Just stop the useless complaining.
POSTED BY: LostInTheVerse
UPDATED: Thursday, November 25, 2004 04:27
VIEWED: 24069
PAGE 14 of 17
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
SignyM and Sigmanuki - I feel lucky and honored to be included in your discourse.
And I feel lucky to have you involved. I have always enjoyed your posts in every thread that I have read that you posted to. They are informative and I don't remember a time when you've "lost it." It's unfortunate that I can't say the same about the latter for myself.
In short, I believe that history has said that yourself and SignyM have proved to provide calm intellegent discorse. This board is lucky to have you two involved with it
----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Calm (urkh!) intelligent (snicker!) rational (SNORT!)
YUP- THAT'S ME!! 
heheheheh
I'm too embarrassed to dredge up some of my less calm discussions... they're here somewhere... but they range from being tinged with arrogance through dripping with sarcasm all the way to foul-mouthed. But at least I can laugh over them!!
I noticed that Jasonzz hasn't answered my question. I hope it's just life getting in the way, I have an itch to hear what he has to say.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
@SignyM:
Oh, we've all had our... passionate moments
But, the fact of the matter is that you and Rue (among many other here. And hopefully I'm included here too) are capable of have such civilized discussions without flying off the handle every second post or so.
The former make this place a wonderful place to be. The latter on the other hand... don't.
I think it's just lucky that for the most part (at least from what I've seen) the former out number the latter. It's the reason why I've stuck around and have enjoyed myself here for so long. And why I expect this to continue for some time
May we all bask in the golden age of FFF.net
----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
There are a lot of people I treasure here, and you're one of them. That's why I keep coming back. Cheers to the FFF crew!!!!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Well, I fixed my comp: Yay me!
For starters: Damn did I hijack this thread. Sorry, it was not my intention.
To the science guys: Have you ever argued why Christianity is wrong to a fundie? It seems that Jason and I are having the same troubles here with you guys. Not that I really care. If you say science is not a religion, all the more power to you. I just can't prove anything if you will not try to see things from my side. (I am willing to call it impasse since I have better things to do.)
Religion changes, drastically and in a very short time. Off the top of my head: Rastafarianism (sp?) when Hallie Sallesi (sp?) died, Rastas had to spin that really quickly. Mormonism (LDS if you prefer) the death of Mr. Young brought a profound change to the religion. Judaism and the destruction of the Temple. Hell, the creation of the state of Israel is living proof of the change in religion.
In closing: our major problem is we have different definitions of things: religion; belief system, belief, truth, proof and so on. I have a feeling that this debate would be better over a nice pint of scotch in person, where the subtle nuances of differences can be explored before a (confusing) counter argument is made.
PS. This rivals the dreaded "fanvid thread" in length and has been so much nicer. Thanks guys.
-----------
"Societies are supported by human activity, therefore they are constantly threatened by the human facts of self-intrest and stupidity." --Peter Berger
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Hey TragicStory
Thanks for posting the word 'absolution'. Though I have to say I'm still gnawing on your post and trying to get it. I think you pro'ly used certain short-hand concepts, that I, not familiar with your field, don't follow. Too bad about your 'puter. I hope you can get back to this fine site soon.
Rue
I'm not sure if you saw this post so I thought I'd re-send a part of it. The original is a couple of posts up. I included an edited version of your post (those few posts above) b/c I wanted to point out the areas where I didn't understand your position. I really think it's b/c you come from a different background and use certain words and phrases in a way well-known to people from your background but unknown to me. So I was hoping you could flesh-out your positions (above) in different words so I could figure out what it was you meant. Could you do that for me?
And YAH to you for the computer fix!
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Wow, that is hard. I had PhDs teaching me for 4 years.
Let me see what I can do.
First, define religion: Write it down: Make sure it will include Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus Bhudists, Native Americans and what you think will be the "bare bones" they share in common.
post that and I will try to use your definition to prove that science qualifies.
Finally I would point to everyone to read "Sacred Santa" because it is a not so direct challenge to science, but to commercialism.
(Once again I must state that the argument goes on because of our differences in training and definitions, but to quote one of my fav. authors growing up: "If I turn this equation upside down, will everything fall downn. No? Then why should I care?")
-----------
"Societies are supported by human activity, therefore they are constantly threatened by the human facts of self-intrest and stupidity." --Peter Berger
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by TragicStory:
Well, I fixed my comp: Yay me!
For starters: Damn did I hijack this thread. Sorry, it was not my intention.
Always good to have a working machine. Welcome back!
And threads always tend to something different when the original topic is done with. To me, hijacking a thread is doing something like this when people are still talking about the original topic. Since I think that this wasn't the case, I'll say don't worry about it.
