 | | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) Is this what you say to everyone whose hackles raise at being enslaved? "Oh, so you're someone else's property. So someone else gets to play with you as a toy and if you're not entertaining, put you to death. Grouse, whine, cry! Just get over (...) (24 years ago, 3-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) I think what is generally meant when your God is called petty and vengeful is a reference to the popular assertion that regardless of how good we act, if we fail to suck up to him, we go to hell. That's probably what Tom means. It's certainly (...) (24 years ago, 3-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) of (...) sentient (...) in (...) Altruism could be an instinct in a sentient being. And instincts aren't universally followed. Why do you folks insist on pretending that we're so different from the rest of the beasts? <...here we go (...) (24 years ago, 3-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian debate in danger of pollution (was Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) I'm not Larry, but I have disdain for self-delusion in general. Don't you? Obviously we disagree about whether Christianity is delusion, but I'm not getting why you would possibly assert that someone's disdain for a particular bit of (...) (24 years ago, 3-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Do market based societies select for virtue? (was Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) Advantages like having to commit suicide alone in a cramped little concrete bunker surrounded by people who have been praying for you to die? When I state it like that, I'm not sure why more people don't want to cheat big. (...) If you meant (...) (24 years ago, 3-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: About "Plowed Territory"
|
|
(...) I admit that I'm not well read, as I've said many times, I've not been to college. I honestly hadn't read Pascal nor his wager - until last night at this location, which is quite good: (URL) reading in the past has been limited in many ways, (...) (24 years ago, 3-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The god debate again... sigh (Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) Yeah? Well what about Catholics who worship the saints? Isn't that idolatry? Chris :-) (24 years ago, 3-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The god debate again... sigh (Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) This isn't really minor. It's kind of the crux of the past three thousand years of philosophy. (...) Woa! What does that mean? I'm not sure that such an assertion is obvious at all. Truths are multilayered, and most things are true/real in (...) (24 years ago, 3-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The god debate again... sigh (Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) No offense back, but I believe that you were failed by your education. (...) The idea that one philosophy is more defensible than another does not negate those who adhere to the less defensible philosophy. (...) And a Christian says there is a (...) (24 years ago, 3-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: About "Plowed Territory"
|
|
(...) If you sincerely thought you came up with Pascal's wager on your own, you're not very well read. Try www.yahoo.com with Pascal's Wager as search string. If you sincerely thought that no one has yet thought about how to refute it, you're not (...) (24 years ago, 3-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Critical Thinking
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal writes: Don't you get it? (...) Don't you get it, man? Haven't you been listening? That's fine that they are separate realms. It's just fine and dandy. You can use whatever metrics you like for your beliefs. But (...) (24 years ago, 3-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Critical Thinking
|
|
(...) <just going off on a tangent here> Why should we privilege rationalism as a source of understanding? And if we should, should it be the only type of insight that informs our understanding? --DaveL (24 years ago, 3-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An interesting North American Election (was Re: Cdn Election Day)
|
|
(...) Thanks for the clarification Steve, but how could it work? How would you determine the "wishes" of the constituents (who are presumably a diverse bunch of people who would disagree on what they wanted their MP to say and do on their behalf). (...) (24 years ago, 3-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Critical Thinking
|
|
(...) Come again? I'm saying it is inconsistent to expect proof of God's existence when that is by definition not possible. Science and religion are separate realms, so don't hold one up to the other as a test of its validity. -John (...) (24 years ago, 3-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: About "Plowed Territory"
|
|
Ohhhh, I see. EVERYTHING is plowed ground, there is nothing new under the sun. Gee, yeah, they must have brought down the walls of Jericho with a tactical nuke, because there is nothing new under the sun, they've ALWAYS existed, right? (...) -- Tom (...) (24 years ago, 3-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Critical Thinking
