|
United States15536 Posts
On April 11 2015 03:33 mordek wrote:
The Last of Us intro... my dad feels...
This is what Wave was talking about.
Shit hurt for everyone though.
But probably you juicy guys more though.
On April 11 2015 03:40 WaveofShadow wrote:
I think I need to quit OT
This is the wavebait I am most ashamed of starting, despite the actual somewhat tolerant and intellectual nature of most of the posting as of late.
You can't quit now bby.
|
Czech Republic11293 Posts
On April 11 2015 03:33 wei2coolman wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2015 03:26 jcarlsoniv wrote:On April 11 2015 03:16 wei2coolman wrote:On April 11 2015 03:15 ComaDose wrote:On April 11 2015 03:02 Numy wrote:On April 11 2015 02:56 Scip wrote:On April 11 2015 02:48 Numy wrote:On April 11 2015 02:33 Scip wrote:
Well, the position you find yourself in is a fairly common one Numy. Nobody can disprove the existence of deities unless they are logically impossible (in which case we have a good reason to reject the possibility of their existence) or unless they can be demonstrated to be false.
As for the rest of logically possible but unfalsifiable deities, they are non-scientific claims of what I would argue to be dubious usefulness and live my life without worship. That is the position you'd find the modern atheist writers defending. What may be the difference between our positions is how probable we think that an unknown supernatural (nevermind what supernatural is even supposed to mean) "force" exists. Or it may be we are in the exact same position. I think you're on the right track honestly just as you said slightly different positions. Deities have their uses if they push in the right direction I feel even if they may not exist. A deity that tells people to be good, rational and kind hearted individuals would be one I could get behind regardless of my view on the existence of it. Also if deities do exist then it stands to reason that superpowers exist too so no way I'm not keeping that possibility open :D What about a person who tells people to be good, rational and kind hearted? You don't need to invoke the divine or the supernatural to either suggest or demand that others act in accordance with those rules. I would even say that invoking the divine (and, presumably, the possible punishments or rewards the deity offers) to assert these are rules one should live by is less honest, less effective and less permanent than engaging in an honest philosophical discussion of what kind of society we want to live in. It's human nature to turn to worship. how do you figure this? bonus bible bash: + Show Spoiler +the bible says bastards cant go in to a church.. but jesus was born out of marriage hahaha don't you know? you're married to god first and foremost. In the last several pages of surprisingly intelligent and thoughtful religious discussion, all of your posts have just stood out as a massive shit pile. I wish I could put you on thread ignore. in readings of the bible, it's a common interpretation that Christians are married to god/christ, i don't understand your butthurt. Show nested quote +On April 11 2015 03:31 Scip wrote:On April 11 2015 03:02 Numy wrote:On April 11 2015 02:56 Scip wrote:On April 11 2015 02:48 Numy wrote:On April 11 2015 02:33 Scip wrote:
Well, the position you find yourself in is a fairly common one Numy. Nobody can disprove the existence of deities unless they are logically impossible (in which case we have a good reason to reject the possibility of their existence) or unless they can be demonstrated to be false.
As for the rest of logically possible but unfalsifiable deities, they are non-scientific claims of what I would argue to be dubious usefulness and live my life without worship. That is the position you'd find the modern atheist writers defending. What may be the difference between our positions is how probable we think that an unknown supernatural (nevermind what supernatural is even supposed to mean) "force" exists. Or it may be we are in the exact same position. I think you're on the right track honestly just as you said slightly different positions. Deities have their uses if they push in the right direction I feel even if they may not exist. A deity that tells people to be good, rational and kind hearted individuals would be one I could get behind regardless of my view on the existence of it. Also if deities do exist then it stands to reason that superpowers exist too so no way I'm not keeping that possibility open :D What about a person who tells people to be good, rational and kind hearted? You don't need to invoke the divine or the supernatural to either suggest or demand that others act in accordance with those rules. I would even say that invoking the divine (and, presumably, the possible punishments or rewards the deity offers) to assert these are rules one should live by is less honest, less effective and less permanent than engaging in an honest philosophical discussion of what kind of society we want to live in. It's human nature to turn to worship so even if you just follow a person that tells other people those things eventually that person over time will get deified in some kind of way. Unless we as human beings evolve to a point where we stop doing these things I believe there's some merit in a benevolent deity that tells people to do those things. Ideally people shouldn't need such things but it seems that we aren't quite ready for that unfortunately. Over time if such a deity also pushes for open education then maybe society will start to change to a point where we realize we may not need this deity anymore. That'll be rather cool. As for your morality point I can't really say here. I don't feel I have an adequate grasp on morality as a whole to really put forward a discussion/viewpoint properly. While the previous point does tie into morality it doesn't really deal so much with it as a concept so I don't feel wrong talking about it. It's not my nature to turn to worship and I don't think it's your nature either. If you will forgive me it seems a bit patronizing to say that all these unwashed, uneducated masses need a deity to act morally. I mean, if I can use phyvo or mordek as examples, I'd say they would be perfectly capable of and willing to act morally even without their faith (and I think we can clearly see a lot of signs of them using their own moral compass to judge the scripture, rather than the other way around). I might not be able to positively assert that religion doesn't make people behave better, but unless you can provide some large and good studies proving you right, I don't think you can assert the opposite either. I also think we should distinguish between worship of a deity and an "worshipping" a popular idol. There are some stark differences between them. The popular idol usually isn't portrayed as (a very powerful) authority on morality, they aren't assigned any supernatural powers (and don't conflict with empiricism in such a way) and their basic existence can be demonstrated. while it might not be the most intellectually honest way of quelling the masses, it's not necessarily an immoral one. and using 5-0 and mordek is a poor example, as i'm pretty sure they're far more intelligent than the average person.
