ZOMBIE FORUMS

It's a stinking, shambling corpse grotesquely parodying life.
It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 12:20 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 105 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 3:14 am 
Offline
Expatriate
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2006 1:14 pm
Posts: 123
Reason wrote:
Er, I'd like to point out a contradiction concerning the christian God.

God gives man Free Will. But he has a plan THAT YOU CAN NOT DEVIATE FROM!
>.>
<.<
o.o

Not all Christians believe that sort of thing, i should point out. It's not necessarily a contradiction, for that matter. God did not give us unlimited free will, so obviously some degree of limitation (ie, a plan) does not contradict this. How do i know we don't have unlimited free will? I can't, for instance, make a million dollars appear in my pocket solely through force of will.

(Incidentally, the whole "God gave us free will" part is theologically shaky also... but that's a different topic, mostly.)

As far as what sort of "plan" God might have in mind? I do believe that God's mind is described in several places in the Bible as "inscrutable". With that in mind, although i don't particularly subscribe strongly to this sort of religious dictate, claiming to understand God or God's plan ("God hates fags!" crowd: i'm looking at you) would be at least mildly heretical. Not to mention assertion of prophet-dom; an assertion, let me be clear, that can be tested harshly according to the Bible.

Tossrock wrote:
I'm a strict determinist and let me tell you it is fucking depressing

Which is a good reason to not be a strict determinist :3nod:

_________________
<a href="http://dresdencodak.com/cartoons/dc_019.htm">"God is powered by irony."</a>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 9:32 am 
Offline
Local
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 2:45 pm
Posts: 267
Location: Out in the Black
That's another thin I don't like about it. It's so goddamn open to interpretation. The damn Bible has been rewritten and translated so many times that nothing is certain. The Bible says that if you sleep in a bed that a woman has had her period in you will be stoned to death.

But then you say "That's in the Old Testament, it doesn't count," or something close to that and my mind is screaming "THEN WHY ARE PEOPLE SAYING BEING GAY IS A SIN! SAME BOOK!"

The whole thing is just so damn frustrating. You know?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 1:44 pm 
Offline
Expatriate
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2006 1:14 pm
Posts: 123
Reason wrote:
..."THEN WHY ARE PEOPLE SAYING BEING GAY IS A SIN! SAME BOOK!"...

In this case, mostly because they are clueless and/or gigantic hypocrites.

Incidentally, part of the reason we're talking about this (i suspect) is due to the stem cell research bill that Bush just recently vetoed. For the record, that bill would have used embryos from fertility clinics that were slated for destruction for research instead of simply destroying them. So, if you want to believe destruction of an embryo is murder (or merely morally equivalent to murder) then let me point out that Bush's veto did not stop a single one.

Which, of course, he knows damn well. But it's too important for him to agitate his "base" for him to let that slip through...

_________________
<a href="http://dresdencodak.com/cartoons/dc_019.htm">"God is powered by irony."</a>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 3:21 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2004 1:36 am
Posts: 1512
Winter wrote:
How do i know we don't have unlimited free will? I can't, for instance, make a million dollars appear in my pocket solely through force of will.


That you can't violate the law of conservation of matter has absolutely nothing to do with free will.

(Or can you?)

_________________
I had that dream again
where I was lost
for good in outer space


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 7:20 pm 
Offline
Expatriate
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2006 1:14 pm
Posts: 123
Actually, it does.

The situation is the following:
Proposed argument A:
1. The Bible says God gave me free will and that God has a plan.
2. However, this is a contradiction because a plan limits free will
3. Therefore, the Bible must be wrong in at least one place or the other

However, there's another argument B that goes like this:
1. Given free will and given conservation of energy.
2. (As per above) there is a contradiction because conservation of energy limits free will (as per my example).
3. Therefore, at least one of the givens must be wrong.

