Why do you say" you have to prove your personal faith and beliefs"

[KWED]

I understand your reply @Hermit Philosopher, this thread is for those who attack religious beliefs, this thread is not about believers have to again defend them selvs from attack.

Why should religious ideology be immune from criticism?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

So should we respect the beliefs of the KKK and IS? It's a yes no question, as you already challenged my opinion that it was absurd to claim all beliefs should be respected. Should I respect the belief that the world is flat?

I don't know with truth, fact or evidence what you should do as your personal value system. That is your subjective problem.

 

[Spirit of Light]

theists love to use them.



That fallacy is called an ad hominem. Now that's the kid of disrespect we shouldn't indulge, people's beliefs are fair game, but you should try and respect the person.



I'm sorry I'm not seeing your point?



Another straw man fallacy.



How often does it happen? It might be Tourette's.

LOL Funny man....

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Why should religious ideology be immune from criticism?

Well, if it is stated as truth, with evidence and fact, then go for it. But that is not the case here.

 

[Sheldon]

Well, if you read up on logic, you well learn that the world can't be explained in strong positive logical terms. In other words you get paradox and contradiction.

Is that a belief? You said all beliefs were fundamental the same, so that belief of yours is no different to believing the world is flat, according to your earlier post.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Is that a belief? You said all beliefs were fundamental the same, so that belief of yours is no different to believing the world is flat, according to your earlier post.

No, there are different beliefs. All beliefs are the same as beliefs and can be different for their content. You do know that?

 

[Sheldon]

LOL Funny man....

You're still playing the man not the ball, it's called an ad hominem fallacy, and you posted two separate straw man fallacies, and two ad hominem fallacies in just three posts.

All you're doing is waving this away, by attacking me personally for pointing it out, and in a thread you started to demand people respect your beliefs. You might want to consider the irony.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

You're still playing the man not the ball, it's called an ad hominem fallacy, and you posted two separate straw man fallacies, and two ad hominem fallacies in just three posts.

All you're doing is waving this away, by attacking me personally for pointing it out, and in a thread you started to demand people respect your beliefs. You might want to consider the irony.

Do notice that the OP poster has made no claim of fact, evidence or truth for his beliefs. Your MO doesn't work here. The thread was originally in discussion. You are barking up the wrong tree.

 

[Sheldon]

No, all beliefs are the same as beliefs

No, there are different beliefs. All beliefs are the same as beliefs and can be different for their content. You do know that?

I know that, I was challenging your claim that all beliefs are fundamentally the same.

In the end, fundamental beliefs about what the world really is, are so far in all cases nothing but beliefs.

So you think we should respect the beliefs of the KKK, you never did say? Only you challenged my post that it was absurd to claim all beliefs should be respected, and now you won't answer a simple question?

 

[Sheldon]

Do notice that the OP poster has made no claim of fact, evidence or truth for his beliefs. Your MO doesn't work here. The thread was originally in discussion. You are barking up the wrong tree.

So should we respect racist beliefs, or is that an absurd idea as I claimed, and you denied?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I know that, I was challenging your claim that all beliefs are fundamentally the same.



So you think we should respect the beliefs of the KKK, you never did say? Only you challenged my post that it was absurd to claim all beliefs should be respected, and now you won't answer a simple question?

All beliefs are fundamentally the same with it comes to the metaphysical status of the world in that they are all just beliefs. They can be different for what is believed, but they are the same as belief. Note this is conditional knowledge and not absolute knowledge.

As for the ethics in dealing with other humans, you can start a new thread. And note that is not natural science.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

So should we respect racist beliefs, or is that an absurd idea as I claimed, and you denied?

You are asking question about a subject that is not natural science. If you don't want to start a new thread say so. But natural science is not relevant in that. That is social science and philosophy in short and that includes some other knowledge that you might need to understand.

 

[Sheldon]

I don't know with truth, fact or evidence what you should do as your personal value system. That is your subjective problem.

You don't know if we should respect vile racist beliefs? I already said that it was absurd to claim all beliefs should be respected, you challenged that, and ignored the evidence I offered, and now you have backtracked so far you're unwilling to say whether you'd respect the beliefs of the KKK?

Best of all is you are now claiming this is my subjective problem, after you claimed all beliefs are fundamentally the same, which is absurd btw. The belief the world is flat, is not fundamentally the same as the belief that all living things evolved, that is manifest, and it is because one contradicts objective evidence, and the other is based on a massive weight of objective evidence.

Try the Matrix analogy, I find when people start denying there is such a thing as an objective fact, an unevidenced unfalsifiable fantasy that all life is a delusion is often where they default to.

So the KKK, should we respect their beliefs?

 

[Sheldon]

All beliefs are fundamentally the same with it comes to the metaphysical status of the world in that they are all just beliefs. They can be different for what is believed, but they are the same as belief. Note this is conditional knowledge and not absolute knowledge.

As for the ethics in dealing with other humans, you can start a new thread. And note that is not natural science.

Sorry I couldn't hear you for a minute, I was deafened by the goalposts being shifted there.

The thread is claiming all beliefs be respected, I said that is absurd as we would have to respect the beliefs of Nazis, the KKK and IS for example. You claimed I'd offered an unevidenced opinion, which was not true of course.

Now should we respect all beliefs?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

You don't know if we should respect vile racist beliefs? I already said that it was absurd to claim all beliefs should be respected, you challenged that, and ignored the evidence I offered, and now you have backtracked so far you're unwilling to say whether you'd respect the beliefs of the KKK?

I don't know. I have subjective beliefs about it, which are without evidence, facts and all that.

Best of all is you are now claiming this is my subjective problem, after you claimed all beliefs are fundamentally the same, which is absurd btw. The belief the world is flat, is not fundamentally the same as the belief that all living things evolved, that is manifest, and it is because one contradicts objective evidence, and the other is based on a massive weight of objective evidence.

Yeah, it is about metaphysics.

Try the Matrix analogy, I find when people start denying there is such a thing as an objective fact, an unevidenced unfalsifiable fantasy that all life is a delusion is often where they default to.

Yeah, that you find, is subjective.

So the KKK, should we respect their beliefs?

That is ethics, sociology and all more, but not natural science.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Sorry I couldn't hear you for a minute, I was deafened by the goalposts being shifted there.

The thread is claiming all beliefs be respected, I said that is absurd as we would have to respect the beliefs of Nazis, the KKK and IS for example. You claimed I'd offered an unevidenced opinion, which was not true of course.

Now should we respect all beliefs?

No,the tread is about being attacked for something you haven't done.

But again, what you say is subjective. We are in ethics, now. Not natural science. So do you want to do ethics and all the rest?

 

[KWED]

The thread was moved from disciousion and the OP poster has never claimed truth or evidence.

They asked a general question. I provided a general answer.

And if a person understand the law of physics those laws can be broken (through spiritual practice as one example)

 

[KWED]

In this physical world where certain physical laws humans can understand, yes. But outside of this physical world/dimention other laws may exists. So no there is not just one answer. And if a person understand the law of physics those laws can be broken (through spiritual practice as one example)

So are you claiming that there are a variety of gods and true religions?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

They asked a general question. I provided a general answer.

Yeah, I know. But the physical part of the world is broken all the time since it is not a fact that the world is physical. That is a belief without evidence.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Yes you are free to reply, and to ask question, but trying to offend anyone who believe in a God. No that you are not free to do in a forum.

There's a difference between feeling offended by a comment and a comment being made with the purpose to offend.

If someone expresses a belief that isn't based on evidence and I then point out that it's irrational to believe things without evidence, then perhaps you may take offense.
Perhaps that is your problem and not mine.