Would you buy it?

[Thief]

My keen sense of observation has noted that you think there is some kind of flaw in my reasoning.

Care to explain?

-Q

It will sufficient that you are not able to undo what I have done.

 

[The Neo Nerd]

It will sufficient that you are not able to undo what I have done.

Hahahaha i know what you are trying to do here.

You're trying to confuse thinking that if you confuse me enough you'll win.

You are a wily one Thief.

But i'm on to you.

-Q

 

[Thief]

Hahahaha i know what you are trying to do here.

You're trying to confuse thinking that if you confuse me enough you'll win.

You are a wily one Thief.

But i'm on to you.

-Q

I am not playing a game....there's nothing to win.
There's plenty to lose.

When I post, I do so as if there will be consequence in the next life.

When I die, the angels will take me to Whom ever I have quoted.

It is likely I will be greeted in this manner........

As He looks me in the face...into my eyes.....
"What's this?!"

And the angels that brought me will excuse themselves and reply....
"He used your Name and your Word...as if it belonged to him.
We thought he was one of yours."

They will stand back, and I shall have my day of reckoning with my Lord.

How about you?
Anyone waiting to talk to you?
Or do you anticipate the Eternal Darkness of the grave?

 

[The Neo Nerd]

So you don't want to answer my question then?

-Q

 

[Meow Mix]

I honetly think that people simply can't justify it at any more than they could their sexuality or political views.

How do you justify an evolved trait that is exaggerated/mitigated by social and developmental cues?

wa:do

Good question, I don't know. I couldn't justify why I feel this or that way about this or that thing. The thing that confuses me though is that even though I just "happen" to have a favorite color, and I just "happen" to be attracted to women, and some other characteristics that are just part of my personality -- none of those things are really beliefs about what exist.

So, I would never ask someone for "justification" for why their favorite color is blue or why they love who they do (ha that rhymed), but it seems like a different scenario when we're talking about beliefs about what exists or not than it does to have likes/dislikes/preferences.

 

[Meow Mix]

Meow Mix. You do not understand that humans are different and have different varying perceptions of observing and seeing reality. Some are completely logical and others are intuitive and deep thinkers.
Introverts — Different Brain Pathways and Neurotransmitters « Writing from the Edge 2
If you think logic is the only way to observe reality then you have to ask why the difference in introverts and extroverts in the way the brain functions?(look at link)
Some people rely on intuition like introverts and see beyond materialism because they allow allow the consciousness to do so. People who are only logical assume everything is just materialistic and can't see past it.
Just because it is irrational to your logic now because it is only observed intuitively does not mean someone can't see intuitively past what someone who is only logical can see now.
I would love to hear your understanding of intuition.
People observe the effects of God intuitively and although there are varying differences in the understanding of these effects, the effects are observed intuitively none the less and give enough rise for justification.

I'm a logical thinker and I'm not a materialist.

I understand the utility of intuition but as you yourself said, intuition isn't enough. It gets the ball rolling, but the real work is done via justification. Knowledge is justified true belief; you can't "know" something through intuition alone. Nor is an intuitive belief (which doesn't have justification) rational to hold.

Time has shown that intuition -- though it is a good guide -- is often wrong. Ignore whatever knowledge you have right now and ask yourself if it's intuitive to believe solid matter is continuous or if it's made of specks so tiny that you can't even see them?

I don't know how you'd answer, but I bet I wouldn't guess atomic theory if I didn't already know about it. My intuition would say that matter is continuous and solid, which is false.

Intuition must be tempered with justification to be useful. Einstein was a great metaphysicist as much as he was a great physicist, and I think he would agree.

 

[Wotan]

Einstein claims it is the most important part of thinking.Why do you soppose that is?

Although intuition is what allows us to move forward—is the most important part of thinking—it alone is not enough. Knowledge also has its place, but intuition is the gatekeeper at the most critical juncture. Even though the workings of intuition remain mysterious, it is a reality.
INTUITION IN-DEPTH: EINSTEIN'S INTUITION

I see you still have NO idea what we are discussing. Of course intuition has a place.
But it is NOT justification for anything. Nor does it prove anything.

Yet you claimed "the effects are observed intuitively none the less and give enough rise for justification."

That claim is absurd. On its face.

