It is quite a bit more than the government being able to do this or that. It is close to all countries, all governments, all media, acting unanimously.
Someone said that we can not understand what is going on as long as we believe there is a virus, but if we understand that it is a bio-weapon...
Of course only if the statement is understood.
It can be a matter of belief. The believer think that the bible is true, and interpret it as if it is true. Naturally twisting the words to suit their belief.
The skeptic might think the bible is not true. Not from their own rational interpretation...
Surely not Adrian.
If we pick up a bible from the shelf, it starts at the beginning; There is no "love god, love people, do good" in there. Quite the opposite.
First thing is, as suggested in the original post, the names has been altered. That is evidently so.
What people refer to as "god" is a...
The answer to the question is: Other (explain)
And the explanation is:
We should look at what happened at and around the Charlie Hebdo event. Look at what happened. Not listen to what the officials are telling us.
Have a look at this video.
And we see that the person laying on the pavement...
I do believe you are overlooking one thing, that actually belongs in the causal chain: the confusion.
If subjective choice did not exist we would act instantly, and if our mind is involved, it would be brilliantly clear and decisive throughout; The opposite of being confused.
What might have...
This is like a catch-22
Objectively there exist no choices, but in some situations the mind conjures up more than one option, and it, the mind, gets confused; This confusion is equal to a choice situation. The confusion is real. Hence the subjective choice was there, indeed.
When we...
Yes. We can address this from many angles.
I say like this: The responsibility is part of the causal chain. When someone does something we react, as a consequence to what he did, to how we feel we should react, and to how we deliberately or intuitively estimate future consequences to be...
I myself am a determinist, and a hard one at that. Been a determinist for all my life, and I have never met any argument to show how our will can be unattached to, or free from, the world. Everything relates, and our will is no exception. The trick is to realize that what we experience as our...
It sure would.
Sometimes it is argued that determinism says that criminals are not responsible for their actions. And that would lead us to seek the causes for their criminality elsewhere. While as free will proponents put all the responsibility on the individual. No need to ban violent movies...
Do you think it matters if we know the causes that made us "act of our own volition"?
The free will proponents ignores the causes that aren't obvious to them, and the determinists assumes there are causes even if they are not all known.
Yes, it is quite suspicious why you come here to the paranormal forum and aggressively convict the mediums and the psychic, Quartermass.
Surely we should not accuse and convict people based on our own ignorance in the subject matter or our own scepticism.
I suppose that even the Australians themselves can have a debate about whether it's Australia or not: - At least it's not what it used to be. A land called by this name, for now, but who can prove it?.
The comparison of "not believing in Atlantis" to not believing in a deity is a good one...
To just believe in the existence of a landmass might not constitute a religion, not even if it deals with Atlantis; But I suppose that one could build some kind of religion around such a belief.
The thing is, once we set foot upon either land we believed in, the belief start to crumble, and...
Yes, person B could be labelled an atheist; But there is no difference in significance between a positive and a negative claim, they are both claims based on the individual person's beliefs.
By the sentence "Show me some evidence for it" we see that person B has a fairly good idea of what he...
In order for you to be able to say that you don't believe in something you must first have an idea of what that something is. That idea is your belief.
A religious person might talk about his belief to the atheist, but the atheist can not receive the belief from the religious person, he only...
I agree with you, this is a good question.
By asking this we see that the original statement is not true. Electronic calculators most likely lack the belief in a higher power or deity, but still they can't be considered to be atheists.
Atheism is not the lack of belief, but instead it is the...