That seems like an argument against free will in general--but most people (or at least, people who buy into free will to begin with) do not believe that limits upon free will by conservation of energy are enough to completely defeat free will--in other words, the second piece (that there is a contradiction) is untrue. So, assuming conservation of energy and a hypothetical plan from God are similar in relevant places (specifically, here, the amount of limitations each place on free will) then the second part of the first argument must also be untrue. In other words, the original assertion is untrue.

_________________
<a href="http://dresdencodak.com/cartoons/dc_019.htm">"God is powered by irony."</a>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 7:48 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2004 1:36 am
Posts: 1512
You can try to create matter all you want. The decision to make the attempt is free will.

The fact that you cannot doesn't limit your free will any more than lack of light removes your ability to see. You still have sight, but not the conditions necessary to make use of it. You can conceptualize creating a million dollars, but lack the conditions to follow through - in this case, a printing press(among other things).

_________________
I had that dream again
where I was lost
for good in outer space


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 7:53 pm 
Offline
Green Text

Joined: Thu Dec 12, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 4126
Location: Clouds, rain, and green fields...
Reason wrote:
That's another thin I don't like about it. It's so goddamn open to interpretation. The damn Bible has been rewritten and translated so many times that nothing is certain. The Bible says that if you sleep in a bed that a woman has had her period in you will be stoned to death.

Image

Also, http://www.godhatesshrimp.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 9:04 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 2428
Location: In the ether, Hand of DM poised for enervation at will
What I love about the Bible is that God apparently gave us free will, but he tosses us in Hell if we use it counter to his plan. He just sort of let us free in this world full of sin, with no guidance or supervision except the ranting of priests, and then gets pissed when we do something wrong.

My roomate equated it to letting your 4 year old go in a livingroom full of sawblades and sharp corners, closing the door, and then getting pissed when he puts an eye out.

It's why I'm not Christian. Too many contradictions, too many restrictions. That, and I don't believe it's valid anymore if I have to cut things out of it to make it believable. Like according to the bible, women can't speak in church, work, teach, read, wear silk, gold or pears, and can only redeem herself in the eyes of God by having as many babies as possible.

I'd rather believe in something experience teaches me than retool the Bible to fit my needs. Because refitting them to my needs just feels... wrong to me. Spirituality should be about feeling more connected to the world and your fellow man, not about how you scored on your Christianity Report Card by following all their silly rules.

Eh. But that's just me.

And I still think it's stupid to bring religion into a debate based in science. Apples and oranges, at least mostly.

_________________
The scent of Binturong musk is often compared to that of warm popcorn.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 9:20 pm 
Offline
Expatriate
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2006 1:14 pm
Posts: 123
Sair wrote:
You can try to create matter all you want. The decision to make the attempt is free will.

The fact that you cannot doesn't limit your free will any more than lack of light removes your ability to see. You still have sight, but not the conditions necessary to make use of it. You can conceptualize creating a million dollars, but lack the conditions to follow through - in this case, a printing press(among other things).

Which is not exactly different than some proposed "God's plan". Which is the whole point.

But regardless of that, it doesn't matter. Regardless of how hard i would like to break conservation of energy, i can't. Conservation of energy limits my freedom, and by therefore my free will.

_________________
<a href="http://dresdencodak.com/cartoons/dc_019.htm">"God is powered by irony."</a>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 10:12 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2004 1:36 am
Posts: 1512
Explain to me how it constrains your ability to make decisions.

_________________
I had that dream again
where I was lost
for good in outer space


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 10:41 pm 
Offline
Expatriate
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2006 1:14 pm
Posts: 123
By constraining my ability to act. If i am unable to act freely then i am, by necessity, lacking free will. I am only able to decide to fail, not to succeed. It is one avenue i cannot actually take.

I might be able to "make decisions" even if i lack free will, incidentally.

_________________
<a href="http://dresdencodak.com/cartoons/dc_019.htm">"God is powered by irony."</a>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 11:27 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2004 1:36 am
Posts: 1512
You're confusing the ability to think with the ability to act. The mere fact that you can envision such a thing is evidence of your free will. If you lacked free will, it would be outside your ability to even concieve of such a notion.

