Does God Exist?

@Olivier5,

Quote:

Well, if you care enough to explain what you mean by circular arguments, be my guess...

What you feel is not pity. Pity requires a certain generosity, an empathy. What you feel is closer rancor, I think.

Always funny to think that people can read my 'state of mind' Even when they don't know me and haven't met me yet! Fantastic! And then they go on to
tell me that they are into raional thinking and logic, well, right!

So, there is no rancor here. Just pity indeed. Because most scientist are dumbed down into an enormous degree and can't think straight anymore.
Listen, I am not saying these people can't really think, because of their flaws or what. I am not saying that. People, so also 'scientist' are born as geniuses.
But their schooling ( education) has damaged them and dumbed them down.
they just can't think straight, but because of their schooling they think they are clever.
Edison knwew about this, and never hired someone who has done university.

Really, the key is to see that schooling is dumbing everyone down, and because the 'scientists' have a longer 'schooling' they are the dumbest.

sorry. It is what it is.

2 Replies

Quote:

Quehon said: Really, the key is to see that schooling is dumbing everyone down, and because the 'scientists' have a longer 'schooling' they are the dumbest.

Yeah the same applies to people who go to Theological College to study religion, they come out dumber than when they went in.. Smile

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Quote:

Well, if you care enough to explain what you mean by circular arguments,

Q means, one might easily presume, Olivier, that you are defining a "small and sad mind" and you readily identify him as having got one and also implying that you have a large and happy mind which is a bit of a stretch given the educational process and the state of the ******* world.

Such circular reasoning, while understandable, seems to be endemic among dim-wiited atheists if my experience is anything to go by. Habitual use of circular reasoning, by which I mean an inability to cease employing it, renders persons of both sexes impossible to have a sensible conversation with although ladies have other characteristics which often overcomes the disadvantage. In fact that is the subtext of the decisions and dogmas of The Courts of Love which thrived in the Dark Ages.

"Because I said so!!!" is an example of how utterly charming circular reasoning is when used by ladies who are in control of themselves.

Used by men it is utterly ridiculous: self demeaning actually because it usurps feminine privilege unjustifiably. That is why a certain word used about ladies is a compliment and when applied the men, an insult.

And while it can be quite amusing to observe, it also enables listeners to know in advance what is going to be said, on any subject, which is why conversation is impossible.

1 Reply

@Romeo Fabulini,

Quote:

Yeah the same applies to people who go to Theological College to study religion, they come out dumber than when they went in

I agree with you on this one.

0 Replies

@Quehoniaomath,

Quote:

Really, the key is to see that schooling is dumbing everyone down, and because the 'scientists' have a longer 'schooling' they are the dumbest.

Right on Q. A scientist would use a whole book for that and still not say it as good.

1 Reply

@spendius,

Quote:

Right on Q. A scientist would use a whole book for that and still not say it as good.

Thank you!

1 Reply

@Quehoniaomath,

I think you are wrong to include theological colleges in your strictures. Proper ones I mean.

1 Reply

@spendius,

He mentioned circular arguments even before I chipped in, so it has nothing to see with me.

0 Replies

@Quehoniaomath,

Quote:

And then they go on to
tell me that they are into raional thinking and logic, well, right!

I am not into rational thinking anymore than I need to. I am not a scientist and use other ways. If you had no rancor against science and scientists, you wouldn't talk of them this way. For there are many shades and hues of scientists. Making wholesale generalisations against any group reeks of rancor.

Quote:

the key is to see that schooling is dumbing everyone down, and because the 'scientists' have a longer 'schooling' they are the dumbest.

You said you took math and physics at university. Was this your experience, e.g. that those around you could not think straight? Profs, students, etc... Or is this condemnation of education based on something else?

Still haven't seen you pointing at a circular argument in science...

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Quote:

I am not into rational thinking anymore than I need to. I am not a scientist and use other ways. If you had no rancor against science and scientists, you wouldn't talk of them this way. For there are many shades and hues of scientists. Making wholesale generalisations against any group reeks of rancor.

But that is just your interpretation protecting you from the whole idea that it might be right. I am not saying these things from rancor as I have previous stated. I am stating this as a fact. It really is the way the schooling systems ( and hence universities) work). You just don't get that, or don't want to,
Don't believe me on my word, I never asked that. Do your research!

Quote:

Quote:

the key is to see that schooling is dumbing everyone down, and because the 'scientists' have a longer 'schooling' they are the dumbest.

You said you took math and physics at university. Was this your experience, e.g. that those around you could not think straight? Profs, students, etc... Or is this condemnation of education based on something else?

