Free thinkers?
I constantly see the accusation on this forum of believers not having the ability to think for themselves. IE Think freely.
Does this imply, then, that ONLY non-believers, and atheists are the ONLY ones who are "free thinkers"?
What does free thinking mean to you, if you are one who says/thinks that?
Why are believers NOT free thinkers?
Free thinking, to me, is your ability to think what you want and not get upset when someone tells you your wrong. Which is the reason why I comment in the religion forums and everyone ignores what I write.
A free thinker, to me, is one who is curious, does his own, independent study and based on "reason'" creates logical concepts, opinions and beliefs upon which to guide his life.
I think that the "religious," represent the opposite definition of free thinking.
Qwark
PS I changed it for you Jachs..
:no such thing as "logical reasoning". It is either "logic" or it is "reasoning".
and, if that "melding" fashions such concepts, opines and beliefs, that makes "logical reasoning" religion too!
think about it...
untrue, wilderness. the processes of reason are used equally by both sides of Theos, science & sensation. The applications different. both of the same rootstock -reasoning- called the human mind. No escape clauses. That is perhaps the only rational fact in all of human thinking.
How many theists do you know who have reasoned their way out of religion? MANY!
How many equations or sensations have reasoned their way to logic. Nearly Zero.
think about it...
James....Wild:
"...but the believer can also be an explorer as long as the exploration is not in religion."
Pls break this down for me: "...an explorer as long as the exploration is not in religion."
I may be a little dense. I don't understand that?
Thanks..:
QwarkWild:
Oh sure!
I didn't say that they didn't have aptitudes of inumerable variety and they don't become expert in those fields, regardless of subject.
I have a close friend who is a physicist! he has a Ph.D in physics but is such a rabid bible fundie that it's hard for me not to laugh when we chat 'cause he always ends a complex explanation about cosmology, QM, et al with the same words the pope used when he had the last word with Hawking i.e. "but god is responsible for it all."...arghhhhh!
Their ending comment is a short quote from scripture.
There is something missing in their ability to separate fiction from reality regardless of the logic involved in math and science.
The truly open minded, will separate the wheat from the chaff and come to a realistic understanding of all that he exists within.
The religious fundie can be highly educated and brimming with knowledge of a specific subject, but, ALWAYS, relates the purpose and end result to a supernatural divinity.
Qwark
logic and reason have nothing to do with religion.
That was easy to answer..:
QwarkThis is one of the most dishonest and absurd things I have heard from a believer. Your indocrination is stunning!
And since YOU are from the theist group of free thinkers, I suppose you have no problem with considering/including the possibility that the Fying Spaghetti Monster is God, and should be worshipped daily.
Lest you be like a closed minded atheist...
You are referring to what you think would make a "rational" free thinker, and the whole idea of "rational" can't be pinned down. What might be rational to one person might be completely irrational to another. But the question asked was "what does it mean to be a free thinker?" and that just means to be free to think without any limitations, in accordance to your own analysis and your own experiences, not others.
I agree with everything you're saying, and we'll leave it at that before we find the point where we start disagreeing.
I just started watching Ancient Aliens, a documentary series... it's very interesting, and like I said before... to me, it makes perfect sense.
What a HUGE load of opinion, and subjective bias!
If you were truly an explorer, you would not be afraid of exploring God.
Let Him prove himself to you, rather than asking us to prove "it" to you.
You are not an explorer of all things, but a lazy thinker, settled comfortably in your biases and prejudices.
So sad.
- DJ: I had to laugh! You are slow!
My goodness man, I've told you and many others that, by golly, if you can provide this "seeker" with a definition of this "god thing" you chronically mention, as if you know "it," that isn't comprised of just your "baseless" opinion, there's a possiblity that I could be converted!!
To my great diappointment, ya've never been able to do it! But ya sure are quick to judge the one who just asks for you to share the "implicit" unequivocally correct definition you can produce.
Just pleeeeease define this god thing ya want me to consider in a form other than a biased opinion with no basis in fact, and by golly we can then chat about the possibility of "its" existence.
Do I ask too much of one who is trying to convince me that he has the answers?