|
|
(...) You know no better than Larry. I seriously doubt God (IF he exists) tapped you on the shoulder and told you exactly what he requires. You are going by what an old BOOK says (a book that is VERY old, and conflicts internally quite a bit), a (...) (24 years ago, 3-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Critical Thinking
|
|
(...) Why it is not inconsistent for you to assume we should be forced to prove God's nonexistence in order to not belive in him? -- Tom Stangl ***(URL) Visual FAQ home ***(URL) Bay Area DSMs (24 years ago, 3-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Problem of Evil
|
|
(...) THE ENTIRE BIBLE is a collection of stories. It conflicts itself all over the place. I suppose you pull the standard dodges, and only pick what parts you agree with, and say they are true while the rest MUST be wrong? -- Tom Stangl ***(URL) (...) (24 years ago, 3-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: About "Plowed Territory"
|
|
So, what you're saying, being a Christian, and a believer in the Bible, is that you'd rather be ignorant and happy? Then stop posting in and reading .debate ;-) (...) <snip> (...) -- Tom Stangl ***(URL) Visual FAQ home ***(URL) Bay Area DSMs (24 years ago, 3-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: About "Plowed Territory"
|
|
(...) I made points, that for me, are unresolved, and asked an honest question because I sincerely want an answer. For me it's not plowed ground. If you don't like it, don't participate. (...) I disagree. I've learned much, and not afraid to admit, (...) (24 years ago, 3-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: About "Plowed Territory"
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal repeats himself: (...) No, your point is that someone ASSERTS that everything everyone can imagine is plowed ground. Not everything actually is, John. That person is wrong. There are wonders still to discover, (...) (24 years ago, 3-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: About "Plowed Territory" - Outcomes
|
|
(...) Since we have already concluded everything as plowed ground, and the major participants concede that neither can persuade the other, I propose moving passed plowed ground to the crop yielded by the ground. Assuming that atheism were "the" (...) (24 years ago, 3-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian debate in danger of pollution (was Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) AMEN! ;^) (24 years ago, 3-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: About "Plowed Territory"
|
|
(...) It could have been two words for all you read. Do you have any idea why I cited it? (...) Mighty white of....forget it, plowed ground;-) (...) At the risk (hope;) of annoying you further, I'll recite the absolute pertinent part of the (...) (24 years ago, 2-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Critical Thinking
|
|
(...) Had to stick that in there, eh? For what reason would you give that the existence of God is implausible? (...) Fair enough. But if I'm asking you to consider something which by definition can't be scrutinized by the scientific method, and you (...) (24 years ago, 2-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: About "Plowed Territory"
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal writes: <snip a long winded Bible cite... it's not enough that we're getting passages repeated that we could go follow a ref to, now they're getting LONGER> When the Son of God appears here, as a LUGNet member, (...) (24 years ago, 2-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) Pardon? Isn't the fact that man is willing to redistribute his wealth a truism since we see that it happens in every nation every day? But aside from that, how is Libertopia dependant on that willingness any more than any economy? (...) I (...) (24 years ago, 2-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Critical Thinking
|
|
(...) Dave! already answered this quite well (thanks, Dave!) but I want to elaborate/restate a bit in hopes that if the christians understand this point they will cease and desist in their hijacking of every topic that comes along. Let us be clear (...) (24 years ago, 2-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Critical Thinking
|
|
(...) Oh. That makes sense, then. I thought you were directing it just at me, but I see what you mean. (...) Absolutely (which I almost spelled "absoulutlely" which would have been a cool pun). That's what I've maintained all along, that science has (...) (24 years ago, 2-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Critical Thinking
|
|
(...) Sorry, I didn't mean you specifically; I was querying the atheists in the crowd who do this:-) (...) Then you agree that it is inconsistent to do this? (...) Ah, but who does? (...) Really? But at least they are credible witnesses in the eyes (...) (24 years ago, 2-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 3.3
|
|
(...) What constitutes a decent doctor? Why couldn't one just figure out if they knew what they were talking about? What is "trial-and-error" about looking up the Consumer Reports article on the local state of medecine? And most of all, beyond (...) (24 years ago, 2-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 3
|
|