And I when I talk about making decisions, I'm not talking about logic gates. I m mean the ability to consciously and intentionally make a choice.

If free will is defined by the ability to act, then your average computer has more free will than your average person.

_________________
I had that dream again
where I was lost
for good in outer space


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 21, 2006 2:46 am 
Offline
Expatriate
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2006 1:14 pm
Posts: 123
Oh, i think i see the argument. Two responses:

First, there are two parts to free will as most people understand it today: an ability to decide and an ability to act. Decision without action cannot be properly termed free will--it is indistinguishable from non-decision. Even our legal system, today, recognizes this distinction--for instance, when dealing with addicts who intend to "quit". This, incidentally, is where a fairly powerful argument against free will comes in... but that's a different story.

However, my original argument was, i think, slightly subtler than that. The claim was that i couldn't choose, and then as a direct result of that choice matter will be created. The argument was that i'm incapable of making a choice (decision, act of will, etc) that causes matter to appear without some intervening factor. (The fact that i can't create matter through any other means as well is only a safety precaution to ensure people can't argue over that part of it--it apparently failed! You can substitute "fly" for "create matter" and it will have the same effect--sure, i can choose to take an airplane, but that's a different choice.)

Even trying to make that choice does not fit as that's a different choice entirely--i'm choosing to try to choose to break the laws of physics with my mind, which is easy. But actually doing the part that comes after "try" is impossible. In my argument, the thought is the act. Now, maybe you're going to try to prove that thoughts cannot be actions--although i am pretty sure you would be wrong--but i have a fall-back position in a slightly more complex argument involving thought --> (something here) --> matter creation.

Secondly: i'm not sure the ability to conceive of a thing equating to free will is relevant to this argument. I'm not trying to argue the experiment i propose proves there's no such thing as free will (if i did that it would hurt my overall argument!) but rather that we lack unlimited free will. In contrast, we might say that a being such as God would have unlimited free will--the ability to will the universe into existence, for example. (Of course, that opens up a whole new can of worms WRT our own free will, but that's a separate--if interesting--line of inquiry.)

In addition to that, i suspect a strict determinist would disagree that your envisioning = free will argument is compelling. A strict constructionist would simply push the lack of free will back: you envisioned it because of your lack of free will, rather than your free wll.

_________________
<a href="http://dresdencodak.com/cartoons/dc_019.htm">"God is powered by irony."</a>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:03 am 
Offline
<font color=red><b>STALKER/FAG ALERT.
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2004 2:38 am
Posts: 1579
Winter wrote:
nick012000 wrote:
The only time abortion is justified is if failing to abort would result in the death of the mother. This falls under the 'self defense' clause I mentioned above. Other than these (very rare) situations, however,

What about in cases of rape or incest? Would you force a woman to raise the child of a man who raped her? What if that man was, for instance, the woman's father?


She doesn't have to raise it. She can put it up for adoption the instant she gives birth to it, and never see it again. Why punish the child for the sins of the father?

Onion: Yes, he will forgive you for abortion, if you repent and accept God's gift of forgiveness, through Jesus.

krylex: This was directed at Cathy, but I'll answer your question anyway. Yes, it is wrong for her to have an abortion. If she wants to avoid responsability for her actions, she can give the kid up for abortion afterwards. I'll point out that my parents were dirt poor when they had me and my little brother, and we're doing fine now. Is it okay for a poor person to murder someone for money? Of course not. Same principle.

RE: Free will subthread: From my point of view, God sees the results of all possible actions by everybody who exists, and ever could exist. The future is a many forked road, and it's up to us to decide which branch to walk down. So, God does have a plan, and we do have free will. Also, free will is not invalidated by the laws of physics. Sure, you can't choose to fly by flapping your arms in the air. This invalidates free will how, exactly? Whether or not the action is impossible or not, you can choose still choose to try. You'll just fail miserably (and possibly with either comical or tragic results).