BE christly magnanimous DJ! Create an epiphany above my empty head and enlighten me! Can ya do that for a poor suffering infidel?:
QwarkI think i told you, but it may have been someone else, so I will repeat myself.
I never offered to give you proof. For one good reason. The kind of proof you want/ask for is not available. (Unless God chose to suspend His MO just for you!) I'm not sure how SPECIAL He thinks you are. But, I can't say. He has been known to reveal Himself in unusual ways before.
But, one thing I can say, is that He WILL reveal Himself to those who honestly, genuinely seek Him.
I can't make you HONESTLY GENUINELY SEEK Him. That's up to you.
Thanks for the well wishes.I do ENJOY my (deluded ) relationship with Hm.
Religious indoctrination does not really 'alter' the brain, but instead does not allow the brain to develop the capacity for critical thought or understanding; ie. thinking. It trains the brain to accept beliefs without question or criticism.
To alter the brain would mean to break the indoctrination so that one can develop the capability to think for themselves.
That would most likely be based on indoctrination, in which you "choose" to accept the bible as the written word of god based on belief and not on critical thought.
There are at least 38,000 reported Christian sects, which means they disagree with each other based on their beliefs and not due to critical thinking.
Case in point.
You assume my explanation/definition is anger, when it is quite realistic, calm and rational. Thus, confirming my statement regarding: "your knowledge" is sensible and everything else nonsensical. Thank you, Marcus for participating in that experiment.
Who is 'we'? I have been told by you and others, that none of you are in agreement, save one thing: the unbelief in something greater than yourself or what you can touch, hear, see, taste, smell, eat and [****] --well you know.
That last thing you mentioned is just plain stupid and makes absolutely no sense (even by your parameters of what is sensible); You reiterating it, makes even less sense. So I'll just leave it to you. Thanks.
James.I didn't know that atheism as a body of thought "knew" of James and the quality of his arguments. I've never before heard of Atheism arguing that "James talks nonsense."
And Mark, I don't buy into 800-year-old-men, either. I never could buy most of the shallow interpretations in my Southern Baptist minister grandfather's church. The 969 years of Methuselah referred to his tribe, not the individual. But because science tells us that man has been around far longer than 6000 years, then Methuselah's age is too short! Imagine that!
I don't believe in "majik dinosaurs," either. Dinosaurs died out at the T-K boundary, 65 Mya. And Noah's Flood, if it was a real and worldwide event, would've happened 27,970 BC, if it happened at all. Interesting that Neanderthal died out at the same time. Could Neanderthal have been the "daughters of men" and target of the Flood? Those naughty Homo sapiens messing around in the wrong gene pool. Tsk, tsk.
How's that for "non-Christian-dogma" free thinking?Not very good actually. This is simply attempting to defend your personal variation of The Nonsense.
There was no flood and the Neanderthals died out over an extended period of time. Nothing freethinking about making up stuff to defend your faith at all. Sorry. Not even much solid evidence that Neanderthals had anything other than a very rudimentary culture and some question as to whether or not they were capable of speech. That is not to say they could not have had some other way of communicating of course.
"Wrong gene pool?" Oh - are you a "visiting aliens did it" type of Christian then?
James does talk nonsense.to your thinking, yes it would appear to be nonsense or better said nonsensitive, void of sensationalism, which we understand is one side of the Quality House. A side you once firmly were rooted and grounded. But, that is just a jibe. Now the other side you have swung to is equation or what you deem reason. And those same parameters of reason keep you under that roof of Quality. But it doesn't make you better or more knowing. It just made more Knowles (
get it Borg Knowles ).
Time and again we go round and round. You claim me and everyone else who does not adhere to your MO of reasoning is nonsense. This just reaffirms my statement regarding atheists as believing they have some super natural knowing, a faux godlike ideology, superior to any other and justified by that ideology.
Notice any similarities to that and what earnest calls megalomania, psychotic. In short 100% ego driven doctrine. Hmm, that sounds like religion, yes?
Show us the empirical evidence of a difference between the reasoning of either! They are both from the root: Theos. Neither is logic/philos. Neither is rational faith ( meaning the action of logic/philos).
Happy Fathers Day Marcus and a very merry un-birthday!
James.