I'm answering based on what I think is right and wrong, and how Christopia (not Libertopia) would be. I suspect that many Libertarians agree. (Though I disagree with some of what Bruce and Scott said.) (...) Absolutely. (...) I waver on this issue. (...) (24 years ago, 2-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Problem of Evil
|
|
(...) Tough proof I agree. (...) I agree. It is better to presuppose that we are acting freely. (...) Stop right there. God isn't "testing" us. God created us and gave us life to do with it what we will. (...) Well, other than the fact that God is (...) (24 years ago, 2-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: IP ( was Re: LP POINT 1
|
|
(...) And even if you do like it, what gives you the right to foist it off on your fellow? If you want your life out on public display, that's fine. But why force my life to follow along? Now, my stance that that government should stay the heck out (...) (24 years ago, 2-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | About "Plowed Territory"
|
|
(RSV, from (URL) ) Ecclesiastes 1 The words of the Preacher, the son of David, king in Jerusalem. Vanity of vanities, says the Preacher, vanity of vanities! All is vanity. What does man gain by all the toil at which he toils under the sun? A (...) (24 years ago, 2-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Critical Thinking
|
|
(...) Which atheists are you referring to? Certainly not me, since I've never demanded any proof of God's existence. I *have* demanded proof of miracles such as prophecies, because these are terrestrial in effect, and therefore part of the natural (...) (24 years ago, 2-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Critical Thinking
|
|
(...) Then WHY do atheists and agnostics try and hold religion up to the scientific method? Seems to me you can't have your cosmic cake and eat it too. Anyone stating that they need some sort of proof or evidence that God exists is inconsistent, (...) (24 years ago, 2-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertopia - unproven theory
|
|
Missed a point... (...) Frank Filz. But that was a while back. (assuming you meant "converts"... you're not *supposed* to see "coverts", that's why they're covert. Me, I think Scott Arthur is secretly a LP member and doesn't want to admit it. :-) (...) (24 years ago, 2-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertopia - unproven theory
|
|
(...) Ya, there's not a lot of unplowed ground 'round these parts to be seen of late, is there? (1) And with debate hijacking going on all over the place, when we find some new nuance, it doesn't take long before it gets turned into some sort of (...) (24 years ago, 2-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 1
|
|
(...) How do you define the haves and have nots? My father is the first generation of college educated people in his line and my mother is the second. They grew up lower middle class. (My grandparents were: an electrician, a secretary, an elementary (...) (24 years ago, 2-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Parental strategies? (was: Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne)
|
|
(...) This is a deep epistimological issue. Which part don't we know? I don't know that the sun came up this morning (I've been at work since before sunrise) but I don't just 'think' that it has. Actually, I'm willing to go out on a limb and say (...) (24 years ago, 2-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertopia - unproven theory
|
|
(...) Thanks! (...) [snip] (...) Not in my dictionary. Still == remains to be. [snip] (...) I agree, but this debate, along with abortion and Lego vs. Legos, have been beat to death. I haven't seen any coverts on either side of any of those (...) (24 years ago, 2-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Critical Thinking
|
|
(...) I disagree with that, but not too sharply. Science is not a matter of faith at all, since it is at its essence a system seeking to verify itself through observation rather than saying "it is that way because it is that way, end of story." (...) (24 years ago, 2-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Critical Thinking
|
|
(...) Lar was already kind enough to answer before I had a chance to respond, and he summed it up pretty nicely for me (thanks, Lar!) I'll elaborate just so I'm not guilty of a "me too" post. Many scientists certainly do believe in a god or ultimate (...) (24 years ago, 2-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Critical Thinking
|
|
(...) Not true! The Geocentric earth theory is certainly not current to any rational way of thinking, nor is the reproduction-by-stork theory. I label creationism a current theory because certain camps are actively promoting its inclusion in public (...) (24 years ago, 2-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Critical Thinking
|
|
I ain't Dave! (...) I think Dave! answered it already when he said they were different realms. I think no more or less of a scientist because of his non scientific beliefs, unless he indulges in Jon Kozan's fallacy of letting faith pollute his (...) (24 years ago, 2-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertopia - unproven theory
|
|
