Religion

TreasonousBastard

(43,049 posts)

1. I thought it was already well known that rationality was a chimera...

Tue Jan 2, 2018, 06:28 PM

Jan 2018

"Non-rational", as opposed to irrational, has been known at least since the Greeks.

We are constantly faced with quandaries. Some are brutal, like one cancer treatment has a 60% chance of success, but will be agonizing while another has a 40% chance of success but won't leave you worse off than you are. And costs a lot less. Or which mortgage terms are best?

Most aren't that stark, but every day we face decisions where we can't prove we have all the facts or don't have the means to "rationally" decide even if we did.

Logic and rationality are preached by too many who haven't even seen a square of opposition, much less analyzed a syllogism. A sorites paradox? Whuzzat?

Getting back to religion, it is easy to mock a magical being in the sky, but it is not so easy to "logically" mock the concept of an intelligence of some sort pretty much running things.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

148 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The myth of homo logicae, or rational man. [View all] guillaumeb Jan 2018 OP

I thought it was already well known that rationality was a chimera... TreasonousBastard Jan 2018 #1

And to make a claim that one arrives at certain decisions by logic only guillaumeb Jan 2018 #2

Yawn. AtheistCrusader Jan 2018 #3

Allow me to congratulate you on your response. guillaumeb Jan 2018 #4

No, I responded to your bullshit throwaway bait line at the end. AtheistCrusader Jan 2018 #5

Feel free to respond to the actual post. guillaumeb Jan 2018 #6

I responded to the part of the post I wanted to address. AtheistCrusader Jan 2018 #7

I understand. guillaumeb Jan 2018 #8

OMG did you not even follow Star Trek? AtheistCrusader Jan 2018 #9

So let us examine this idea: guillaumeb Jan 2018 #10

That's the whole point of Spock. AtheistCrusader Jan 2018 #16

Why would it be desirable for a human to eliminate emotion? guillaumeb Jan 2018 #18

I didn't say anything about faith or proof. AtheistCrusader Jan 2018 #26

Why does he bring Spock up? I'll tell you why. trotsky Jan 2018 #41

He's not even bringing up Spock. He's bringing up straw man Spock. Cuthbert Allgood Jan 2018 #42

Hahahaa that is perfect. n/t trotsky Jan 2018 #44

You need to stop using Star Trek to support you arguments Cuthbert Allgood Jan 2018 #40

I think he's abandoned this avenue of attack. AtheistCrusader Jan 2018 #48

I hope so. It was kind of embarrassing. Cuthbert Allgood Jan 2018 #53

Again demonstrating why discussions can't happen Lordquinton Jan 2018 #11

Are we talking? Metaphorically? guillaumeb Jan 2018 #13

"an intelligence of some sort pretty much running things" not mockable? Seriously? Voltaire2 Jan 2018 #14

I said it was a concept, not necessarily a reality. TreasonousBastard Jan 2018 #25

Ok so present a serious argument for it. Voltaire2 Jan 2018 #38

I agree that man is not homo logicae. Jim__ Jan 2018 #12

Those are mathematical proofs. guillaumeb Jan 2018 #15

Technically, mathematical figures are not "physical" objects. ExciteBike66 Jan 2018 #27

And yet despite your insistence they are separate "fields", you cannot provide us... trotsky Jan 2018 #29

You appear to completely misunderstand the function of faith. guillaumeb Jan 2018 #32

Yes, you have told me many times you think I'm stupid. trotsky Jan 2018 #33

Now you misframe my reply. guillaumeb Jan 2018 #34

Then explain to me. trotsky Jan 2018 #35

Is everything that you believe provable? guillaumeb Jan 2018 #36

I cannot prove love exists outside my head. trotsky Jan 2018 #43

We agreed. A start. guillaumeb Jan 2018 #46

No, you've just made up your own definition of "belief"... trotsky Jan 2018 #47

Yes. Pleasure, Reward and Dopamine centers in the brain light up in fMRI's when experiencing AtheistCrusader Jan 2018 #62

