This one is a bit silly, too. None of you have drawn a single conclusion about myself that is not Palinist (ignorant, reactionary, superstitious, and based in absurd faith).
http://niggerwise.com On Nov 4, 6:16 pm, stem cell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thanks for the thoughts (and the time you spent looking in to this) > However, I wanted to get your thoughts on naturalism...as discussed in > the podcast with John Shook. I am just getting in to the literature. > The link I provided onwww.naturalism.orgis a new find so when I > heard of the podcast on Point of Inquiry my interest peaked. > > I would like to address some points you made. > > Orn. said >>> Oh, I have learned in > different contexts how cruel it is to play with people who hold such > beliefs, so I seldom engage in such activity. <<< > > With this I totally agree. I tend to shy away from "taking away one's > faith", which most believers "believe" a nontheist skeptic is out to > do. To each thier own. I tend to think that methodological natualism > is the best tool humans can use for an objective explaination of > what's out there. The reason being...because it works. > > On Nov 4, 6:01 pm, ornamentalmind <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > stem, assuming that this is what you wanted me to listen to: > > >http://www.centerforinquiry.net/mp3_stream/myWimpy.html > > > I listened to as much as I could and skipped to the end to see the > > conclusion. > > > Thoughts: I had forgotten how, in my youth, I was fascinated with Erik > > Weisz. I now even remember studying most written about his attempts at > > such communication, prior and after death. In a way, my current > > skepticism is in part based on his work. Oh, I have learned in > > different contexts how cruel it is to play with people who hold such > > beliefs, so I seldom engage in such activity. > > > Anyway, over the decades, not only have I reached the same conclusion > > (no communication of this kind is possible between the dead and the > > living) but I’ve added a strong intuition for the same result. > > > All of this is the case even though almost ever culture has stories > > and myths about this type of communication. > > > I don’t know what else there is to discuss. > > > On Nov 4, 12:56 pm, ornamentalmind <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > IF you mean the mp3 from > > > here:http://www.pointofinquiry.org/the_12th_annual_cfi_houdini_seance/ > > > > I'll try to listen to it and respond. Overall, I consider the things > > > implied by the article there to be based in superstition, a form of > > > ignorance. > > > > On Nov 4, 12:25 pm, stem cell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > That link will take you to the Point of Inquiry pocast shows. There > > > > are episode titles there to choose from and the episode in question > > > > with Shook is 28th down from the podcast titled "The 12th annual CFI > > > > Houdini Seance". > > > > > stemcell > > > > > On Nov 4, 2:17 pm, stem cell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > I was listening to this podcast today and thought it would be a good > > > > > topic to discuss. I would like to get personal thoughts on this from > > > > > Orn. and Aaron. I hope this link goes through. Just FYI. More > > > > > information on this can be found atwww.naturalism.org. > > > > > >www.pointofinquiry.org/john_shook_naturalism_and_the_scientific_outlook/ > > > > > > stemcell- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memphis Freethought Alliance" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/memphisfreethoughtalliance?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