If not claiming that it's necessary, you certainly claimed it's possible. Which is again a claim I consider unacceptable unless you can provide a good enough study that supports that claim.
|
On April 11 2015 03:44 Ketara wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2015 03:43 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On April 11 2015 03:41 ComaDose wrote:On April 11 2015 03:38 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On April 11 2015 03:34 ComaDose wrote: I'm anti-most-organized-religions but i think Taoism is alright but even they did the whole animal sacrifice bit. So you don't believe in ejaculation and would like to redirect semen into your brain? dont just my fetish + Show Spoiler +evidently there is more to it than the Tao Te Ching and i am ignorant. the hunt for an acceptable faith group continues! On April 11 2015 03:40 WaveofShadow wrote:
I think I need to quit OT
This is the wavebait I am most ashamed of starting, despite the actual somewhat tolerant and intellectual nature of most of the posting as of late.
huh why? this seems pretty fine no? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taoist_sexual_practices#Male_control_of_ejaculation :3 Oh Asia, you so crazy.
As opposed to western doctrines regarding sexual practices?
BTW, graham crackers are disgusting
On April 11 2015 03:45 Scip wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2015 03:33 wei2coolman wrote:On April 11 2015 03:26 jcarlsoniv wrote:On April 11 2015 03:16 wei2coolman wrote:On April 11 2015 03:15 ComaDose wrote:On April 11 2015 03:02 Numy wrote:On April 11 2015 02:56 Scip wrote:On April 11 2015 02:48 Numy wrote:On April 11 2015 02:33 Scip wrote:
Well, the position you find yourself in is a fairly common one Numy. Nobody can disprove the existence of deities unless they are logically impossible (in which case we have a good reason to reject the possibility of their existence) or unless they can be demonstrated to be false.
As for the rest of logically possible but unfalsifiable deities, they are non-scientific claims of what I would argue to be dubious usefulness and live my life without worship. That is the position you'd find the modern atheist writers defending. What may be the difference between our positions is how probable we think that an unknown supernatural (nevermind what supernatural is even supposed to mean) "force" exists. Or it may be we are in the exact same position. I think you're on the right track honestly just as you said slightly different positions. Deities have their uses if they push in the right direction I feel even if they may not exist. A deity that tells people to be good, rational and kind hearted individuals would be one I could get behind regardless of my view on the existence of it. Also if deities do exist then it stands to reason that superpowers exist too so no way I'm not keeping that possibility open :D What about a person who tells people to be good, rational and kind hearted? You don't need to invoke the divine or the supernatural to either suggest or demand that others act in accordance with those rules. I would even say that invoking the divine (and, presumably, the possible punishments or rewards the deity offers) to assert these are rules one should live by is less honest, less effective and less permanent than engaging in an honest philosophical discussion of what kind of society we want to live in. It's human nature to turn to worship. how do you figure this? bonus bible bash: + Show Spoiler +the bible says bastards cant go in to a church.. but jesus was born out of marriage hahaha don't you know? you're married to god first and foremost. In the last several pages of surprisingly intelligent and thoughtful religious discussion, all of your posts have just stood out as a massive shit pile. I wish I could put you on thread ignore. in readings of the bible, it's a common interpretation that Christians are married to god/christ, i don't understand your butthurt. On April 11 2015 03:31 Scip wrote:On April 11 2015 03:02 Numy wrote:On April 11 2015 02:56 Scip wrote:On April 11 2015 02:48 Numy wrote:On April 11 2015 02:33 Scip wrote:
Well, the position you find yourself in is a fairly common one Numy. Nobody can disprove the existence of deities unless they are logically impossible (in which case we have a good reason to reject the possibility of their existence) or unless they can be demonstrated to be false.