Quote:
Originally posted by TragicStory:
To the science guys: Have you ever argued why Christianity is wrong to a fundie? It seems that Jason and I are having the same troubles here with you guys. Not that I really care. If you say science is not a religion, all the more power to you. I just can't prove anything if you will not try to see things from my side. (I am willing to call it impasse since I have better things to do.)
Fundie? Do you mean fundamentalist?
And I *am* willing to see your side. I have already stated that I can see how people can see science as a religion (see above posts). But this *doesn't* make science a religion. It is a misnomer.
If you are refering to my conversation with Jasonzzz, I have found that Jasonzzz didn't read what I typed. For any number of examples, read my post and then what he *thought* I typed. There are radical differences. This is why I stopped talking to him. I have already stated other reasons for breaking communication with him and won't restate it here. See above if you are interested.
But, I must mention that this, "science is a religion", is only really found in the US. The people here (Canada) that I have spoken with, have never stated that science is a religion. That is unless they themselves are religous zealots. And since I, nor anyone I know, puts any weight on what a widely extreme person says, I (and they as well) discard this idea. I (and they) require calm logical discorse.
The people here, when people have stated that they are studying math and/or physics and/or etc. just get wide eyes and say, "You must be *smart*. I could never do that!" Of course they probably could, it's just a mental block most of the time. But the point is that they don't see it as a religous study, they see it as a difficult subject.
Basically, in the rest of the world (and from what my wife tells me it is even more so, in the direction that I defend) science is not perceived as anything of a religion. There are too many differences. I beleive that this perception that science is a religion comes from a lack of education and understanding of what science really is. Which is (from what I've learned about the "failed public education system" in the US) a problem in the US, and it must as well be mentioned that this is also becoming an issue elsewhere in the world.
Quote:
Originally posted by TragicStory:
Religion changes, drastically and in a very short time. Off the top of my head: Rastafarianism (sp?) when Hallie Sallesi (sp?) died, Rastas had to spin that really quickly. Mormonism (LDS if you prefer) the death of Mr. Young brought a profound change to the religion. Judaism and the destruction of the Temple. Hell, the creation of the state of Israel is living proof of the change in religion.
Well, I was speaking more in general terms. Yes, anything can change fast. It usually comes when something of an external stimulus forces them to do so.
I'll restate, a hopfully, clearer statement. Religion cannot change fast on its own.
For instance, how many times has Christanity gone under radical change? Or any significant change for that matter? Wasn't it the Catholics that just offically stated in the 1980's that the earth isn't the center of the universe and that it does revolve around the sun (or something equally rediculus)? I won't exactly consider this fast change.
Quote:
Originally posted by TragicStory:
In closing: our major problem is we have differentNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The conflict in this thread seems to boil down to the issue of orthodoxy. This is something that science and religion share. At all times there is an orthodoxy that seeks to maintain its power by defining heterodoxies. Heretics are dealt with in any number of ways from mere ostracization (as in the scientist who can’t get his paper published) to full on pogroms and inquisitions. There are indeed flourishing orthodoxies in modern science, just ask any chiropractor or psychic.
However, in its heart of hearts, we know Science is an investigation, entirely empirical in its methods. The problem is that modern, western science is predicated upon the assumption that there are only five senses. Other forms of investigation are scorned. Science has a very hard time acknowledging the very existence (let alone efficacy) of intuition. This is a limitation that Science has chosen because these first five senses are provable through scientific means. All other senses have thus far proven utterly elusive to its grasp.
The wise scientist, therefore, understands that this limitation is formal and not metaphysical. The wise scientist agrees with Hamlet that there are “more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of” in Science. The credulous (or if you will, religious) scientist does not. Because he cannot produce evidence of God in a petri dish he calls himself an atheist. He raises Science from a mere method or tool into a Cosmology, a kind of god in its own right.
So, though the ideal of Science may be free from orthodoxy and dogma, people (even people who call themselves scientists) are not always.
Of course religiosity all too often errs at the other extreme, untethering itself from what is commonsensical and obvious to sense and descending absolutely into mere fundamentalism. If you ask me, both extremes have done harm and impeded the developement of our species.
HKCavalier
Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
On the topic of Hijacking:
I think after the firestorm I started died down, this conversation quite naturally (if not somewhat strangely) emerged from the ashes. But as it was the natural evolution of the thread, I don't see it as a hijacking.
I actually never expected this thread to keep going as strong as it is, and I absolutely love the discussion it has become. Thanks to everyone involved for keeping it respectful and courteous, this is why I like this board so much.
Keep it coming everybody
~ Lost In The 'Verse
"About a year before we met, I spent 6 months on a moon where the primary form of recreation was juggling geese. My hand to god. Baby geese. Goslings. They were juggled!"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME