So cowardly of me to admit that part of my argument is weak. Totally not as brave as you continuing to lie about your understanding of 'categorical'.bolded for cowardice
Sorry, I didn't say it there. I responded to the rest of your post. But sure, I can address it again. First, I still don't know why you keep bringing up mutual exclusivity. Second, I said why Kant's view of 'categorical' could be in line with those Greek philosophers, because 'categorical' as "absolute" is part of Greek just like it is in German and English. Third, don't get it twisted. 'Categorical' is related to 'categories' and has been for years. No one's arguing that. However, that doesn't mean that 'categorical imperative' means "an imperative to categorize". It doesn't, and you won't find any reliable source that suggests that. Everything else you've been doing has been trying to justify that belief. Your quote just confirms that.It's not my fault that you cannot keep up with the argument. I will now quote the same ing quote that I have been saying for two days now and that somehow is not considered in the above yet subsumes all of it.
You mock the very scientific method you use to refute all theism. If you cannot take your process seriously, you have zero right to use it to refute those that are genuinely working the process. Of course we cannot say "because there is water, there is life on mars" as only one of the conditions have thus far been met. So why keep looking there? Simple... that is only a piece to the puzzle of extraterrestrial life and we continue to look for new pieces.
Problems with "categorical" similar to problems I had with a few when I said a certain religious book was written in an allegorical style of writing common back then, but not so much nowadays.
Some here still wanted to pin me down to a "black or white" definition rather than see most of the gray.
if a scientist right now said "there is life on mars! i found water, therefore there is life" he'd be mocked in the scientific community. i never said we should stop looking, but it would be an extraordinary claim to make
So it is wrong to form a hypothesis that life exists on Mars based on evidence gathered.
That is all that statement is. A hypothesis, it has yet to be proven.
Since you mock the hypothesis, you are mocking the process.
it's not wrong to form a hypothesis. the hypothesis needs to be tested before it becomes accepted. THAT is the scientific method.
merely saying "there is water" is not sufficient in demonstrating life. perhaps a sample, a fossil, even some complex organic molecules. something
1. Ask a question.
2. Do background research.
3. FORM A HYPOTHESIS
4. Test the hypothesis
5. Analyze and conclude
6. Communicate results
This is the scientific method. I reject your description of the scientific method. You sir are mocking the process of scientific method.
Last edited by xellos88330; 10-31-2014 at 11:32 PM.
Quoted myself....
Last edited by xellos88330; 10-31-2014 at 11:31 PM.
So you think that saying:
Means that? You are a cowardly piece of because you dissemble as a matter of course. Example from the previous post:
and then of course you go further:
So you knew that I looked it up but you knew that I didn't.
You knew the word didn't mean 'of categories' but you really did and were just trolling.
You are a deceitful piece of . There really is not two ways about it. When its put in your face you dissemble more like your alter ego, xmas.
Let me know how you intend on experimenting the existence of God. Making untestable hypothesis and passing it off as science is fun I guess.
It is clear you should have prepared for this internet argument more.So you think that saying:
Means that? You are a cowardly piece of because you dissemble as a matter of course. Example from the previous post:
and then of course you go further:
So you knew that I looked it up but you knew that I didn't.
You knew the word didn't mean 'of categories' but you really did and were just trolling.
You are a deceitful piece of . There really is not two ways about it. When its put in your face you dissemble more like your alter ego, xmas.
The peanut gallery is great. None of you guys ever have anything constructive to say. I get that I am cynic myself but you guys guys are a bunch of nihilist dimwits. Talk about guns or how minorities are responsible for crime then yeah but don't you dare try and talk smart. A true tribute to the stupid.
There are three of you lackwits that chimed in on the categories debate before I finally had to post the what was to me very obvious in the actual definition of the word. You people's reading skills suck.
When I was in kindergarten our teacher had these screw cabinets that they put all the various suffix's and prefix's into and that is how I learned how to learn words. That was the first time I remember learning about the specific subject at hand.
I'm just writing what comes to mind for the most part. I can talk about asymptotes and convolution all day too. I picked that up in college.
At the end, how can you really say that considering how you spend your time at the political forum? You are one to often cite articles that you don't understand or where the headline mislead you as to content as you spam your google/email/fb/rss.
This thread is a train wreck, but the long and short of it appears to be that chinook has done some ridiculous mental gymnastics in order to justify his default belief in god, then claims that anybody that hasn't done that same "work" is lazy. Meh.
nobody is saying the 995 shouldn't do without their beliefs. In this example, I'm just saying the 995 need to keep their beliefs out of the public school curriculum.
What if your Christian kid was one of the five in the 1000 kid public school where the Muslim teacher told everyone to pray to Allah each morning?
You're not even giving the time mark where he might be discussing the points you find riveting.2. I have provided you the paper and the video with the points of the person who DOES know the subject as he is more qualified than myself (it is also not my personal revalation so I take no credit from it). Apparently, my incapability to explain it myself makes the entire segment on geometric time irrelevant. Because logic my ass.