What went on in the forums BB? I woke up and Cags is banned!
Why would one of the most helpful people in the forums be banned?
I know you will read this Cags. Sorry that happened to you mate, you must have been telling the truth again!
It seems to happen to every person who goes up against the religiously infirm.
Maybe they still gang up, get others banned then go around and vote all their hubs down.
No morals, no decency.- Emile Rposted 13 years ago
0 I'm ready to change my beliefs in a heartbeat in light of better information, in fact I did so today for example. I traveled across town with my son to buy a ute, and met an old experienced motor engineer who I had met before.
I have always hated the gearbox in one model of the Holden Rodeos for having a weakness in the output shaft.
Today I discovered that I am wrong, the gearbox is sound, it is a problem in the rest of the drive train that causes the gearbox to blow.
I had it explained to me, and had to accept the evidence presented.
If I saw an ounce of truth in any religion I would sign on. Who wouldn't?
All that extended life sounds marvellous!
The problem is that in 2,000 years not one bit of evidence has emerged.You surprise me from time to time.
This is one of those times.
Let me just say, that NO MAN convinced me to believe.
There was no empirical evidence, and there were no scientific proofs.
I just MET Jesus Christ.
That was enough of an experience for me. It settled it for me forever.Fear not, my little one.
The words that I speak, they are Spirit, and they are Life!
I wrote a hub on it, if you want the whole story!Sure.I'll read it. With 47 hubs though, it might help if you told me which one to look for.
- Touche Baileybear. I suppose that might be a very reasonable argument.
On the contrary Emile The world always has 30 or more wars running, we are on the edge of global war half the time and a lot of people have the vote. I'd say it's the minority that is more likely to have it right, or we would be living in a nicer world than we are today.
That could be true. I wouldn't know. I simply googled each one and grabbed the numbers listed. Google is owned by religious zealots so there's no telling what they do with information before it gets to the end user.
Agreed. You are aware of the implications of this statement? It's kind of like saying you, alone, are sane. It's the rest of the world that is crazy. That sounds borderline delusional.
That would be a ridiculous argument on several levels, but I can think of one where it would apply. Why do people eat at McDonald's even though there is ample evidence they don't even use real meat? Because they've got the best marketing campaign of all of the fast food chains. People will follow anything they perceive as a winner.
Not really, that's exactly how indoctrination works, one wholeheartedly accepts the doctrines, without question or critical thinking. Of course, it's a vicious cycle in which the capacity to question or think critically never had a chance to develop due to the acceptance of the doctrine from early childhood.
The key is to break the cycle of indoctrination and you'll see those numbers change dramatically.I, a sane person, visit an insane asylum.
I step inside and everyone around me is insane!
I am the minority!
One of the insane walks up to me and says: "I talk to jesus!"
I reply: Really? I don't think so.
Now lets see if we can relate that to Emiles response:
"There are an estimated 2.1 billion christians in the world. 1.6 billion muslims. 851 million Hindus. 32 million Jews. That's 4,583,000,000. And there are, of course, other religions.
There are only an estimated 157,529,444 atheists in the world. Looking at the numbers, it is difficult to imagine that the lion's share of the world is psychotic. To imply that it is, would make one wonder at the sanity of the person making the accusation."
What'd'ya think about the majority being right?:
Qwark
Well nothing is set in concrete for me DJ, I am willing to believe something right up to where I see it proved wrong, then I will accept the new belief until a better one replaces it.
It is truly astounding the things the indoctrinated will claim to defend or support their beliefs.
What's that you say? How can I know if I never met Jesus myself?
By all means, feel free to introduce him to me the next time you have a chat with him. Tell him I await his presence in all earnest and I will be his most ardent follower.
Uh-huh.
2,000 years ago is easy enough to work out.
The problem with the religious tomes is they are psychotic.
This makes it very easy to ignore.
Who writes psychotic scripture? A psychopath.
Very simple to deduce I would think.... unless one were to remain indoctrinated and frozen in a belief that glorifies fear hate and loathing.
A no-brainer.
I can easily prove it is psychotic, to anyone who can read, thus my belief.
The thing about psychosis is it remains psychotic no matter who it addresses and at any time in history. A demonstrable condition with known parameters.
