Searching for GOD...

[Maeght]

Not enough, evidently.

Amazing isn't it

[Shaker]

Amazing isn't it

No ... not after this many years, it isn't It's dully, hugely predictable and immensely boring. The only amazing thing about it is that even now, still, we keep hearing the same shitty, fallacy-riddled pseudo-arguments from those without sufficient brain cells to rub together to know when the would-be arguments they advance are a large pile of soiled underwear.

That, I concede, continually amazes me. Not a lot else does.

[Alan Burns]

A fat lot of good that is.  The best a supreme being can do is to incarnate himself into an obscure backwater of the Roman Empire and tell a bunch of illiterate fisherman that he's God and to go spread the message by word of mouth.

But it worked!

Hardly cuts it by modern standards of evidence you know, strictly for those eager to believe but hardly compelling for anyone with critical faculties.

In his riches, man lacks wisdom Psalm 49

[ProfessorDavey]

But it worked!

Really - hardly very successful when god has failed to convince vast numbers of people that he even exists.

In his riches, man lacks wisdom Psalm 49

A quote translated from another language and written by a man - what exactly is that supposed to prove.

[Shaker]

But it worked

What do you consider to constitute "worked"? Because I'm already fairly certain that your definition of working doesn't correspond with mine.

Feel free to pretend you never even saw this question about your beliefs. That's the Burns way, isn't it.

[Shaker]

A quote translated from another language and written by a man - what exactly is that supposed to prove.

Nothing. It means nothing at all.

[ProfessorDavey]

No anything is a positive assertion and therefore carries a burden of proof.

Rubbish - or we'd all spend our whole lives having to prove things we don't believe exist, which is, of course, an endless list.

Nope the burden is entirely on those who claim that something does exist to provide the proof.

[Gordon]

But it worked!

Nope - it failed.

In his riches, man lacks wisdom Psalm 49

I'm walking backwards for Christmas. The Goons.

[Shaker]

I'm walking backwards for Christmas. The Goons.

Bitch 

[ProfessorDavey]

Nothing. It means nothing at all.

Actually I don't think it means nothing - it is a rather common type of 'philosophical quote' - effectively that individuals may become blinded by material things and lose sight of what is most important - i.e. lose their wisdom.

But is no more or less meaningful that countless other philosophical quotes along similar lines. The bible is actually full of rather memorable quotes (just as Shakespear is too), but that doesn't mean it is anything other than a series of books written by men many many years ago.

[Alan Burns]

Did you see what the elephants did?

They did not just react, they solved the problem because they made a moral decision.

Elephants, along with dolphins, whales and monkeys, are known to be intelligent creatures.  So it is a perfectly natural response to use their intelligence to follow their instinctive goal and save a baby elephant from drowning.

What would surprise me is an animal making a conscious decision not to follow its own instincts.

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

Elephants, along with dolphins, whales and monkeys, are known to be intelligent creatures.  So it is a perfectly natural response to use their intelligence to follow their instinctive goal and save a baby elephant from drowning.

What would surprise me is an animal making a conscious decision not to follow its own instincts.

What "instincts" do you think our species uniquely "consciously" do "not follow"?

[ProfessorDavey]

But God is not hidden.  He revealed Himself in the form of Jesus Christ

Sure - and Thor reveals himself through the thunder and lightning that is flashing and crashing outside my window at this very moment.

[Shaker]

Sure - and Thor reveals himself through the thunder and lightning that is flashing and crashing outside my window at this very moment.

Ooh, you jammy bugger.

[ProfessorDavey]

Ooh, you jammy bugger.

Thunder and lightning stopped now. Does that mean Thor is now dead, or that I am no longer part of his special plan.

[ProfessorDavey]

Thunder and lightning stopped now. Does that mean Thor is now dead, or that I am no longer part of his special plan.

Thor is back again.

[Sebastian Toe]

Elephants, along with dolphins, whales and monkeys, are known to be intelligent creatures.  So it is a perfectly natural response to use their intelligence to follow their instinctive goal and save a baby elephant from drowning.

What would surprise me is an animal making a conscious decision not to follow its own instincts.

The rescue involved planning and cooperation though. Is that instinctive also?

[Sassy]

That's because you're about as up to speed with what a logical fallacy is as he is. Which is to say, not at all.

EXCUSES AND EVASION NOT AN ANSWER

[torridon]

Elephants, along with dolphins, whales and monkeys, are known to be intelligent creatures.  So it is a perfectly natural response to use their intelligence to follow their instinctive goal and save a baby elephant from drowning.

What would surprise me is an animal making a conscious decision not to follow its own instincts.

All behaviours can be classed as either instinctive or learned; just to remind you, the Alaskan bear for instance does not instinctively know how to catch salmon swimming upriver, it is a skill that requires a process of conscious learning from its parents. It has an instinct to follow its parents and learn from them and so do humans.  This phenomenon is far more extended in humans, but it is not unique to humans.

[floo]

EXCUSES AND EVASION NOT AN ANSWER

Talking about yourself again, dear?

[Alan Burns]

How is that anything different from what I said?

If we use words to represent what our soul perceives then the soul must communicate that to the brain mustn't it?

How does the soul interpret what it perceives and decide what words to use ?

Any form of "meaning" is a conscious phenomenon, not a reaction, and exists in our conscious awareness (our soul).  Our soul perceives the information contained in the brain and forms meaning from it.  Our soul then interacts with the brain to enable it to express this conscious meaning into words.

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

Any form of "meaning" is a conscious phenomenon, not a reaction, and exists in our conscious awareness (our soul).  Our soul perceives the information contained in the brain and forms meaning from it.  Our soul then interacts with the brain to enable it to express this conscious meaning into words.

All you've done there is to repeat (again) your original logically incoherent, ill-defined, un-argued and evidence free-assertion. When asked why you believe it, you've made various attempts to validate the claim that are hopeless – either because the reasoning fails or because the assertions are ignorant of the facts we do have (for example about animal behaviour).

When then bother? If others find the claim to be idiotic for reasons they explain and that you never address, what do you hope to achieve by just repeating your opinions?   

[ekim]

Any form of "meaning" is a conscious phenomenon, not a reaction, and exists in our conscious awareness (our soul).  Our soul perceives the information contained in the brain and forms meaning from it.  Our soul then interacts with the brain to enable it to express this conscious meaning into words.

Where does the notion of Heaven and Hell fit into this idea, where there is no living brain nor sensory apparatus?

[bluehillside Retd.]

ekim,

Where does the notion of Heaven and Hell fit into this idea, where there is no living brain nor sensory apparatus?

Now that's a good question. If AB's "soul" clocks off in Heaven & Hell, absent the little magic man how do we derive "meaning" from the endless supply of Waitrose plain chocolate-coated ginger biscuits in one, or the prod of the toasting fork in the other?

I suspect you'll find that, like so much else, he hasn't "quite got all the details worked out yet" 

[BeRational]

Elephants, along with dolphins, whales and monkeys, are known to be intelligent creatures.  So it is a perfectly natural response to use their intelligence to follow their instinctive goal and save a baby elephant from drowning.

What would surprise me is an animal making a conscious decision not to follow its own instincts.

So you accept they have empathy, and some notion of 'right' and 'wrong'.
They are intelligent and can solve problems just like we can.

But we are really special though?