Welcome back Ed! (...) True enough. In fact, they won't even elect *the LP's* characterization of the LP, which is far more accurate and far more flattering. Libertopia is still only a pipedream, an ideal society. Two points though. Does (...) (24 years ago, 2-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Problem of Evil
|
|
(...) Flawed. Prove free will rather than determinism. Prove to me that your actions are not determined by your nervous system, learned behavior, socialization skills, etc. Free will is an idea I tend to agree with because I find it aesthetically (...) (24 years ago, 2-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Problem of Evil
|
|
(...) Flawed. God is good and gives us free will to choose evil. Respecting this choice is a part of honoring our autonomy. (...) If God wanted to. See above. (...) Flawed. Explain how to quantify evil. (...) This goes without saying. (...) Maybe (...) (24 years ago, 2-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | The Problem of Evil
|
|
Hey Y'all: I see some of you exerting some considerable effort around the subject of the problem of evil. I thought I might summarize the essentials if I might... The problem of evil is normally worded in the manner of a theorem, as are the (...) (24 years ago, 2-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Critical Thinking
|
|
(...) Hey Dave!-- I just thought of a question to which I would like to hear your response: What do you think about scientists who believe in God? Does believing in something unprovable put into question their worthiness as scientists? Or is there (...) (24 years ago, 2-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Critical Thinking
|
|
(...) I know Jon can speak for himself, but just to clarify things -- I think Jon is alluding to the idea of the "prime mover" or "first cause." No one knows what the first cause of the universe was or is. Science, on this count as well as others, (...) (24 years ago, 2-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Critical Thinking
|
|
(...) I suppose you're testing me with this false statement, since as a physicist you surely know that the greatest strength of science is precisely its ability to grow as understanding grows, rather than stagnate on centuries of dogma; if it were (...) (24 years ago, 2-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertopia - unproven theory
|
|
(...) Yeah, what we have now, with bought and paid for politicians delivering the goods to the various special interest groups that own them is much better, isn't it? (24 years ago, 2-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Libertopia - unproven theory
|
|
You can debate the benefits and drawbacks of Libertopia all you want. The fact is that it is still only a pipedream. The majority of Americans would never elect a party that would base governmental, social service or public education funding on the (...) (24 years ago, 2-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: New LEGO factory inaugurated
|
|
(...) Well, you are on to something I think. In the US the major cost would go to lawyers, while it is likely that the developing Eastern European contries are more open to corporations stepping in. They likely will experience less legal resistance (...) (24 years ago, 2-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Critical Thinking
|
|
(...) you sure? :) all that i know about goedel comes from douglas hofstadter's book 'goedel, escher, and bach: an eternal golden braid', but the impression i got from that was that there isn't a clear answer. of course it's been a while. ;) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) Ooops, Bud Light! (...) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) And yet that was the point. OK, I'm typing really slow here, try to keep up. I was acting like *you* when you go into your little rants to illustrate that you ain't all you think you are. You stepped in it, didn't even see it coming, and are (...) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) Yep - the posting statistics are pretty scary in this group. -Jon (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian debate in danger of pollution (was Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(There's a lot here and it would make sense to split up further replies into separate threads depending on the topics below - just a thought) (...) How do you define "saved"? Don't abuse religious language without providing a context for your (...) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) I'll let it speak for itself, but I find coherency helpful. (...) That implies that I'm a sore loser. On the contrary, I relish losing a hard fought battle against a skilled opponent. Why, just today at lunch, my officemates managed to defeat (...) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) I remember this from the first time it was brought up :) Talk about mental images!? (...) <Typical ++Blather> Many of your "qualms" are based on your own misconceptions. (...) I like this. Again, I'm with ya on that one. (...) You betray (...) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) Ah, but it wasn't a "rant" was it? You're just upset that I beat you at your own game. :D Bill (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