Here is proof positive from the "good book" itself.
You must destroy all the nations the LORD your God hands over to you. Show them no mercy and do not worship their gods. If you do, they will trap you. Perhaps you will think to yourselves, 'How can we ever conquer these nations that are so much more powerful than we are?' But don't be afraid of them! Just remember what the LORD your God did to Pharaoh and to all the land of Egypt. Remember the great terrors the LORD your God sent against them. You saw it all with your own eyes! And remember the miraculous signs and wonders, and the amazing power he used when he brought you out of Egypt. The LORD your God will use this same power against the people you fear. And then the LORD your God will send hornets to drive out the few survivors still hiding from you! "No, do not be afraid of those nations, for the LORD your God is among you, and he is a great and awesome God. The LORD your God will drive those nations out ahead of you little by little. You will not clear them away all at once, for if you did, the wild animals would multiply too quickly for you. But the LORD your God will hand them over to you. He will throw them into complete confusion until they are destroyed. He will put their kings in your power, and you will erase their names from the face of the earth. No one will be able to stand against you, and you will destroy them all. (Deuteronomy 7:16-24 NLT)
Now you be the judge.
Is this psychotic?Yes I did, perhaps it was not clear enough.
The killing comes with the psychosis, which was probably always there in mankind. More psychosis as that in the bible is not a solution to it.
I answered your question, you avoided my claim as you usually do when the going gets too tough.
Why are you trying to wiggle out from under DJ?
I am being truthful as you well know. It is psychotic!
Show me how it is not.Psychosis then killing, then religion with more killing would be the logical order I think.
Do you know what psychosis is and how it manifests?
The bible or quoran will give you a very clear picture of it.
Here is another psychotic scripture.
Cursed be he who does the Lords work remissly, cursed he who holds back his sword from blood. (Jeremiah 48:10 NAB)
Is this another psychotic scripture?
Yes or no and why please.Beely! Are we still talking about banging, as in The Big Bang theory?
I'm very confused! I understand, there are several definitions and even slang references to "banging". Let me know if you want to discuss them in person sometime?
-
Happy Father's day, Beelzedad.
Just checked out the dictionary - Reason: Definition: Think, understand, and form judgments by a process of logic:" - Note the use of "logic" at the end there
Logic?
What's the big deal about logic?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logic
Note the word "philosophy"
NAh! I'd need two rolls of dunny paper to list them!
Thanks Earn: phew! Yer a gentleman and a scholar!...oh and I almost forgot,...KIND!
:
QwarkI don't know how they wade through this crap.
Oh that's right! They don't actually read all the book, just the bit they can twist to fit one of 30,000 beliefs and ignore the rest because they have the only truth.
Megalomania is best with bone leve;l ignorance, they go together like cheese and crackers!
I've still got plenty of time. I'm not gonna go to my funeral.
I won't be at yours either Earn.
I'm gonna be dumped out of a can into the Pacific off the coast of Oregon and end up in the belly of a few nice big salmon or ling cod.
Damn that's gonna be a long rest!:
qwarkI'm confident you will rejoin the food chain with great success Qwark!
I have drowned many worms in my lifetime. In fact in our house fishing is referred to as worm drowning.
I feel I owe them!Hey Earn, we call it drowning worms here too! I'll bet'cha I've drowned more worms than you ...I bet'cha....
When I was a kid, I remember growing worms in my grampas horse and cow manure pile.
Ya could ram yer hand in the hot shyte and come out with a handfull'a red manure worms that catfish love!:
Yep! I've drowned alota worms...
I'm sure kids in Australia do that too..:
Qwark
Is that still burning you Peabody?
I would only be pretending if I tried to explain it thoroughly to you, my memory does not hold that much information, and like all things that need to be refutable, duplicable, and comply across disciplines, I would refer you to any of the fine series that are available on your Television from sources that have more credibility than a mere layperson such as myself.
I did two things for recreation as a kid. Fishing and prospecting.
By the sounds of it, you owe those worms big time Qwark!Yeh, I'm still owing 'em...'cause I'm still drownin' 'em...