To your last sentence: guillaumeb Jan 2018 #65

And? AtheistCrusader Jan 2018 #67

Actually yea, scientists have found a way to prove love Lordquinton Jan 2018 #81

LInks? guillaumeb Jan 2018 #90

You have lost any ability to call for links. Cuthbert Allgood Jan 2018 #94

So you are the official spokesperson? guillaumeb Jan 2018 #95

Nope, but you need to realize that what you say and do has consequences. Cuthbert Allgood Jan 2018 #97

I second the motion. Motion Carries. Talk to the new spokesman. AtheistCrusader Jan 2018 #129

As the poster, and the Chair, I declare the motion out of order. guillaumeb Jan 2018 #130

I have provided you with the same level of proof you provided Lordquinton Jan 2018 #127

Everyone starts as an atheist. AtheistCrusader Jan 2018 #49

Every human starts with an unformed consciousness. guillaumeb Jan 2018 #54

Well that's just patently untrue. Cuthbert Allgood Jan 2018 #57

Atheism is one choice. guillaumeb Jan 2018 #58

Why do babies not develop a religion different from their parents? Cuthbert Allgood Jan 2018 #59

And how could this be accomplished? guillaumeb Jan 2018 #64

Let them come to their own conclusions on faith. AtheistCrusader Jan 2018 #68

The question actually was: guillaumeb Jan 2018 #70

I rejected multiple presentations and exhortations to faith by society. That's the only choice I AtheistCrusader Jan 2018 #72

What form did these "presentations to faith" take? guillaumeb Jan 2018 #74

Direct conversations. Invitations to join various church youth groups. Pamphlets. Free copies of AtheistCrusader Jan 2018 #75

Understood. guillaumeb Jan 2018 #86

Who cares? Cuthbert Allgood Jan 2018 #79

Not my argument. guillaumeb Jan 2018 #89

Of course it's your argument Cuthbert Allgood Jan 2018 #91

Humans are not "born" anything, except human babies. guillaumeb Jan 2018 #93

Humans are born atheists. Because that is the lack of belief in any god. Cuthbert Allgood Jan 2018 #96

Utter nonsense. guillaumeb Jan 2018 #99

"Humans are born with no opinions or views on anything." Cuthbert Allgood Jan 2018 #100

They are literally born with no beliefs. guillaumeb Jan 2018 #101

"They are literally born with no beliefs." Right. They are atheists in relation to god. Cuthbert Allgood Jan 2018 #102

No, babies do not have the language required to form opinions. guillaumeb Jan 2018 #107

So your argument is that we need language to form opinions? Cuthbert Allgood Jan 2018 #110

So a baby has functioning taste buds. guillaumeb Jan 2018 #112

So you are saying they don't have opinions? Cuthbert Allgood Jan 2018 #113

Animals also have food preferences. guillaumeb Jan 2018 #114

Human are animals. In case you didn't realize. Cuthbert Allgood Jan 2018 #115

An interesting tactic, guillaumeb Jan 2018 #116

"Babies have no thoughts on theism versus atheism." trotsky Jan 2018 #119

Not what I said, but ironically enough, guillaumeb Jan 2018 #120

Yeah, the 1/2 that actually applies. trotsky Jan 2018 #121

What is clear is that you need to rationalize what you believe. guillaumeb Jan 2018 #123

But that's what you're doing, gil. trotsky Jan 2018 #126

All that is important is that they have no thoughts on gods. Cuthbert Allgood Jan 2018 #140

And you know this how? guillaumeb Jan 2018 #141

Um, you agreed with me. Cuthbert Allgood Jan 2018 #142

More harmonius replies. guillaumeb Jan 2018 #143

Listen, dude, if you are accusing me of being a sock, then just do it. Cuthbert Allgood Jan 2018 #144

Simply an observation. guillaumeb Jan 2018 #146

So you just double down it? Cuthbert Allgood Jan 2018 #147

We can't all be original like you. Act_of_Reparation Jan 2018 #145

Atheism is also inclusive of lacking an opinion. AtheistCrusader Jan 2018 #132

I understand that position. guillaumeb Jan 2018 #134

So, when exactly does one's innate understanding of God develop, then? Act_of_Reparation Jan 2018 #104

When did your understanding develop? guillaumeb Jan 2018 #108

I didn't encounter a reason to consider or think about religion or faith until well into being able AtheistCrusader Jan 2018 #131