_________________
USER SHOULD HAVE BEEN BANNED FOR THIS POST.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 21, 2006 10:20 am 
Offline
PostWhorePornStar
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2003 5:00 pm
Posts: 7672
Location: Tallahassee, FL
So nick, she has to stop her life so that she can bring an unwanted child into the world to simply toss into an orphanage after 9 months?

How is bringing unwanted children into the world a good thing?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 21, 2006 10:44 am 
Offline
Local
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 2:45 pm
Posts: 267
Location: Out in the Black
I've heard lots of horror stories about orphanage life (the one that ends with the kid killing himself rather than going back is my favorite).

People act like being killed is such a bad thing, but there are worse things in life than dying. I'd rather be killed than jump from foster home to foster home or go to prison or an orphanage. These are not good forms of life!

What if the kid grows up, manages to get through all the bullshit and become moderately successful, and hunts down his real parents? His mom put him up for adoption because she was raped/raped by her father/brother/uncle?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 21, 2006 3:38 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 4439
Location: You can't take the sky from me. Since I found Serenity.
nick012000 wrote:
Onion: Yes, he will forgive you for abortion, if you repent and accept God's gift of forgiveness, through Jesus.


Don't worry Nick. Though your karma has been thus far battered by your past bad faith, you still have hope of achieving Nirvana in this life time. All you must do is follow the Eightfold Path and recognize the Four Noble Truthes. You need not be doomed to reincarnation forever.

_________________
Build a man a fire, warm him for a day,
Set a man on fire, warm him for the rest of his life.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 21, 2006 4:01 pm 
Offline
Green Text

Joined: Thu Dec 12, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 4126
Location: Clouds, rain, and green fields...
What are the Four Noble Truths, say you!? Scratch your head in puzzlement, do you!?

<marquee> :confused: :confused: :confused: </marquee>
I an glad you asked!1

1. Life means suffering.
To live means to suffer, because the human nature is not perfect and neither is the world we live in. During our lifetime, we inevitably have to endure physical suffering such as pain, sickness, injury, tiredness, old age, and eventually death; and we have to endure psychological suffering like sadness, fear, frustration, disappointment, and depression. Although there are different degrees of suffering and there are also positive experiences in life that we perceive as the opposite of suffering, such as ease, comfort and happiness, life in its totality is imperfect and incomplete, because our world is subject to impermanence. This means we are never able to keep permanently what we strive for, and just as happy moments pass by, we ourselves and our loved ones will pass away one day, too.

2. The origin of suffering is attachment.
The origin of suffering is attachment to transient things and the ignorance thereof. Transient things do not only include the physical objects that surround us, but also ideas, and -in a greater sense- all objects of our perception. Ignorance is the lack of understanding of how our mind is attached to impermanent things. The reasons for suffering are desire, passion, ardour, pursue of wealth and prestige, striving for fame and popularity, or in short: craving and clinging. Because the objects of our attachment are transient, their loss is inevitable, thus suffering will necessarily follow. Objects of attachment also include the idea of a "self" which is a delusion, because there is no abiding self. What we call "self" is just an imagined entity, and we are merely a part of the ceaseless becoming of the universe.

3. The cessation of suffering is attainable.
The cessation of suffering can be attained through nirodha. Nirodha means the unmaking of sensual craving and conceptual attachment. The third noble truth expresses the idea that suffering can be ended by attaining dispassion. Nirodha extinguishes all forms of clinging and attachment. This means that suffering can be overcome through human activity, simply by removing the cause of suffering. Attaining and perfecting dispassion is a process of many levels that ultimately results in the state of Nirvana. Nirvana means freedom from all worries, troubles, complexes, fabrications and ideas. Nirvana is not comprehensible for those who have not attained it.