 

[Midnight Pete]

She gave you a pretty clear description about when emotion shouldn't be used and when it should. It's not about never using emotion.

Do you believe that emotion should be used when determining the number of whales in existence? Of course not. Otherwise, if you like whales your number may differ from that of somebody who doesn't like whales.

Now, should emotion be used in determining whether we should protect whales or not? Absolutely. While a logical argument could probably be made either for or against whale protection, I would think emotion an integral part of assigning value to something.

Emotion is involuntary! :banghead3

 

[painted wolf]

Good question, I don't know. I couldn't justify why I feel this or that way about this or that thing. The thing that confuses me though is that even though I just "happen" to have a favorite color, and I just "happen" to be attracted to women, and some other characteristics that are just part of my personality -- none of those things are really beliefs about what exist.

Yes, but you also just happen to believe in more "liberal" or "conservative" ideas too. You also just happen to be more or less prone to depression... even if you can't explain why you feel depressed.

So, I would never ask someone for "justification" for why their favorite color is blue or why they love who they do (ha that rhymed), but it seems like a different scenario when we're talking about beliefs about what exists or not than it does to have likes/dislikes/preferences.

Does it? Given how much of our perception is influenced by brain chemistry, social cues and genetic predispositions, is it any wonder we have a range of thoughts of what is "real" and what exists in our own minds?

Have you heard of the "invisible princess Alice" experiments?
Is Believing In God Evolutionarily Advantageous? : NPR

wa:do

 

[Walkntune]

I don't know how you'd answer, but I bet I wouldn't guess atomic theory if I didn't already know about it. My intuition would say that matter is continuous and solid, which is false.

Interesting question.Going by intuition I think that energy is what is continuous and that matter is just energy in different forms and the effect of energy. This is my view and I am not all that familiar with science(QM) but just intuitive self thinker.I know science uses energy in specific terms but I am speaking of a force that is the first cause of materialism.We can't observe it as we can't observe gravity but we can observe effects as materialism that we assume is first cause.
By intuition I would assume string theory lines up with reality better than I guess you call particle theory or quantum mechanics but it because I believe energy is first cause and not materialism.
Possibly are intuition is tied into this instinctively and our logical minds observe everything in the materialistic view and only when the two truths come together do we get an understanding of what the real truth is.Einstein and Tesla both had an intuition about a cosmic source for creation and I think Einstein had some understanding in this and expressed a lot of his views in his quotes.
"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."Albert Einstein.

 

[Meow Mix]

Interesting question.Going by intuition I think that energy is what is continuous and that matter is just energy in different forms and the effect of energy. This is my view and I am not all that familiar with science(QM) but just intuitive self thinker.I know science uses energy in specific terms but I am speaking of a force that is the first cause of materialism.We can't observe it as we can't observe gravity but we can observe effects as materialism that we assume is first cause.
By intuition I would assume string theory lines up with reality better than I guess you call particle theory or quantum mechanics but it because I believe energy is first cause and not materialism.
Possibly are intuition is tied into this instinctively and our logical minds observe everything in the materialistic view and only when the two truths come together do we get an understanding of what the real truth is.Einstein and Tesla both had an intuition about a cosmic source for creation and I think Einstein had some understanding in this and expressed a lot of his views in his quotes.
"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."Albert Einstein.

But matter "isn't" energy, it just possesses energy. Also energy is material, so cannot precede materialism.

If as you suggest you might be using a different context of "energy" this would be a good place to define it, because if you're not talking about energy that we talk about in physics then I don't know what you're talking about.

I do agree that intuition is important in science but unchecked intuition only gets you in trouble. Intuition must be tempered with justification and understanding.

 

[Meow Mix]

Does it? Given how much of our perception is influenced by brain chemistry, social cues and genetic predispositions, is it any wonder we have a range of thoughts of what is "real" and what exists in our own minds?

Have you heard of the "invisible princess Alice" experiments?
Is Believing In God Evolutionarily Advantageous? : NPR

wa:do

Interesting article, thanks for posting that!

There may be some natural inclination to think about supernatural things just like we have a natural inclination for face recognition (and seeing faces where there are none, such as in the moon's patterns, the "face of mars," etc.) but once we excercise our reason we can rise above what we're genetically predisposed for.