I need Hard Evidence. And The Bible isn't it. (...) -- | Tom Stangl, Technical Support Netscape Communications Corp | Please do not associate my personal views with my employer (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Critical Thinking
|
|
The bigger point is: Even if we thought we COULD reproduce the BigBang, should we? What would be the consequences? Would we annihilate our universe in the process? A smaller point related - Black Hole theory. While investigating Black Holes is (...) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
Thank-you Tom. I just wanted to be sure exactly where you stand. It's tough posting with people you aren't at all sure of where they stand. So, your belief systems says that you don't know if there is a God. And if there is you need some hard (...) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian debate in danger of pollution (was Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) Ah. I suppose that's the beauty of God - that He entrusts His perfect plan into the hands of imperfect people - yet it will not fail. :-) -Jon (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
If it matters (which it doesn't), I am basically agnostic. I won't believe without proof, and NOONE to date has shown proof. I "have faith" that I am right, that God doesn't exist until he taps me on the shoulder, so noone will really be able to (...) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Critical Thinking
|
|
(...) HA HA That's why it's a theory - once it's gets more evidence they'll refine the theory yet again. Unfortunately, they'll never be able to prove the theory which is what science drives for. That is, without a supernatural force entering into (...) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Critical Thinking
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Jeromy Irvine writes: <snip> Think about Goedel and whether the author's statements are part of the system they describe or not. They aren't. But since you won't do that thinking... When I put meaningful in quotes I was (...) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian debate in danger of pollution (was Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
"Jon Kozan" <jauction@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:G4wt23.J1K@lugnet.com... (...) DOH! The third paragraph is what I think I meant to say. "I am more offended than you by what I see in Christendom." :o) -- Tim Courtney - tim@zacktron.com (URL) (...) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) Contrary to your opinion, I didn't skulk away. I'm busy enough trying in every free minute (the few that I have) to keep up with those who spend their entire day in this group :-O Just for you, I'll revisit the posting, and reply. (...) I'm (...) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) Right you are, Bill. They go to Hell for not rubbing blue mud in their bellybuttons (1). Er, that is, for not accepting Christ's love, putting aside whatever logical qualms about the contradictoriness, unprovability, or non-necessity of God's (...) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Critical Thinking
|
|
(...) All right, all right. What I was getting at is that The Big Bang doesn't imply any supernatural intervention, and as such it is by definition theoretically accessible under physical theories (even if they haven't been formulated yet). At no (...) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Critical Thinking
|
|
(...) (John reveals his soft underbelly of linguistic responses) -Jon :^D (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) If I ain't gonna do easy homework for Dr. Scott (who at least, of late, has been posting some incredibly interesting cites, asking thoughtful questions, and conceding a point here and there (not all of them, mind you :-) ) when he's wrong) I (...) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Critical Thinking
|
|
(...) If you consider that creationsim has been around since Moses penned the book of Genesis - and even before that though it wasn't written down, I guess you can call creationism "current". By your standard, then, most every theory known to man is (...) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Critical Thinking
|
|
(...) Speaking as a Physicist myself... (are you??) Physics cannot prove the Big Bang - any honest Physicist will admit, as do I, that it is only a _theory_, indeed, one which cannot be proven. Evidence suggests that something occurred, but evidence (...) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) Hmm.. That's interesting, and I hadn't considered it that way. My understanding was that Christ's death provided atonement for Originial Sin, but I didn't realize it's applications to sins-in-progress. Is that part of the "new and everlasting (...) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Critical Thinking
|
|
(...) No I won't.....er damn! :-) -John (...) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Critical Thinking
|
|
"Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message news:G4wp09.635@lugnet.com... <snip> (...) The author is stating something he believes is a fact. Last time I checked, that's a claim. So, is the author's claim meaningful? If not, let's (...) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian debate in danger of pollution (was Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) "It must be a guy thing"??? I'm thinking that you're actually more comfortable with the response Dave! provided...?? -Jon (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
