How can we be sure that all religions are wrong?

@Fil Albuquerque,

Quote:

By the way, my last post to which you replied wasn't addressed to you...

Huh???

Quote:

Re: Frank Apisa (Post 5304148)
Because on a matter of coherence you have to apply the very same principle to your very own doubting...who's to say your best informed guess is not the case ? Whether such correspondence amounts to knowledge I said yes you say no but none of us said I don't know...do you grasp the argument of a current in Philosophy that states that Reality it is your own experience and why it is so don't you ? So it might be the case that you do know all there is to know about reality even if you are not aware that the knowledge you have is complete...

When I say "I do not know blah, blah, blah..."...what I mean by that is that I do not know whatever the "blah, blah, blah" is.

Why are you so antagonistic to me acknowledging that I do not know the stuff that I do not know?

Gotta go play golf...will be back about noon.

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Not that one Frank the one before that one !

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

When I say "I do not know blah, blah, blah..."...what I mean by that is that I do not know whatever the "blah, blah, blah" is.

If so, you are only meaning you are not certain of what you know ! I am not certain either...

2 Replies

@Fil Albuquerque,

Give me a link to the place where I answered a comment addressed to someone else. Just give me the link...I'd like to look it over.

0 Replies

@Fil Albuquerque,

Please, Fil...don't tell ME what I mean.

When I say I do not know something...I mean that I do not know it.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

Why does my acknowledgement of that lack of knowledge bother and annoy all you folk so much?

For one thing, you're inconsistent in your acknowledgement of a lack of knowledge about supernatural things, i.e. you dismiss some of those things off-handedly, and others you treat with the utmost seriousness in regard to your acknowledgement of a lack of knowledge. For another thing, your categorization of these supernatural things is arbitrary based on your own criteria e.g. experiential bias, whim, etc.

1 Reply

@InfraBlue,

Quote:

For one thing, you're inconsistent in your acknowledgement of a lack of knowledge about supernatural things, i.e. you dismiss some of those things off-handedly, and others you treat with the utmost seriousness in regard to your acknowledgement of a lack of knowledge. For another thing, your categorization of these supernatural things is arbitrary based on your own criteria e.g. experiential bias, whim, etc.

I am VERY CONSISTENT in my acknowledgement of my lack of knowledge about the true nature of REALITY.

I have lots of other things about which I have a lack of knowledge...but I am not here to discuss them.

Why would the fact that I am not disposed to discuss all the things about which I lack knowledge cause people to suggest that I do have knowledge of the things that I say I do not have knowledge of?

If I want to have a discussion about World War II...would you require that I also must have a discussion of the Boer Wars in order to do so?

2 Replies

@Fil Albuquerque,

Fil Albuquerque wrote:

This one made by Looking4truth :

Quote:
You have wisdom my friend. We no practically NOTHING compared to ALL things.

Go read Descartes I think therefore I am n you will get my point soon enough...

Frank I've done it and you missed it ! I am quoting the exact place where I did try to show you where...the quotes in the middle are from Looking4truth to whom I replied when you misguidedly thought it was addressed to you !

1 Reply

Notice how in these debates we (including me) are almost always right and others are almost always wrong. Wink

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

Quote:

Frank I've done it and you missed it ! I am quoting the exact place where I did try to show you where...the quotes in the middle are from Looking4truth to whom I replied when you misguidedly thought it was addressed to you !

Fil, I did not miss anything. I am going to answer your question, but in the future, when someone asks you for a link...this is what they are looking for:

http://able2know.org/topic/211403-17#post-5304068

That way, the issue can be looked at and inspected in context.

I kept asking for a link…and you kept quoting or paraphrasing. I wanted a link.

...........

Now, in answer to your question: Yes, I did realize that you had directed that comment to Looking4Truth, but since I had just agreed completely with Looking4Truth, I asked my question of you.

Here is a link to me agreeing with what Looking4Truth had said:

http://able2know.org/topic/211403-17#post-5304136

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

You see the problem resides in that "reality" it is an all encompassing term Frank...if you say, I don't know the ultimate nature of reality, but I know other stuff, you are showing you don't understand what reality addresses...if you don't know the ultimate nature of reality you NECESSARILY don't know ANYTHING and since KNOWLEDGE is a PART of REALITY you CANNOT understand WHAT you know or don't know either , which ends up being a contradictory statement...unless you think knowledge is not a part of reality in which case you would have to explain why and how we talk about it...this is about set membership and what contains what !