Should I believe that there's really a face on Mars because I'm naturally inclined to look at the structure and think so?

Or should I still run my beliefs, no matter how intuitionistic or fueled by my genes, through the tempering engine of reason?

 

[Midnight Pete]

Should I believe that there's really a face on Mars because I'm naturally inclined to look at the structure and think so?

Why not? If it looks like a face, it looks like a face. If I saw a cloud that looks like a bunny rabbit, I would not shrink back from making that observation in the privacy of my own mind.

You overthink everything.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

A company is selling a box with wonderful attributes. After all, it explains why evil exists and how the world was created. Furthermore it grants you eternal life. Sometimes if you ask it for things then it will happen for you, other times it won't (the box is temperamental, or has a higher purpose that it doesn't want your wishes to inferfere with sometimes). Many people who've purchased the box have had good things happen to them and many gained a lot of self-confidence to drop drugs and other things like that. In fact, there were a few people who had their cancer go into remission inexplicably after purchasing the box! There are even reports of people hearing the magic in the box. One time, there was a cloud that looked exactly like the box -- logo and everything.

The catch is, though, that you can never look inside it while you're alive; or scan or probe it. Also the box is $1,000 USD.

Sorry, you get most of the benefits of the box after you both purchase the box and then die (don't worry, eternity and all those answers are waiting for you inside the box right?)

So, who here would buy the box? Surely $1,000 and taking some time to whisper desires and thankfulness to it as well as taking the time to indoctrinate the children towards getting their own boxes* is worth the time, right?

(* - you DO want them to live forever right?)

If not, why not?

I think it's incredibly obvious what I'm getting at here.

Edit: Also the box still works even if it's physically destroyed because you live eternally inside the spiritual box. So, nobody can point to the fact that some of the boxes will decay after a person's death and use that as evidence that the box's claims of immortality are false.

I can get that deal for free.

 

[Meow Mix]

Why not? If it looks like a face, it looks like a face. If I saw a cloud that looks like a bunny rabbit, I would not shrink back from making that observation in the privacy of my own mind.

You overthink everything.

I'm not saying that we shouldn't say "That looks like a face," but there's quite a difference between saying "That looks like a face" and "That's an intentionally designed structure in the deliberate shape of a face." That's the point I'm making here. Believing through intuition unchecked by reason is untenable.

 

[painted wolf]

Interesting article, thanks for posting that!

There may be some natural inclination to think about supernatural things just like we have a natural inclination for face recognition (and seeing faces where there are none, such as in the moon's patterns, the "face of mars," etc.) but once we excercise our reason we can rise above what we're genetically predisposed for.

Should I believe that there's really a face on Mars because I'm naturally inclined to look at the structure and think so?

Or should I still run my beliefs, no matter how intuitionistic or fueled by my genes, through the tempering engine of reason?

This is where culture and things like operant conditioning come in. When you have a strong genetic predisposition and the strong reinforcement of culture, the behavior has the potential to become fixed and/or exaggerated.

You may never be able to recognized that this has happened... you won't be able to justify the behavior any more than "Baby Albert" could justify his crippling fear responses as an adult. The behavior simply is, and your ability to recognize and/or mitigate it may well have to do with the exact blend of genetics and conditioning you have.

You must admit that there are atheists who are unusually fervent in their beliefs for claiming rationality.

wa:do

ps.. you are very welcome.

 

[Midnight Pete]

I'm not saying that we shouldn't say "That looks like a face," but there's quite a difference between saying "That looks like a face" and "That's an intentionally designed structure in the deliberate shape of a face." That's the point I'm making here. Believing through intuition unchecked by reason is untenable.

Believing through intuition unchecked by reason is untenable.

I don't know what that means.

 

[Thief]

So you don't want to answer my question then?

-Q

Well...though some digression happens....

Could your question be aimed at the 'box'?

 

[tomato1236]

I don't know what that means.

www.dictionary.com

 

[Meow Mix]

I don't know what that means.

If by "that" you mean my statement about believing through intuition without reason being untenable, I mean that our intuition is often wrong and it takes reason to sort the wrong from the right.

Much of science and mathematics are counterintuitive, meaning that they are intuitively wrong, but actually true.

Intuition alone is insufficient.