@ughaibu,
ughaibu;131797 wrote:Why do Americans say "I could care less" when they mean 'I couldn't care less'?
Because they mean the latter by the former. By some strange twist of fate.
---------- Post added 02-24-2010 at 08:50 AM ----------
captn sensible;61366 wrote:[INDENT]somebody wrote in a discussion about Bruce Lipton v Richard Dawkins views: Perceptions are not beliefs. Arguably, beliefs derive from perceptions. They are not one in the same.
[/INDENT]Arguably is a nice word to use when you're not sure.
I'm not sure if beliefs derive from perceptions but in practice they usually result in the same thing.
Don't brain wave appear the same when a man looks at a picture of a naked woman as when he imagines a naked woman?
Both ways his ******** believes he saw a naked woman...
How come conservative, atheist, scientists believe in the placebo effect? Isn't that all about physical cures from belief they took the right tablet?
Have I missed somethin' here....?
Yes, "arguably" is what is called a "weasel word". I guess it means, "it could be argued that....", but holds off on whether such an argument would be even plausible, let alone correct.
I suppose that to believe in the placebo effect just means, believing that there is such a thing as a placebo effect.Not, as you seem to think, that it is a good thing.
---------- Post added 02-24-2010 at 08:52 AM ----------
avatar6v7;59363 wrote:This all rather misses the point- the question is not 'what caused the earthquake?' or even 'why do earthquakes happen?' but rather 'why do people die?'- and that is a question worth asking.
You mean that we don't know why people die in an earthquake? It is because stuff falls on them, among other things. Why is that question worth asking? We all know the answer.
---------- Post added 02-24-2010 at 09:06 AM ----------
Zetherin;53805 wrote:But that's not what people are seeking when they say "Everything happens for a reason". If someone's daughter just got impaled by a javelin, the family isn't looking for me to explain how gravity and momentum worked to drive the javelin into her chest, piercing her lungs. Of course they probably understand the logicality behind it. No, they seek something more: meaning, the why behind the how. This is how the quote is predominantly used, a justification for an event.
I see you made your edit, I think you get it.
Yes, you are right. It is just assumed that there is some intentional explanation for every event over and above the causal explanation. It is, of course, a questionable assumption.
Yes, we can !