As for the rest of logically possible but unfalsifiable deities, they are non-scientific claims of what I would argue to be dubious usefulness and live my life without worship. That is the position you'd find the modern atheist writers defending. What may be the difference between our positions is how probable we think that an unknown supernatural (nevermind what supernatural is even supposed to mean) "force" exists. Or it may be we are in the exact same position. I think you're on the right track honestly just as you said slightly different positions. Deities have their uses if they push in the right direction I feel even if they may not exist. A deity that tells people to be good, rational and kind hearted individuals would be one I could get behind regardless of my view on the existence of it. Also if deities do exist then it stands to reason that superpowers exist too so no way I'm not keeping that possibility open :D What about a person who tells people to be good, rational and kind hearted? You don't need to invoke the divine or the supernatural to either suggest or demand that others act in accordance with those rules. I would even say that invoking the divine (and, presumably, the possible punishments or rewards the deity offers) to assert these are rules one should live by is less honest, less effective and less permanent than engaging in an honest philosophical discussion of what kind of society we want to live in. It's human nature to turn to worship so even if you just follow a person that tells other people those things eventually that person over time will get deified in some kind of way. Unless we as human beings evolve to a point where we stop doing these things I believe there's some merit in a benevolent deity that tells people to do those things. Ideally people shouldn't need such things but it seems that we aren't quite ready for that unfortunately. Over time if such a deity also pushes for open education then maybe society will start to change to a point where we realize we may not need this deity anymore. That'll be rather cool. As for your morality point I can't really say here. I don't feel I have an adequate grasp on morality as a whole to really put forward a discussion/viewpoint properly. While the previous point does tie into morality it doesn't really deal so much with it as a concept so I don't feel wrong talking about it. It's not my nature to turn to worship and I don't think it's your nature either. If you will forgive me it seems a bit patronizing to say that all these unwashed, uneducated masses need a deity to act morally. I mean, if I can use phyvo or mordek as examples, I'd say they would be perfectly capable of and willing to act morally even without their faith (and I think we can clearly see a lot of signs of them using their own moral compass to judge the scripture, rather than the other way around). I might not be able to positively assert that religion doesn't make people behave better, but unless you can provide some large and good studies proving you right, I don't think you can assert the opposite either. I also think we should distinguish between worship of a deity and an "worshipping" a popular idol. There are some stark differences between them. The popular idol usually isn't portrayed as (a very powerful) authority on morality, they aren't assigned any supernatural powers (and don't conflict with empiricism in such a way) and their basic existence can be demonstrated. while it might not be the most intellectually honest way of quelling the masses, it's not necessarily an immoral one. and using 5-0 and mordek is a poor example, as i'm pretty sure they're far more intelligent than the average person. If not claiming that it's necessary, you certainly claimed it's possible. Which is again a claim I consider unacceptable unless you can provide a good enough study that supports that claim.
the problem is, even if you created a list of moral codes of which majority of people are to abide by, they would take it as face value, without actually thinking about it.
which leads to the question, what's the difference? at least story time makes the rules easier to remember.
|
On April 11 2015 03:43 onlywonderboy wrote:One of the best intros and one of the best endings of any game. I just watched it again on Youtube earlier and it still gives me shivers.
Yeah I posted about that a couple days ago. I can't watch any more of it.
And I started it with the passover comment.
No there's nothing wrong with most of the conversation.
|
graham crackers are delicious as smores or in lemon squares.
|
OMG HE'S RIGHT IT WAS A WAVEBAIT
Well done, sir.
|
Czech Republic11293 Posts
On April 11 2015 03:47 WaveofShadow wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2015 03:43 onlywonderboy wrote:On April 11 2015 03:33 mordek wrote:
The Last of Us intro... my dad feels... One of the best intros and one of the best endings of any game. I just watched it again on Youtube earlier and it still gives me shivers. Yeah I posted about that a couple days ago. I can't watch any more of it. And I started it with the passover comment. No there's nothing wrong with most of the conversation.
You still didn't care to explain to us the symbolic meaning of the passover, despite that being the main point of the discussion in the first place.
You can keep arguing that people will keep creating their deities so promiscuously that theism will stay with us forever regardless of what anyone does, but that is besides all the points I've made in this discussion so far.
|
On April 11 2015 03:47 WaveofShadow wrote:
Yeah I posted about that a couple days ago. I can't watch any more of it.
And I started it with the passover comment.
No there's nothing wrong with most of the conversation.
It's okay He's a good dad.
|
Lets get back off topic for a bit.