QwarkWell in that case you need a proper burial in the soil to keep the worm cycle happening, although, I guess joining the food chain further up is an option I may have to consider.
How in hell can you eat catfish!
The other fish won't even eat the one's we have in Australia.
....except for puffer fish who will eat cigarette butts!Ohhh Gosh ,finally someone who cant stand catfish!!
Lived down south (USA) for over a year and you are odd if you didnt go ga ga over the ugly lookin buggars
Guess its an aquired taste,mud n that.
Imagine my delight when I saw Orange Roughy in the supermarket!!
<CatfishEarn;
I can't speak for the taste of Australian catfish, but out of the lake here in Texas, these fish are fantastic! No fishy taste and we just skin 'em roll
em in a beer batter put 'em on the bar'bee on foil and cook till done...then eat 'em like corn-on-the cob with chunks of sweet onion and french fries! DEELISHUSSSS!: Wash down with an ice cold bottle of yer fav beer....can't beat it! :
WE Texans know what's good!!!
Qwark
PS We don't eat "puffers" here...they're poison..yuk!We don't eat the puffers here for the same good reason.
They are the most annoying fish in the ocean as far as I'm concerned,
Bait swipin poisonous little thugs!
Really??? And by evidence you mean concrete, indisputable proof that humans lived 4 or 400 million years ago, or that the center of the planet is liquid iron, or that the universe came into existence by nothing and then bang, yes?
And, pray tell, what secondary source provided agreement to those proofs? Did the stars tell you these things? Do you talk to stars? Do they answer? How about a protozoa, as it mutated itself into a guppy, into a tiger, into a human? Or maybe the Neanderthal left you a letter, an ancestry map perhaps, --or some pixie "star dust" trail to Shangri La? !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!- pixie dust...by the way speaking of pixie dust, what do you have on that, I mean, there was a lot on dust in the Golden Compass, and that writer is as we would call it, "in on it" lot of of animal archetypes going on there and so on...
I'm curious what "dust" is pertaining to in the book. You have any in depth knowledge on pixie dust? I'm serious...what is DUST? As opposed to the biblical version of creation, which has "ample actual concrete indisputable proof"?
"as opposed to"? Meaning as opposed to something you say is completely false and does not exist???
you're killing me.
Now, be a good humor -err- human and show us this "indisputable, concrete proof". Show us humans another (non-human) source that backs up your claims; that testifies to these 'facts' of science.
James.
Notice that computer in front of you, it's connected to the internet, both use the technologies discovered by science. Notice also, the many things around you that you obviously take for granted, they too were a product of scientific discovery.
Or, is all you see are the walls of a cave?A computer is NOT PROOF OF EVOLUTION.
Show me the proof so I can believe! I want to believe!!!
Science hasn't "discovered" anything. Everything was there already, even the subatomic units that make up this computer aka plastic, metal, silica, electricity.
Science didn't discover electricity either, Einstein, nor are humans products of scientific discovery.
Technology is simply MANIPULATING WHAT ALREADY EXISTS.
So, either show the proof to back up your claims or go back to that cave you keep talking about and beat your --- chest, yeah, that's it, chest. Because I see no difference between your lies, your claims of fact (which are nothing but fantasies) and religions types either. You know the funniest thing, though, the mentality is identical! unga-bunga
fa love paLOLOLO
Getting even more angry I see. Does it really bother you so much that humans like to learn and create things ? Doesn't seem to stop you using that scientific invention - the computer.
Aww - tell 'im about the flood and the majik dinosaurs. That should make youlive forever in grace.Marcus, I am falling off my chair i laughter, not anger. This is comedy at its finest -and I know many a stand up comic. I have a vested interest in a few.
This is comical.
What did the evolutionist say to the dinosaur?
"Just think, in 50 million years, you'll get 50 miles to the gallon!"
Yes, I know you "want to believe" - that is exactly the problem because you don't want to understand.
Then, why weren't there computers and internet connections centuries ago if science didn't discover anything and it was all there to begin with?
Then, why didn't all the things we have today exist centuries ago if it already existed?
Obviously, no amount of evidence or proof of anything is going to make any difference to your opinions. You simply aren't interested based on your reasoning of science. What's the point?