It's illogical to expect anyone to sit through an hour and a half YouTube to try to find them.
If you watched that video I posted, you can see that there are theists that are currently trying to test or develop tests to test such a hypothesis. I guess making assumptions that the existence of God will never be able to be tested is fun I guess.
1. It is the same as the answer above. I would send my child to a Christian school as there are many Christian schools available. I also wouldn't really mind sending my child to a Muslim school. It is a great opportunity to learn and understand a different faith. My child will become educated in the beliefs of another faith and will learn how to treat them with respect and love without any bias.
2. It is around the 1 hour and 7 minute mark. It is also illogical to debate without hearing the entire argument. I also wonder how you can have time to debate for pages, but not have time to sit through an hour and a half youtube video.
Last edited by xellos88330; 11-01-2014 at 10:24 AM.
How exactly are they trying to test the existence of god?
Sounds like he's just feeding sheep some garbage to eat up
I said "public school"
It's taking me +/- 20 seconds to read your post and type a response.2. It is around the 1 hour and 7 minute mark. It is also illogical to debate without hearing the entire argument. I also wonder how you can have time to debate for pages, but not have time to sit through an hour and a half youtube video.
if you don't want to discuss your YouTube, what makes you think anyone else wants to do it for you?
The beginning of the universe is being tested. God created the universe. Since everything in the universe is being tested, every test is testing God.
I knew this would be the reaction. Hence why I was so adamant that you watch the video in it's entirety.Sounds like he's just feeding sheep some garbage to eat up
I also stated that I wouldn't mind sending my child to a Muslim school.
Since you are reading all of my posts, I also sent the pdf of geometric time. You clearly have time to read don't you? Or should I just compile it into a picture for you.It's taking me +/- 20 seconds to read your post and type a response.
if you don't want to discuss your YouTube, what makes you think anyone else wants to do it for you?
there's not one test out there that will ever be able to test the existence of God.
"ah damn.....you guys found me finally"
sorry but nobody is going to discuss your video for you.I knew this would be the reaction. Hence why I was so adamant that you watch the video in it's entirety.
Well your 995 to 5 ratio only matters in a public school setting, not the private school.
You do understand the difference between private and public schools?
make a direct argument based on your pdf. I don't want to spend time guessing what your argument is.Since you are reading all of my posts, I also sent the pdf of geometric time. You clearly have time to read don't you? Or should I just compile it into a picture for you.
You do realize you are arguing, not debating, with blake and fuzzy, don't you?
Neither one has any interest in debating, never did and never will.
Their sole interest is to make fun of you and ridicule your beliefs i.e. troll you, that is their MO on here and nothing else.
You should just ignore any reply from either of them because that is the sum total of what in essence they are doing to you and to chinook, or any of us for that matter.
And you will never convince them of anything, it would be easier to convince chump is wrong about something!
However if you want a fun competent informative substantive debate, then pick someone like chinook or a few others like spurraider.
They have definite views that are different than yours and will concede points that they logically see when seen and make others as long as you remain open minded.
1. Public school is only an option. You understand what an option is right? It does not matter if it is public, private or home. School is school. If public schools were Muslim, I wouldn't care. If private schools were Muslim, I still wouldn't care. Is exploring the options available to you really that hard to do? My argument isn't confined to just a public school. It is based on school in general. If the children were in a private school with one dominant religion, wouldn't the cir stances still be the same? You still have a 5 children who are of a minority faith or belief.
2. The argument is that there are limits to how time functions in our linear timeline. You cannot reverse and it doesn't repeat, has beginning and has end as space time theorums indicate. This requires some kind of cause. In geometric time, there is no beginning and there is no end. The necessity of creation no longer exists within the dimensions of geometric time as unlike our universe, things do not require a cause to exist. Therefore God could dwell within geometric time and affect the physical universe as we know it. That is the argument Dr. Ross was making using scientific evidences to explain how God could exist before the big bang and not require creation himself.
Last edited by xellos88330; 11-01-2014 at 02:11 PM.
I understand what you are saying, but I actually do enjoy this kind of thing. It is almost like a morning cup of coffee for me.You do realize you are arguing, not debating, with blake and fuzzy, don't you?
Neither one has any interest in debating, never did and never will.
Their sole interest is to make fun of you and ridicule your beliefs i.e. troll you, that is their MO on here and nothing else.
You should just ignore any reply from either of them because that is the sum total of what in essence they are doing to you and to chinook, or any of us for that matter.
And you will never convince them of anything, it would be easier to convince chump is wrong about something!
However if you want a fun competent informative substantive debate, then pick someone like chinook or a few others like spurraider.
They have definite views that are different than yours and will concede points that they logically see when seen and make others as long as you remain open minded.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