WHEN THE FUCK IS MOONBEAR SINGING AND WHAT IS HE SINGING EPPA.
|
When I decide to find the poll Ill give an answer.
|
France45622 Posts
On April 11 2015 03:31 Scip wrote:
I also think we should distinguish between worship of a deity and an "worshipping" a popular idol. There are some stark differences between them. The popular idol usually isn't portrayed as (a very powerful) authority on morality, they aren't assigned any supernatural powers (and don't conflict with empiricism in such a way) and their basic existence can be demonstrated.
See, apart from the obvious (and extreme) case of celebrities directly telling their fans what to do/think (in which case it's kinda a guru), where do you position celebrities using their fame to raise awareness to a particular cause (usually diseases and stuff like that, sure, but not limited to)?
When a celebrity participates in a surge of popularity for some product because they did an ad for it, which part do you attribute to the product (and the fact that it's being marketed), and which part to the celebrities' impact on his/her fans watching the ad?
Depending on your definition, I'd say the "authority on morality" part is quite debatable.  Of course you added "very powerful" so there's that.
|
On April 11 2015 03:48 Scip wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2015 03:47 WaveofShadow wrote:On April 11 2015 03:43 onlywonderboy wrote:On April 11 2015 03:33 mordek wrote:
The Last of Us intro... my dad feels... One of the best intros and one of the best endings of any game. I just watched it again on Youtube earlier and it still gives me shivers. Yeah I posted about that a couple days ago. I can't watch any more of it. And I started it with the passover comment. No there's nothing wrong with most of the conversation. You still didn't care to explain to us the symbolic meaning of the passover, despite that being the main point of the discussion in the first place. You can keep arguing that people will create their deities so promiscuously that theism will stay with us forever regardless of what anyone does, but that is besides all the points I've made in this discussion so far.
I never said I was going to explain the symbolic meaning behind passover itself. Despite going to a religious school my knowledge and commentary on the matter is far beneath what I would have been able to explain years ago, and I acknowledge my own shortcomings in being unable to defend my faith, though it doesn't change my feeling that I shouldn't have to.
|
United States15536 Posts
On April 11 2015 03:49 Cixah wrote:
Lets get back off topic for a bit.
WHEN THE FUCK IS MOONBEAR SINGING AND WHAT IS HE SINGING EPPA.
I have a feeling that seeing this will be a religious experience in and of itself.
So really we're still on topic.
|
On April 11 2015 03:52 Eppa! wrote:
When I decide to find the poll Ill give an answer.
Cool. Should figure it out before the next splits starts tho LOL.
|
Was waiting for the discussion to calm down a little, as I didn't want to randomly interject in such serious topics, but I've literally been forced to read "Kingdom Come" by my comic book podcasting friends, and damn, this makes me want to read more and more DC comics.
Only DC/Marvel comics I've read have been "Civil War", "Batman Year One", "Dark Knight Returns", "Batman Killing Joke", and I tried reading "Batman/Robin Allstars", but that one left a really bad taste in my mouth.
But yea, Kingdom Come is amazing.
|
On April 11 2015 03:59 sung_moon wrote:
Was waiting for the discussion to calm down a little, as I didn't want to randomly interject in such serious topics, but I've literally been forced to read "Kingdom Come" by my comic book podcasting friends, and damn, this makes me want to read more and more DC comics.
Only DC/Marvel comics I've read have been "Civil War", "Batman Year One", "Dark Knight Returns", "Batman Killing Joke", and I tried reading "Batman/Robin Allstars", but that one left a really bad taste in my mouth.
But yea, Kingdom Come is amazing.
on the DC side the long halloweens pretty good if you can excuse a plot that doesn't make a lot of sense (its well written its just when you think about it you realise how ridiculous it is.)
also i think all star superman is supposed to be amazing.
|
Sung moon you can talk to me about MTG :D
|
lol wave you surely learned one or two tricks from me 
|
I've had the same people recommend I read that and Hush as well. I'll probably check it out tomorrow.
I'd love to talk about MTG Wave, but I get the feeling you are getting into Limited/Sealed, while I've literally been only playing Modern since I've slowly allowed the paper crack back in my system. I've always loved Limited however, and I do want to slowly start drafting again.
edit: I really do want to read about these other DC superheroes (hell, even non mainstream comics I'd be down to read), but when I start reading a Superman/Green Lantern comic that I'm sure is amazing, halfway through, I'm hoping Batman will randomly come in.
I felt this way when watching Suicide Squad. I know its not all about Batman, but I kept hoping I'd see more of him. The animated movie was amazing, and I have high hopes for the live action.
|
Speaking of Comics, Daredevil is out on Netflix and my buddy texted me to tell me how awesome episode 1 was. I think I'll make the Otter watch it with me tonight.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