4. The path to the cessation of suffering.
There is a path to the end of suffering - a gradual path of self-improvement, which is described more detailed in the Eightfold Path. It is the middle way between the two extremes of excessive self-indulgence (hedonism) and excessive self-mortification (asceticism); and it leads to the end of the cycle of rebirth. The latter quality discerns it from other paths which are merely "wandering on the wheel of becoming", because these do not have a final object. The path to the end of suffering can extend over many lifetimes, throughout which every individual rebirth is subject to karmic conditioning. Craving, ignorance, delusions, and its effects will disappear gradually, as progress is made on the path.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:38 pm 
Offline
<font color=red><b>STALKER/FAG ALERT.
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2004 2:38 am
Posts: 1579
krylex wrote:
So nick, she has to stop her life so that she can bring an unwanted child into the world to simply toss into an orphanage after 9 months?

How is bringing unwanted children into the world a good thing?


She doesn't need to stop her life. It is illegal to discriminate against workers based on the fact they're pregnant, it is still safe to engage in intercourse or sports as long as you avoid placing pressure on the stomach, and so on.

Any life is better than no life at all. If Buddhism is right, I want to reincarnate eternally. Any existance, even a suffering one, is better than no existance. A crappy life is better than being aborted. People who commit suicide are cowards (with the notable exeption of Islamic fanatics who martyr themselves with bombs, and people who choose to die in order to save other people's lives i.e. jumping on a grenade in order to save your comrades).

_________________
USER SHOULD HAVE BEEN BANNED FOR THIS POST.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 21, 2006 8:25 pm 
Offline
Expatriate
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2006 1:14 pm
Posts: 123
nick012000 wrote:
Winter wrote:
nick012000 wrote:
The only time abortion is justified is if failing to abort would result in the death of the mother. This falls under the 'self defense' clause I mentioned above. Other than these (very rare) situations, however,

What about in cases of rape or incest? Would you force a woman to raise the child of a man who raped her? What if that man was, for instance, the woman's father?


She doesn't have to raise it. She can put it up for adoption the instant she gives birth to it, and never see it again. Why punish the child for the sins of the father?

Says you. Apparently you haven't noticed, but forced childbirth has been a tool of oppression of women for centuries. Adoption is not a solution, it is part of the problem. White, healthy children are extremely valuable--particularly to certain sects of Christians who want or need to use adopted (or otherwise acquired) children in order to pass on their "name" and philosophies to the next generation. Witness the phenomenon of "snowflake children" (if you watched Bush's press conference: that's who those kids were) and similar.

Furthermore, sometimes giving a child up for adoption is impossible. Sometimes the damage will have been done by the time the woman gives birth. Don't forget, also, that a child who is born is technically custody of both parents--what happens in a situation where a father repeatedly impregnates his daughter and forces her to raise the subsequent children? Abortion, in that instance, isn't necessarily a safe solution either--but it's another option.

And so on, and so on.

Are you really prepared to condemn every such situation?

Quote:
krylex: This was directed at Cathy, but I'll answer your question anyway. Yes, it is wrong for her to have an abortion. If she wants to avoid responsability for her actions...

And yet, just a second ago, weren't we talking about situations where the woman did not take any actions, yet ended up pregnant anyway? This whole "women who want abortions are just irresponsible" idea is bullshit. Sometimes that's what's going on, but sometimes it's not.

Quote:
Is it okay for a poor person to murder someone for money? Of course not. Same principle.

Actually, yes it is. (Well, in some places.)

If a person is attempting to break into my home i am, in many circumstances, justified in killing that person to death under US law. Even if that person was only after money.

Quote:
...Sure, you can't choose to fly by flapping your arms in the air. This invalidates free will how, exactly? Whether or not the action is impossible or not, you can choose still choose to try. You'll just fail miserably (and possibly with either comical or tragic results).

Once again, missing the subtlety of my argument.

You can choose to flap your arms all you want, but you won't fly. You can't "will" matter into existence, or even attempt it.

_________________
<a href="http://dresdencodak.com/cartoons/dc_019.htm">"God is powered by irony."</a>


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 105 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 29 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group