When is it appropriate to share your religious faith with others? - Page 15

bob x · 06-06-2008, 09:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by seattlegal

Hey, I'd be more than happy to discuss the finer points of punctuated equilibruim with you. The idea of rocks hitting the earth causing apes to change into people...

Your second sentence proves that you have zero familiarity with the finer points, or even the grosser points, of the subject matter.

Alex P · 06-07-2008, 02:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by path_of_one

Just a gentle word from a friendly mod...

Please be as polite as possible to each other and refrain from name-calling and personal attacks. It's just a conversation, folks, and I'm sure we can debate our points effectively without being rude to each other.

Peace,
Path

You are amazing...

China Cat Sunflower · 06-07-2008, 02:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by seattlegal

That's the point, Chris. When it all comes down to where the the rubber meets the road, belief regarding origins of whatever flavor breaks down due to a lack of concrete evidence that can be proven in a definitive manner, leaving only faith to fill in the gaps. All you're left with is MU!

OK. I had unrealistic expectations. You're very good at playing the conversation game without ever giving anything away SG. That's understandable I guess. Of course, if one has nothing to offer but quips and quotes one shouldn't engage in smug condescension over people who've actually got chips on the table.

Chris

Dream · 06-07-2008, 04:02 AM

I like the card playing analogy but nobody's chips are down. That's a ridiculous assessment. I can think of times when everyone here has played the conversation game, because that's what forums are about. Suddenly all of Seattlegal's posts are reassessed as having been nothing but "smug condescension of others?" And I thought I was the one using Seattlegal as a crutch!

Alex P · 06-07-2008, 04:07 AM

I'm too skint... Someone will have to loan me chips..... :\

China Cat Sunflower · 06-07-2008, 04:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dream

I like the card playing analogy but nobody's chips are down. That's a ridiculous assessment. I can think of times when everyone here has played the conversation game, because that's what forums are about. Suddenly all of Seattlegal's posts are reassessed as having been nothing but "smug condescension of others?" And I thought I was the one using Seattlegal as a crutch!

Don't pretend that you know something you don't Dreamy. You're another one who won't take a solid position.

Chris

Alex P · 06-07-2008, 04:44 AM

What is wrong with not having a solid postion? I think that shows there is room for error... So you haven't put all your eggs in one basket.

China Cat Sunflower · 06-07-2008, 05:04 AM

There's nothing wrong if you say that up front, Alex. But you can't then pretend to engage people with a thin gruel of intellectual sounding goo gaw that never, ever, goes toward making any SOLID point that someone might be able to craft a rebuttal to. I'm calling bull**** on that.

Chris

Alex P · 06-07-2008, 05:08 AM

ah ok I see, thanks for your reply.

Dream · 06-07-2008, 06:31 AM

Your judgment in this, Chinacat, seems questionable. You underestimate the effects of your own zeal and religiousness -- your own mission.

Yes, some lame excuses for science have graced the public with non scientific propaganda and fallacious arguments for instantaneous creation. Yes, the Institute for Creation Research lied about this and stretched that. Yes, they truncated rationality to make the world fit their point of view. Yes, the Intelligent Design people are panicky religious types. This is beside the point and does not address the issue.

Dream · 06-07-2008, 06:32 AM

People may not say so, but they often think of Science as a religion, and Scientists as its priests. Universities are their temples. Science propaganda has itself become religious, part of a well meaning effort to cleanse humanity from traditional religions. Science as religion is considered to be humanity's only hope! Ironically, it was this Science Religion in universities which partially created the conditions for the public to fall for quack scientists, including people like Henry Morris the Creationist. Shortcut science propounding theories as fact has undermined confidence in the Scientific Method, creating a slack attitude in the public -- an attitude of faith in scientists instead of in knowledge. Pet university theories are still zealously, and sometimes slavishly promoted without good explanations.

seattlegal · 06-07-2008, 06:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nick the Pilot

SG,

I find this discussion fascinating. The way I see it, Purusha (spirit) gladly allows itself to be imprisoned in Prakriti (matter). And, Prakriti gladly imprisons Purusha.

"Prakriti ... wants to imprison the spirit so it can continue to evolve."

--> Yes! And it is a great thing. I think the problem is that we have been told this is a bad thing, when the reality is that it is a good thing.

The way I see it, this is exactly what Christians refer to as "God sacrificiing his only Son for us." (Although I disagree with such a visualization.) To me, the Fall was not bad, it was good.

How do you figure Prakriti is a confused Purusha?

That's the impression I get from my (by no means complete) study of Samkhya philosophy. (It seems that part of the interaction involves a struggle over the identity or mind...)

seattlegal · 06-07-2008, 06:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by China Cat Sunflower

OK. I had unrealistic expectations. You're very good at playing the conversation game without ever giving anything away SG. That's understandable I guess. Of course, if one has nothing to offer but quips and quotes one shouldn't engage in smug condescension over people who've actually got chips on the table.

Chris

Quote:

Originally Posted by China Cat Sunflower

There's nothing wrong if you say that up front, Alex. But you can't then pretend to engage people with a thin gruel of intellectual sounding goo gaw that never, ever, goes toward making any SOLID point that someone might be able to craft a rebuttal to. I'm calling bull**** on that.

Chris

Well, Chris, look what I've got to work:

Quote:

Originally Posted by bob x

Your second sentence proves that you have zero familiarity with the finer points, or even the grosser points, of the subject matter.

The way I see it, this is just a ploy for me to get bob x to do his homework for him. As the believer, he's the one that needs to present the evidence to which I can craft a rebuttal. I've already examined punctuated equilibrium (as a believer in abiogenesis,) and I found that I didn't have enough faith to fill in the gaps of implausibility the theory had.

I would say that this thread highlights the truth in the Acintita Sutta regarding conjecture about the origin of the world leading to madness and vexation to those conjecture about it.

Acintita Sutta
Unconjecturable

"There are these four unconjecturables that are not to be conjectured about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about them. Which four?

"The Buddha-range of the Buddhas1 is an unconjecturable that is not to be conjectured about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about it.

"The jhana-range of a person in jhana...2

"The [precise working out of the] results of kamma...

"Conjecture about [the origin, etc., of] the world is an unconjecturable that is not to be conjectured about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about it.

"These are the four unconjecturables that are not to be conjectured about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about them."

I would say that there is ample evidence of madness and vexation being brought to the people in this very thread who are conjecturing about these things. It reminds me somewhat of someone wrestling with really difficult and emotionally disturbing koan.

seattlegal · 06-07-2008, 07:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dream

I like the card playing analogy but nobody's chips are down. That's a ridiculous assessment. I can think of times when everyone here has played the conversation game, because that's what forums are about. Suddenly all of Seattlegal's posts are reassessed as having been nothing but "smug condescension of others?" And I thought I was the one using Seattlegal as a crutch!

Well heck, Dream, it's June, and today's high temperature was only 56° F. I'm only trying to generate a little heat, here. I'm freezing my butt off!

seattlegal · 06-07-2008, 07:53 AM

Doh! Oops! This

Quote:

Originally Posted by seattlegal

The way I see it, this is just a ploy for me to get bob x to do his homework for him. As the believer, he's the one that needs to present the evidence to which I can craft a rebuttal.

...should be this:

The way I see it, this is just a ploy by bob x to get me to do his homework for him.

Doh!