Subject:
|
Re: Critical Thinking
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 5 Dec 2000 22:01:12 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
727 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Low writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Jon Kozan writes:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> >
> > > When you (J. Random Christian) come up to me and say "I believe in God!", my
> > > response will be "Well, I don't have that certainty, and your god seems
> > > implausible, but that's nice, I am happy for you, everyone should have a
> > > hobby, now run along". Your methods of arriving at conclusions are your
> > > affair.
> > >
> > > When you come up to me and say "and so should YOU, Mr. A. G. Nostic", my
> > > response is going to be "prove it in a manner that I accept, or buzz off. If
> > > you want ME to accept something as true, I will use whatever mechanisms I
> > > choose to validate it. Take it or leave it." In the end, though, no harm
> > > done to you if I choose not to accept. I'm facing the consequences of my
> > > actions.
> > Larry - your vehemous defence of asking to be left alone is admirable indeed.
> > And you are certainly correct in that you are facing the consequences of your
> > actions - I will actually support your doing so. But I would ask you this - • If you knew a friend was taking drugs, and you knew that it would eventually
> > destroy and kill them - would you try and stop them? Would you get them
> > help?
> > Even if they just wanted to be left alone with their drugs? And just said
> > "In the end, though, no harm done to you if I choose not to accept (your
> > help) I'm facing the consequences of my actions. "
> > Worse still - what if you saw a small child enter a busy street and say to
> you, "I'm just fine" "Leave me alone" "I deny the existance of those cars and
> you can't prove to me that they exist"... Would you ? Could you, do nothing?
> > Those of us who accept God, also recognize that me force you to accept
> > anything, but rather, will engage in discussions to attempt to explore your
> > positions with you, and too - help you see the cars that we see.
>
> If someone has a completely adequate understanding of theology, and remains
> agnostic or atheist, IMHO it is pointless to continually badger them about
> the reality of God. Ultimately belief relies on faith, an irrational
> attribute that should not be part of .debate discussions, although it may
> inform the position that someone takes.
That's precisely the position I'm arguing against. Faith is not a blind
irrational element. Faith is based on the seen and experienced.
If I have confidence in an object - say a chair - to support my weight, I have
faith in it. The faith is not without both substance and belief. There are
then varying degrees of faith. I may have a little faith that you'll respond,
but more that Lar will... :-)
-Jon
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Critical Thinking
|
| (...) I disagree. Faith, for me, is a subjective experience that only really makes sense to the individual. An individual's faith may be based in religious tradition or a community of worship, but ultimately belief depends on the individual. Unless (...) (24 years ago, 6-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Critical Thinking
|
| (...) If someone has a completely adequate understanding of theology, and remains agnostic or atheist, IMHO it is pointless to continually badger them about the reality of God. Ultimately belief relies on faith, an irrational attribute that should (...) (24 years ago, 5-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
198 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