1 Reply

@JLNobody,

Quote:

Notice how in these debates we (including me) are almost always right and others are almost always wrong.

Since my major point during this conversation has been "I do not know the true nature of REALITY"...and since the finest minds that have ever existed on this planet cannot agree on the "true nature of REALITY"...I feel that I am not "wrong."

Considering the circumstances, it interests me that so many people seem to be suggesting that I am.

By the way: Do you know the true nature of REALITY?

2 Replies

@Fil Albuquerque,

Quote:

You see the problem resides in that "reality" it is an all encompassing term Frank...if you say, I don't know the ultimate nature of reality, but I know other stuff, you are showing you don't understand what reality addresses...if you don't know the ultimate nature of reality you NECESSARILY don't know ANYTHING and since KNOWLEDGE is a PART of REALITY you CANNOT understand WHAT you know or don't know either , which ends up being a contradictory statement...unless you think knowledge is not a part of reality in which case you would have to explain why and how we talk about it...this is about set membership and what contains what !

Perhaps you are correct here, Fil. Perhaps I am not intelligent enough to be able to discuss an issue as complex as this with people like you and the others who are telling me that either I am wrong...or mistaken...or simply not able to comprehend the subtitles of this discussion.

Perhaps the problem is that I am just not intelligent enough for this...or that I am unwilling to concede when you folk have shown me conclusively that I am wrong for asserting that I do not know the true nature of REALITY.

I concede that may be the problem.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

Since my major point during this conversation has been "I do not know the true nature of REALITY"...and since the finest minds that have ever existed on this planet cannot agree on the "true nature of REALITY"...I feel that I am not "wrong."

Yes making up fantasies to cover areas that we lack knowledge on have a long history of proving helpful.

Do not understand lighting bolts well that is the god Zeus at war so no need to look further.

Not understanding of the weather systems and storms at sea well they are cause by the goddess Neverita having a fight with her husband Neptune.

Saying we do not know at the moment seems not to be allow for a large percent of the human race and so we need to dream up gods and goddess and when a few brave men come up with how the universe in fact work such as the earth not being the center of the universe but just a planet revolving around the sun we punish those persons.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Quote:

Yes making up fantasies to cover areas that we lack knowledge on have a long history of proving helpful.

Do not understand lighting bolts well that is the god Zeus at war so no need to look further.

Not understanding of the weather systems and storms at sea well they are cause by the goddess Neverita having a fight with her husband Neptune.

Saying we do not know at the moment seems not to be allow for a large percent of the human race and so we need to dream up gods and goddess and when a few brave

I'm not sure of your point, Bill.

If you are saying that superstitious, early people probably invented gods to explain the many mysteries that they encountered in their lives...so what?

Do you think you would have been enlightened enough to not have done that back in caveman days?

Do you suppose that homo sapiens is now so intelligent that we do not have superstitions that people of two thousand years from now will laugh at...and wonder how we could have been so primitive?

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

The problem is worse Frank...the problem is just like Russel's paradox...if you do not know then you know something, you know that you cannot know...but then in order to cannot know you must know...

another formulation could be:

This sentence does not exist !

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

f you are saying that superstitious, early people probably invented gods to explain the many mysteries that they encountered in their lives...so what?

The so what is such nonsense act as a brake to investigating how the universe in fact work and is not helpful in any other manner such as predicting future events such as storms.

Without the religious nonsense it is my opinion that we would be a great deal further along then we are now in understanding the universe.

Quote:

that we do not have superstitions that people of two thousand years from now will laugh at...and wonder how we could have been so primitive?

Hell what are you talking about as this thread/website is full of people that are true believers in one form of nonsense or another such as the three in one Christian god.

Evolution we do not believe in no damn evolution or a universe that is tens of billions of years old along with an earth that is 4 billions or so years old.

God created the earth and the universe around 10,000 years ago do you not know?

0 Replies

@Fil Albuquerque,

Hi Fil!

1 Reply

@mark noble,

Hya Mark ! Very Happy

(you pick the right one ty)

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

Am sorry I cannot debate this topic, until I have read all relative posts.
Most here, especially Frank, are on ignore.
I find their input less than constructive and more disruptive.
Will read between the lines.
But wtf right has the O Poster to state that 'WE' determine all religions to be wrong??? Means 'He/She does...surely?
Or speaks for us all? Smile

2 Replies

How can we be sure that all religions are wrong?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know