Most people indeed didn't think straight, except for one other guy.
You see, they are not thinking at all! They believe their professor and their books and they start memorising , not thinking!
yes, they now how to make their mathematical sums, they just repeat what they have learned.
But at that time I didn't know the real purpose of 'schooling' and went along, but I felt there was something very wrong.It was too mechanic, too dull, too a creative!,. So, No, I haven't based my idea of schooling on that, but later I could see it was a piece of the puzzle.
Now , it is extremely clear to me that schooling is used, from the start and all the way up to University to dumb people down.
The 'government' won't like creative vibrant, healthy , independent, non-conformingh citicizens. Dumbing down by education is one of the ways to weaken the population. They use other ways as well. You see, they rather have 'slaves' So, a lot of things that are VERY important to you, you don't get to learn at school.

http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/236x/c5/9f/3f/c59f3f93df48042001f325789ac42439.jpg

http://www.smartvoters.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/H-L-Mencken.jpg

Quote:

Still haven't seen you pointing at a circular argument in science...

I reallly think you won't get it! But it is very easy. Pick any Physics book and look for it! They are full of it!

1 Reply

@spendius,

I really don't think there are proper ones.

0 Replies

@Quehoniaomath,

Quote:

It really is the way the schooling systems ( and hence universities) work). You just don't get that, or don't want to,

There is of course a lot of 'mind formating' and normative dampening of creativity in school and universities, in some more than others. Bourdieu has studied and written on this extensively, only to become a normative 'lab dictator' himself as he grew older and became established, if I believe what I hear.

To a degree, normative teaching is useful. Societies need common ground, common values, etc. So it's a matter of balance.

And I am ready to admit that the US public school system (and probably also the private universities) do a lot of dumbing down and cliché peddling. Michael Moore and others have made the same case that you are making. Some of the interns from US ivy league universities who I employed or worked with over the years were grossly one-dimensional, heavily specialised, no creativity whatsoever left in them. Others were vibrant learners and experimenters though...

To be fair, I was also frustrated with many of my own profs and fellow students during my own schooling, but they respected creativity, by and large (IMO, creativity cannot be taught; the best a teacher can do is NOT DAMPEN IT when he sees it).

But I'm rambling. The point I want to make is that the best scientists, those who will discover or invent something radically new, are creative. Science needs creativity. And it has a lot of it, an amazing amount of it, not always thanks to universities but probably more often in spite of them. Don't throw the science baby with the academic bathwater.

Anyone who broad-brushes scientists as a bunch of mindless robots is being grossly unfair to one of the most inspiring and creative enterprises of mankind.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Quote:

Quote:
Still haven't seen you pointing at a circular argument in science...

I reallly think you won't get it! But it is very easy. Pick any Physics book and look for it! They are full of it!

Should I conclude that you can't point to any specific example of a circular scientific argument, then?

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Quote:

Should I conclude that you can't point to any specific example of a circular scientific argument, then?

No you can't.
I really have always to laugh if this one comes up.
You'r hardly original, far from it!
They rather conclude I can't then see that I am right with this.

Really, pick up a physics book and see the many, many, many circular arguemts. especially with regards to gravity, but there are a lot more, a lot!
But my guess is, you haven't looked yet, now, have you? Wink

1 Reply

Quote:

To a degree, normative teaching is useful. Societies need common ground, common values, etc. So it's a matter of balance.

This really is nonsense! It is ONLY needed if one wants CONTROL

In reality society needs much much more diversity, originality, non conformity and so on and so forth.

1 Reply

@Quehoniaomath,

Quehoniaomath wrote:

Quote:
To a degree, normative teaching is useful. Societies need common ground, common values, etc. So it's a matter of balance.

This really is nonsense! It is ONLY needed if one wants CONTROL

It's not nonsense, this is obvious. We need to talk the same language, as an obvious example, so we can all invent our own vocabulary, grammar and orthography. Societies need some common ground. Which does not mean that this common ground should never evolve or be challenged of course.

1 Reply

@Quehoniaomath,

Quote:

Really, pick up a physics book and see the many, many, many circular arguemts. especially with regards to gravity, but there are a lot more, a lot!
But my guess is, you haven't looked yet, now, have you?

This may come as a surprise, but I am not responsible for making your arguments clearer than they are. You are supposed to do that. And so far you have not been able to mention any specific example... So your case is vague and unsubstantiated. That's a fact.

1 Reply

Big Bang blunder bursts the multiverse bubble
http://richarddawkins.net/2014/06/big-bang-blunder-bursts-the-multiverse-bubble/

When science finds EVIDENCE no longer supports a theory they reverse their belief.

Unlike faith that believes with zero EVIDENCE...

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Should read: so we CAN'T all invent our own vocabulary, grammar and orthography.

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Quote:

This may come as a surprise, but I am not responsible for making your arguments clearer than they are. You are supposed to do that. And so far you have not been able to mention any specific example... So your case is vague and unsubstantiated. That's a fact.

Yawnnn, whatever

1 Reply

Does God Exist?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know