Bill Farkas wrote: Speaking of Calvin...;-) -John <snip> (...) <snip> (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Critical Thinking
|
|
(...) The difference, without generating yet another sub-debate, is that the Big Bang can be retroactively derived from observable and replicable events. The Creation reported in Genesis is by definition (as you've noted) a supernatural event that (...) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) But there's the rub. No one goes to hell for their sins! How could they if Christ paid for them? The answer follows the famous John 3:16, thru the end of the chapter. Read it for yourself. Bill (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) I can't debate unless _you_ state, or refer me to your position. Call me lazy, but I couldn't find what you personally believe stated. I tried a few searches, but I don't have time to ready 7000+ messages in this group alone... and then puzzle (...) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) (Larry - you and my brother are so similar it's scary.) I, however, would like to know what it is that _you_believe_. Perhaps you've posted it already, and if so, please point me in the right direction. Beyond all the "standard" arguements on (...) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) Who said anything about heaven? That was part of the trap...you assuming too much. The other part of the trap is your incessant ability to nitpick about minor things and miss the entire, OBVIOUS point. This was not about theology, it was about (...) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Critical Thinking
|
|
(...) Sad fellow there. I guess that's what we get out of academia these days. He purports to add creationism to his list of "current" topics, and then requires an obviously supernatural event, to stand up to a 'replicability' test. I better get (...) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) Zoinks! I forget this part in my second reply - I'm still heavily medicated! The analogy was only intended to be about Larry as a child (--Lar) on a roller coaster, which actually means it's not really an analogy, I suppose. I was only (...) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) I want to answer this a little better now that I have more time: As to Calvinism - I don't buy into the whole hyper-Calvinistic TULIP thing, but I do believe in predestination in the way that Selcuk described it earlier (in reference to (...) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An interesting North American Election (was Re: Cdn Election Day)
|
|
(...) <snip> (...) You missed the point - If a member doesn't vote according to the wishes OF HIS CONSTITUENTS, THEY can force a by-election. It's the opposite of party discipline - making the members accountable to those that elected them on an (...) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Critical Thinking
|
|
(...) He didn't say that, exactly. He said every "meaningful" (paraphrasing) true claim is falsifiable and then proceeded to show why non falsifiable claims don't help us in our understanding. (...) Good point but while you're thinking about that, (...) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Enduring Marxism
|
|
(...) It's amazing to think that some of their film work is almost 70 years old! Duck Soup, in its day, was deemed so volatile that Il Duce banned its screening in Italy for several years, and its madcap anti-war sentiment was echoed fully 40 years (...) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Critical Thinking
|
|
"Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message news:G4wJLA.DAL@lugnet.com... (...) What happens if we hold him up to his own standard? It must be possible to conceive of evidence that would prove the claim -- 'It must be possible to (...) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) I am lazy and act in my own self interest as much of the time as I possibly can. And I'm afraid too... Afraid I consider those virtues rather than the denigrating characteristics you make them out to be. I'm not "most people", believe me, but (...) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian debate in danger of pollution (was Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
<snipped even more capriciously than usual!> (...) I agree. Those Marx brothers were pretty zany all right. Yet their belief system (the right to wear silly hats, have dark eyebrows, wave cigars leeringly at matronly women, and honk a large bicycle (...) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Critical Thinking
|
|
(...) Fortunately for HIM, he wasn't posting to a newsgroup, and wasn't arguing, merely presenting information. So he didn't "lose", per se. (didn't satisfy 2 of the preconditions) Fortunately for YOU, you quoted that quote BEFORE any argument was (...) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Critical Thinking
|
|
(...) LOL And he was doing so well, too;-D "...If I claim that Adolf Hitler is alive and well and living in Argentina, how could you disprove my claim?" -John (...) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
