!
Thanks for the compliment re: mythology.
FYI, my 'tag', as easy as it is to project upon, is founded upon a
coherent praxis/philosophy.
On Oct 27, 9:26 am, CrossBow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tower of Babel perfect
ooo, you used a Greek word!!! First card gets dealt to you! Had to
take a break to look deeper into the word Praxis but like how you used it.
crossbow http://praxischurch.com/content/view/22/34/
http://praxischurch.com/content/view/22/34/
On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 11:59 AM,
RE: Greek word
I merely used the two words in the same light and way that I learned
them. While they do represent my practice method, they can also be
seen as a meme.
On Oct 27, 10:11 am, CrossBow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ooo, you used a Greek word!!! First card gets dealt to you! Had to
I'm just trying to be diplomatic. One of the things I've noticed in
all the groups I've joined is that some members seem very dogmatic.
Everyone has a reason for believing what they believe, but to believe
that one has somehow reached the very pinnacle of thought just by
rejecting relgious
“I'm just trying to be diplomatic.” – Rick
Yes Rick, I knew that. I was just using a lazy and simple method of
adding my view to the mix.
“One of the things I've noticed in all the groups I've joined is that
some members seem very dogmatic.” – Rick
Yes, and not only in groups. Differing levels
By pinnacle of thought I mean that one believes they have arrived at
the absolute truth (and no one can convince them otherwise).
Rick S
On Oct 27, 12:44 pm, ornamentalmind [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
“I'm just trying to be diplomatic.” – Rick
Yes Rick, I knew that. I was just using a lazy
Thanks! I really enjoyed the insight.
Rick S
On Oct 23, 11:22 pm, ornamentalmind [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbSu69SwU1o
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Memphis
By pinnacle of thought I mean that one believes they have arrived
at
the absolute truth (and no one can convince them otherwise). -
Rick
Yes Rick, and, by extension, would not this arrival at 'the absolute
truth' result in omniscience?
On Oct 27, 10:51 am, Rick S [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Okay, my Amerind name is she-who-runs-with-beer for today.
On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 12:50 PM, ornamentalmind
[EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
Homeland security devolution?
http://www.flyingsnail.com/images/homeland.jpg
On Oct 27, 10:42 am, CrossBow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oh, but the states
I'm sure there are thousands or maybe millions of twins that would
disagree with your assessment.
So? Confirmation bias. People get feelings all the time that some
misfortune has happened to friends or loved ones, and frantically
call, only to find out that they're safe and sound.
Someone should name a town
Absolute Truth so we could arrive there.
I once had a friend who told me there were no absolutes. I asked him
if he was absolutely sure.
Rick S
On Oct 27, 12:57 pm, ornamentalmind [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
By pinnacle of thought I mean that one believes they have
It was probably a mistake for me to post the first paragraph of
Lowder's essay or to offer a summary. It's too easy (and perfectly
natural) for people to respond to my blurb rather than to the essay
itself. I'm always happy to hear what my fellow freethinkers think,
but I am especially
No, being dogmatic or fundamentalist means being unable to even
consider another point of view.
Rick S
On Oct 27, 12:51 pm, Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
adopting scientific thought as the only valid form of reasoning
seems to me to be very similar to the fundamentalist rigidity they
No, being dogmatic or fundamentalist means being unable to even
consider another point of view.
Good. Back to Dr. Terry Halwes. Do you have any evidence that he is a
scientist? (Not that it matters a whole lot.)
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message
This is about ownership of a definition as an organization. WE can
either show ownership and give this word a bent in respect to the
organizations mission, or we can leave it as an open-ended question,
thereby allowing any existing and future members to give it thier own
personal meaning without
I'm not a scientist and I'm guessing neither are you, does that make
our opinions irrelevant?
On some issues, yes.
Actually, I said that his essay was interesting to me. Even if he
did not have credentials as a scientist, it would not matter if what
he said made sense. )
You said very
Rick S said I'm sure there are thousands or maybe millions of
twins that would
disagree with your assessment.
See earlier post about objective standards. Plus, how is one to know
that they are telling the truth? Personal anecdotes are subjective.
stemcell
On Oct 27, 11:31 am, Rick S [EMAIL
so is that a perfect example of what I just said...Logic is only limited by
human use of it? did I have to say misuse'? did I have to say flawed use
of it to make it clearer? You know, my emails have the potential of being
too long if I cover my butt on every angle...
yes, I am a crotchblow and
If you did not yet get the hand out from me, then check the MFA site.
