Do you think/believe that your body was designed/created?

[Shad]

It's okay, it's just philosophy, no need to be radical about it.

Not just. You lack of understanding of the role philsophy has played in the most mundane of modern tasks is appalling

There are so many philosophies out there. Just because you showed some that you impose as absolute, it does not mean things are concluded or refuted.

No I pointed out issues with your logic thus it was you acting if you logic was valid and sound, not I

Your own personal logic means nothing on its own too, if that how you put someone else's logic.

It isn't my personal logic but what is taught in academia. Have you heard of it?

You really need to let it go and calm down. Life has more than being radical with some philosophy (we've been thru all this already)

You need to realize that your opinion is irrelevant.

 

[Smart_Guy]

Not just. You lack of understanding of the role philsophy has played in the most mundane of modern tasks is appalling

No I pointed out issues with your logic thus it was you acting if you logic was valid and sound, not I

It isn't my personal logic but what is taught in academia. Have you heard of it?

You need to realize that your opinion is irrelevant.

You don't seem to realize that what I'm saying has nothing to do with debating anything. I feel you're feeling offended and threatened by it from your replies.

I could go on in an endless useless debate like arguing that the theoretical fallacies your philosophies say like that just because the creator and designer of humans is not seen on the media like the creators and designers of cars are means He does not exist and humans are not designed is invalid and does not by default mean humans are not designed. But your argument in the first place is irrelevant to what I started.

You don't have to feel offended and threatened about it really. And being someone else's philosophies is exactly as being your philosophy because you're using it. But so what anyways, it is someone else's philosophy then. Connecting it to academia and education, which you don't seem to understand, does not add anything useful here.

And when I said your posts claim perfection you said no. Philosophies are not absolute facts. Why can't you comprehend such a simple notion? What you claim irrelevant in what I say is actually what I started. It's not rocket science really.

 

[Shad]

You don't seem to realize that what I'm saying has nothing to do with debating anything. I feel you're feeling offended and threatened by it from your replies.

Your argument for design merely paraphrases the watchmaker one thus is not irrelevant and not off-topic

I could go on in an endless useless debate like arguing that the theoretical fallacies your philosophies say like that just because the creator and designer of humans is not seen on the media like the creators and designers of cars are means He does not exist and humans are not designed is invalid and does not by default mean humans are not designed. But your argument in the first place is irrelevant to what I started.

Hardly as per the above.

You don't have to feel offended and threatened about it really. And being someone else's philosophies is exactly as being your philosophy because you're using it. But so what anyways, it is someone else's philosophy then. Connecting it to academia and education, which you don't seem to understand, does not add anything useful here.

Not threaten in the least as you use really horrible logic for your views. I just think it is pure ego that your opinion of logic should be even considering.

And when I said your posts claim perfection you said no. Philosophies are not absolute facts. Why can't you comprehend such a simple notion? What you claim irrelevant in what I say is actually what I started. It's not rocket science really.

I said no as you didn't understand my points. You still don't. Philosophy or logic not be absolutes does not mean your horrible logic is even something to be considered.

 

[Smart_Guy]

Your argument for design merely paraphrases the watchmaker one thus is not irrelevant and not off-topic

Hardly as per the above.

Not threaten in the least as you use really horrible logic for your views. I just think it is pure ego that your opinion of logic should be even considering.

I said no as you didn't understand my points. You still don't. Philosophy or logic not be absolutes does not mean your horrible logic is even something to be considered.

You're still going in circles. It's okay, your philosophy, views, education, logic, claims, etc. are all respected here. You just have to calm down. They are not threatened or offended by any means. I won't hold anything against you for it really. Thank you for sharing those, although they were irrelevant to what I started. It's so simple and clear for anyone to understand.

 

[Kirran]

@Smart_Guy, I think you quite readily think a person has gotten emotional and stressed when they haven't - Shad is eager to debate the point and point out where he sees that you've gone wrong, but I don't there think there's call for telling them to calm down and that they're safe - might come across condescending!

 

[Smart_Guy]

@Smart_Guy, I think you quite readily think a person has gotten emotional and stressed when they haven't - Shad is eager to debate the point and point out where he sees that you've gone wrong, but I don't there think there's call for telling them to calm down and that they're safe - might come across condescending!

I guess you're right. Sorry about that @Shad

Dunno why he's giving me that impression tho. I think it is because of his insistence that his beliefs are absolute universal truth and that he's fighting against my answer of "I respectfully disagree"? I also clearly told that what I originally said was just sharing what I thought and I'm not putting it for debate. Those could be the reasons that gave me that impression, I think.

 

[Kirran]

I guess you're right. Sorry about that @Shad

Dunno why he's giving me that impression tho. I think it is because of his insistence that his beliefs are absolute universal truth and that he's fighting against my answer of "I respectfully disagree"? I also clearly told that what I originally said was just sharing what I thought and I'm not putting it for debate. Those could be the reasons that gave me that impression, I think.

Well hey, we're in Religious Debates. Shad thinks what you say doesn't make sense, so there's a legit position to challenge it.

 

[Smart_Guy]

Well hey, we're in Religious Debates. Shad thinks what you say doesn't make sense, so there's a legit position to challenge it.

Yeah, good point.

 

[illykitty]

Well same again, historically our subjective judgment of 'bad design' usually turns out to come from our lack of appreciation for what the design does.

What do you, with your superior life designing skills, think you could improve on?

and on the last sentence- nor is it a reason to jump to the 'accident' conclusion, we're all taking our best guess, as long as we acknowledge that, our faith, I think we can all get along!

Lol superior life designing skills? I never claimed such a thing, in fact I pointed out that others could probably design something better, not me. Aren't you getting a little angry there?

Here's something to start with, that's just the human body mind you, I could point out certain things in nature too: http://io9.gizmodo.com/the-most-unfortunate-design-flaws-in-the-human-body-1518242787

 

[Ben Avraham]

No, not my body in particular but the first man's body when HaShem formed man from the dust of the earth and breathed in his nostrils the breath of life and man became a living soul. (Genesis 2:7)