You're free to take the time to read about evolution, no one here is going to teach it to you. But, at the very least, I can get you started.
Evolution requires two things, and two things only:
1. The generation of diversity.
2. Natural selection - culling of the "less fit".
Process number (1) is essentially a random process, entirely in accordance with the laws of thermodynamics and statistical mechanics. Process number (2), which involves the disproportionate death (or failure to reproduce) of the less fit. Processes (1) and (2) together produce all the forms of life we see on Earth.-first, that is the biggest cop out ever! I would expect that from a first year theist.
-second, actually it will make a huge difference to all humanity.
Now, if you would be so kind, show me the source of this proof. Show me a non-human: document, cave drawing, collection of stars, hypothesis --anything-- that says clearly your claim of this evolution thing.
PS, showing me a picture of a tree frog and a picture of a tadpole with a cartoon balloon and TELLING ME this is evolution is NOT PROOF. If it is, then I am going to call every single theist on planet earth and tell them I was wrong, that the Bible IS in fact "infallible, complete and total word of God".
Why? Because that is what they are claiming as proof, just like your charts, graphs and made up time lines of millions of years, etc is.
Else, I can only believe! you are lying. And certainly I do not want to believe! that.
Don't let 'em kid'ya Earn. These "cats" come out of a 21 mile long lake that is the drinking water reservoir for the city of Corpus Christi Texas.
I love trout and salmon...been fishin' for 'em most of my life, but these "cats" have no muddy flavor like some of the river "cats" do.
None at all.
You'll never do it, but eaten' 'em with friends at a catfish cookout here in texas'd make a believer outa ya...yahoooo..:
QwarkHard to know. I could get it in my head to go fishing. It's a small world.
hmm, I didn't know of the connection between astrology and kabbalah. Interesting. I suppose yes though, as star or pixie 'dust' pertains to both. I need to read this deeper.
James.
Yeh! I was just praying to my motherboard about that!
- stop earnest, because that is what they do. They 'pray' to the weirdest things. Things I think theists would be scared to pray to nowadays. But hey 5,000 years ago, they were praying to meteors or comet leftovers, chiseled into half dog half men! Inanimate cyborgs?
ps, how are things across the western pond?Calm and logical as always! Thanks for asking!
But god does not exist. So - you are following nonsense.
No wonder it is so hard. Did you murder any witches today?Yes - I am real. Just because your Invisible Super Being does not exist - that will not make me majikally vanish.
Still here.
Disgusting religion.You seem to post such ignorant messages. If this God does not exist then what are you doing wasting your time telling everyone? And of course the biggest question...how would you know? Of course you don't. To generalize about religion is such a cop out. And in fact I was talking about God, so because you cannot say anything about that you always seem to resort to this religion attack. And yes you are real...a real piece of work. It is so easy to ridicule something you know nothing about, which seems to be what you are very good at. Why don't be on your merry way and leave the rest of us alone? What is the reason you always want to rain on others' parade. Is your atheist world so unsetting to you that you have no sunshine to spread?
Odd. Sounds like the typical religious argument that it is OK to kill for god because people kill for money.
I have access to all the supposed benefits of god existing in my head. But - without the nonsense and self deception that causes all the problems that come from believing that what exists in your head also exists outside and must therefore apply to everyone else.
Therefore god does not exist as anything other than a subjective concept. Which is not the same as physical existence.
Does that fact that believing in god gives you "purpose," negate the fact that you will burn witches and gays? Or does this not matter because you cannot prove witches exist?I wish I could remember the last time I burned a homosexual or a witch, in fact I don't even know any witches. Of course I have known of atheists who kill their spouses for the insurance. Those atheists are so violent. They all have sick beliefs. Are you now proud to be an atheist? And be part of such a sick and delusional group...I bet you are and I must say it really suites you too.
- Valemanposted 13 years ago0
Well, I guess then you don't know what "Free Thinker" actually is. You just know the distorted version.
Maybe you should look up the word "dogma".
I didn't say it did. Science has covered a lot of knowledge, but yes we don't know everything. Did you plan on making a point with this statement, or did you type it for some mysterious reason?