Jason will scan and upload the file. If that doesn't work out for you,
let me know and we can meet somewhere durring the week so I can give
you a copy.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this
Crotchblow said Logic is not limited in scope, only the human
use of it is.
Just curious. How does this fit in these regards?
1. All birds are mammals. (premise)
2. A platypus is a bird. (premise)
3. Therefore, the platypus is a mammal. (conclusion)
This is a valid deductive argument, even
Ultimate truth supported by years of very detailed, very thorough
research.
And Stop calling me that before it sticks...
On Oct 27, 4:00 pm, stem cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for that clarification about use and misuse Crotchblow.
Very fine or just fine? Is that like ultimate truth
I think Crotchblow has a point. In the early days we went through
this. But before I go any further, I would like to ask Aaron what
prompted you to post that link? Are you considering that it would be
an idea to consider changing the name of MFA? It is the name. It is
inclusive. It is
“…Is truth not truth? Is it not all or nothing?…” – Stem
No.
There are subjective truths…including things like black is not red.
Truths based upon at least one person's apprehension of appearances is
another way of saying this. For the above example, a blind person
would not agree that black is
On Oct 27, 3:23 pm, CrossBow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
so is that a perfect example of what I just said...Logic is only limited by
human use of it? did I have to say misuse'? did I have to say flawed use
of it to make it clearer? You know, my emails have the potential of being
too long if I
Rick S said If I ate a peach and told you that it tasted like an
apple to me, how
could you possibly prove that I was mistaken? It might taste like a
peach to you and everyone else. But it still might taste like an
apple
to me.
You are right. I guess that is what Orn. calls subjective
Because something is subjective does not mean it cannot possibly be
true. It only means that it cannot be measured by another standard,
like objectivity. Is perfect objectivity even possible? I remember an
old saying Even though the experts all agree, they well may be
mistaken. I can easily
The word truth is sometimes applied as a kind of final conclusion.
It reminds me of the 19th century scientist who confidently said that
there was no more left to learn in science. Of course, the idea of
what is truth has been debated for centuries. I cannot give a short,
pat answer. As for me
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Jessica
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008 4:19 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [skeptics-145] Fwd: Enjoy the read!
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008 11:47 AM
Subject: Enjoy the read!
Dear Red States:
We've decided
It depends on what you consider 'truth. Really, the truth is I want
to watch Heroes on television in a few minutes, so I will let you
have the last word on this if you care to reply.
Rick S
On Oct 27, 6:42 pm, stem cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rick S said Let's say someone gives an
great one. thanks.
On Oct 27, 6:32 pm, Liz Purkrabek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Jessica
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008 4:19 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [skeptics-145] Fwd: Enjoy the read!
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008
I don't think I can claim that I have arrived at the absolute truth. There
are things though that are absolutely bullshit, and no one can convince me
otherwise.
J.
By pinnacle of thought I mean that one believes they have arrived at
the absolute truth (and no one can convince them
Black is not red is not subjective it is objective, measurable, observable,
testable with instrumentation.
J.
“…Is truth not truth? Is it not all or nothing?…” – Stem
No.
There are subjective truths…including things like black is not red.
Truths based upon at least one person's
“…it seems to me it still will be subjective. For instance, what do
you mean by RED? It seems meaningless unless you provide a consistent
standard of what IS RED.” – Stem
Yes stem, all concepts are subjective. This includes the notion of
color and other sense organ things. We have a convention
“Black is not red is not subjective it is objective, measurable,
observable, testable with instrumentation.” – humanis
The topic was truth. I merely gave an example of something that is
‘true’, but since it is relative, it is subjective. The very term red
is a learned concept. It is a word and
Red is a word used to refer to a light wavelength of about 650 nm. Whether
you can see it or not or whether it looks purple to you does not change the
wavelength. We use different words to refer to different wavelengths for
simplicity sake. Red is red regardless of ones perception of it.
Orn said Convention. Agreed upon.
‘truth’...
That still does not tell me what truth is other than what someone
says it is. A majority might DISbelieve evolution but that does not
make it false.
Orn said By know, I mean have direct experience rather than a
shared
notion of what a word means.
55 matches
Mail list logo