And that was probably well past infancy. guillaumeb Jan 2018 #133

Correct. That is why I say, I have always been an atheist. AtheistCrusader Jan 2018 #135

I disagree with the idea that babies are atheists. guillaumeb Jan 2018 #136

Having no opinion, and no faith is equal to 'atheist'. AtheistCrusader Jan 2018 #137

or to say it another way, I didn't decide to become an atheist. AtheistCrusader Jan 2018 #138

I was responding to #131. guillaumeb Jan 2018 #139

A majority of humans are clearly predisposed to faith. AtheistCrusader Jan 2018 #105

Atheism is the LACK OF FAITH. AtheistCrusader Jan 2018 #103

Wrong. AtheistCrusader Jan 2018 #61

A majority of humans are clearly predisposed to faith. AtheistCrusader Jan 2018 #60

Or predisposed to spirituality? guillaumeb Jan 2018 #63

I used the terms used by the studies that revealed it. Not whatever you're angling for. AtheistCrusader Jan 2018 #66

I do it all the time. Eko Jan 2018 #17

We all do it. guillaumeb Jan 2018 #19

No, you mistake me. Eko Jan 2018 #20

But you do use both. As do we all. The point of the article. guillaumeb Jan 2018 #21

Those are good questions. Eko Jan 2018 #22

I do not feel that people can truly separate logic and emotion. guillaumeb Jan 2018 #30

So, Eko Jan 2018 #39

I feel is an idiom. guillaumeb Jan 2018 #45

It is? Eko Jan 2018 #78

It's actually a metaphor. Cuthbert Allgood Jan 2018 #80

We do it all the time. AtheistCrusader Jan 2018 #50

Which merely restates what I already said. eom guillaumeb Jan 2018 #55

Not in the slightest. AtheistCrusader Jan 2018 #69

Okay. My point was clearly made that we use both processes, logic and emotion. guillaumeb Jan 2018 #71

I did NOT illustrate the same thing. re-read. AtheistCrusader Jan 2018 #73

Evidently the straw man is very much alive and well. Act_of_Reparation Jan 2018 #23

Hey, the g-man makes his best arguments against straw men. trotsky Jan 2018 #24

He's doing the 'equal footing' fake-out. AtheistCrusader Jan 2018 #52

Gets sadder every time he tries. trotsky Jan 2018 #82

Apparently, someone thinks such a claim has been made. MineralMan Jan 2018 #28

Perhaps you should read the numerous posts here guillaumeb Jan 2018 #31

Perhaps you should link to a few of them. MineralMan Jan 2018 #37

No need for those who frequent this group. guillaumeb Jan 2018 #56

No, you never have to back up your claims. trotsky Jan 2018 #83

There are none that go so far as to completely eschew emotion, as in your incorrect Spock analogy. AtheistCrusader Jan 2018 #51

That is not what I actually said. guillaumeb Jan 2018 #88

Post 19. AtheistCrusader Jan 2018 #92

In addition to post 19, add this one Cuthbert Allgood Jan 2018 #98

So commonality implies reliability? Act_of_Reparation Jan 2018 #77

Haha interesting corner he just backed himself into. n/t trotsky Jan 2018 #84

"Well... how did I get here?" Act_of_Reparation Jan 2018 #85

It's funny, I read an article about this very subject a couple of weeks ago tymorial Jan 2018 #76

And, as this post demonstrates, guillaumeb Jan 2018 #87

Is that the royal 'we'? AtheistCrusader Jan 2018 #106

We is the plural first person, correct? guillaumeb Jan 2018 #109

You got a mouse in your pocket? Cuthbert Allgood Jan 2018 #111

Which class is that, Guy? When you use the word "we" MineralMan Jan 2018 #117

The "we" referred to is obvious from a reading of the original post. guillaumeb Jan 2018 #118

Who, other than you is "we can think that we can separate logic from emotion" AtheistCrusader Jan 2018 #128

I remember when an atheist saying we would derail anything they said Lordquinton Jan 2018 #125

I only see Homo triticum Lordquinton Jan 2018 #122

Perhaps guillaumeb Jan 2018 #124

Message auto-removed Name removed May 2024 #148