Actually, that would be a misrepresentation of what we know. Shame, you cannot tell the difference.
I would say that "perception" isn't properly used by more than 80% of the world's population. But, I don't expect you to understand.
I am not sure what this has to do with anything. If people want to see their future, then I would suggest that they put their life on a path, which allows them to do so.
Science has nothing to do with it actually. It's an individual power of conscious thought, but a little more complex than that simple explanation. However, conscious thought is the basis.
The conscious mind absorbs all information, as long as perception is used properly.
If you would like to take it to the extreme, then do so. Einstein did, but to him it was his imagination at work.
However, I am curious what made you post a reply to my post, when you NEVER touched on what I actually said, with anything substantial? Then again, it doesn't actually matter. So, don't bother. It was my only post to this thread and I was pointing out something that someone else said. Ironically, you didn't bother to read all of the post, before replying with your supposed response. Good to know you jump before you look where you're jumping. It will help my learning curve in future conversations with you.
That is a myth. The brain is doing exactly what it is supposed to be doing. We can look at any one portion of the brain to see that. The hypothalamus releases hormones and controls many biological routines, the Medulla controls motor functions and deals with sensory information, etc. etc.
You would need to explain what part of the brain is not working to it's capacity or function?Actually, I don't, but I don't expect you to understand and I don't have the inclination to help you understand, considering from many of your posts, it shows that you're not actually up for learning anything.
Can be right on occasion. However, "commonly agreed"? is a stretch to say the least. You would be lucky if 10% of the population would agree on anything.
Yes, if you were only talking about the brain by itself, however, the mind is part of the brain, and the mind's capacity is the limited part of the brain that isn't used to it's fullness.
The brain and the mind work in combination with one another. But there are limits to usage of both, because the brain limits the mind and the mind limits the brain.
Nope. But, most of the posters on Hubpages know you do, just by reading your posts.
Myth? In your mind maybe. The "behavior" you supposedly see? Isn't actually anything. I simply stated truth about your actions, nothing more.
I don't have a problem, but from your posts, seen by many, shows you do.Ah yes, the appeal to authority fallacy.
That's odd, seems more like a personal rant based on the fact you posted a myth and are attacking me instead of dealing with your claim.
Again, appeal to authority fallacy. Explain yourself. Tell my what problems I have. I have no problem taking you on in any subject or topic without posting myths.
Cagsil, are you chanelling your inner Jung a little today? Thought I saw some flashes in there about mid way. lol.
That was aimed at you Mr dj.
I do have something worth listening to. You are too busy defending your belief system to do so.
Related Discussions
- 129
Comparing Deism, Atheism and Theism
According to the dictionary, the term Deism was used during the intellectual movement of the 17th and 18th centuries. Deism accepts "the existence of a creator on the basis of reason," but rejects the belief of a "supernatural deity who interacts with humankind." Q. Is the...
- 123
How Are Atheists Created?
Before I go into this discussion, we all need to understand that I am not a scientist, I am not a prophet, and I am not an expert on the topic. I am merely trying to offer my belief in how atheism occurs. And why some of you might not like what I am about to say, understand that it is not meant as...
- 634
If you don't believe in God, why does it matter to you if others do?
I am sincerely curious as to why those who do not believe in the existence of God would spend time and energy to convince others to believe the same? I am asking this respectfully and am seeking true, valid answers--not attacks or arguments. I just want to understand the...
- 52
What are the personality types of Atheists and theists?
"Are atheists really so different from everyone else? Well, yes – but not in a bad way. Catherine Caldwell-Harris of Boston University has studied atheists and found that they share certain personality types, including being individualistic and being systematic...
- 28
Theists/Atheists: Can you compliment the opposite belief system?
Theists/Atheists: Can you compliment the opposite belief system?If you're a theist, what's something positive you could say about atheists? If you're an atheist, what's something positive you could say about theists? Please no sarcastic or passive-aggressive responses.
- 10
Could narcissism define religious belief?
Could narcissism define religious belief?As many theists have stated here, that they, alone, possess the ultimate truth of the universe in the form of a supernatural deity. Is this not a true definition of narcissism. self-absorbed, self-obsessed, conceited, self-centered, self-regarding,...