Religion

cbayer

(146,218 posts)

81. Which one? OED?

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 11:49 AM

Oct 2012

noun
an idiosyncratic belief or impression maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument, typically as a symptom of mental disorder:

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

132 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The Black Cat Analogy [View all] Silent3 Oct 2012 OP

heh... progressoid Oct 2012 #1

+1 n/t Silent3 Oct 2012 #2

Hip Hip Hooray for Scientific Materialists ! Berlum Oct 2012 #3

He ironically typed on his computer connected to millions of other computers in a great web". Fumesucker Oct 2012 #4

+1000 n/t trotsky Oct 2012 #49

A retort with all of the wit and humor of a Tea Party rally. Silent3 Oct 2012 #5

The Middle Ages, probably. mr blur Oct 2012 #8

+1 n/t whathehell Oct 2012 #51

The Berlin Wall AlbertCat Oct 2012 #96

I'd say "religion" instead of "theology." Brickbat Oct 2012 #6

Religion is telling others there is a black cat and a dark room for money. Spitfire of ATJ Oct 2012 #10

As a "scientific materialist" edhopper Oct 2012 #7

I consider this more a fun analogy that a highly accurate one. Silent3 Oct 2012 #30

And dogma is like being in a black room zeemike Oct 2012 #9

And religion edhopper Oct 2012 #13

+1 n/t Silent3 Oct 2012 #14

And science like the person that did not have electricity zeemike Oct 2012 #16

The "light" of science, however, produces fairly consistent results... Silent3 Oct 2012 #21

Religion does not have a light. zeemike Oct 2012 #24

Science involves both directed and non-directed searches Silent3 Oct 2012 #27

No I meant what I said...religion does not have a light and does not want one. zeemike Oct 2012 #29

I don't buy the idea that there's much distinction between... Silent3 Oct 2012 #32

Perhaps just as evidence free as string theory. zeemike Oct 2012 #37

String theorists know, however... Silent3 Oct 2012 #40

Well you confuse religion with spiritual beliefs. zeemike Oct 2012 #43

Definitions bongbong Oct 2012 #48

Yup tama Oct 2012 #102

Chemistry bongbong Oct 2012 #38

And perhaps you get yours from the same chemistry. zeemike Oct 2012 #41

???? bongbong Oct 2012 #42

I did not say that. zeemike Oct 2012 #45

???????????????????????? bongbong Oct 2012 #47

As usual with this kind of discussion, you will run us in circles until you find something. zeemike Oct 2012 #53

Hi yo silver bongbong Oct 2012 #56

Yep here we go... zeemike Oct 2012 #68

This has to be one of the greatest conversations I have ever read on DU. cleanhippie Oct 2012 #75

and sense they believe there can be no black cat AlbertCat Oct 2012 #94

Because what they say does not match what they do. zeemike Oct 2012 #101

Because what they say does not match what they do. AlbertCat Oct 2012 #105

Wrong, I do like what science tells me zeemike Oct 2012 #108

And thats the beauty of science. cleanhippie Oct 2012 #109

You mean credible evidence. zeemike Oct 2012 #112

Allow me to clarify...FACTUAL evidence. cleanhippie Oct 2012 #115

"But you can�t have the opinion that evolution isn�t real" zeemike Oct 2012 #116

You can have your own opinions but not your own facts. Evolution is factual. cleanhippie Oct 2012 #118

Well good then, neither of us have to waste our time. zeemike Oct 2012 #119

I would give any point you made consideration, but since you have demonstrated a below average cleanhippie Oct 2012 #120

That is total fucking bullshit zeemike Oct 2012 #121

I only know what you posted. And I never called you stupid. cleanhippie Oct 2012 #122

The understanding of an 8 year old?....well that is not stupid i guess. zeemike Oct 2012 #123

If one's argument is rediculous, then one should expect ridicule. cleanhippie Oct 2012 #124

Well I don't know because I have never been to a creationist web site. zeemike Oct 2012 #125

Then go to one or fifty and read what they have to say. cleanhippie Oct 2012 #126

Now why would I want to do that? zeemike Oct 2012 #127

Uhm, to see what is is I am talking about? cleanhippie Oct 2012 #128

How about you reevaluate your with us or against us notions. zeemike Oct 2012 #129

What you DID present is a regurgitation of a typical creationist argument. cleanhippie Oct 2012 #131

consider it done. zeemike Oct 2012 #132

There is such thing as *good* authority... Silent3 Oct 2012 #130

Science has produced constant results? Thats my opinion Oct 2012 #65

I said consistent, not constant. Silent3 Oct 2012 #66

One has to wonder why skepticscott Oct 2012 #72

Flashlights do use electricity, you know. Your analogy is quite incoherent. cleanhippie Oct 2012 #73

You mean there is such a thing as a coherent analogy? zeemike Oct 2012 #86

If we're using yours as the exams, them no. cleanhippie Oct 2012 #87

Well yes you told me zeemike Oct 2012 #88

Yet in this case, there is a clear definition, and yours comes up well short of the mark. cleanhippie Oct 2012 #89

This is about rhetoric. zeemike Oct 2012 #92

No, this is about coherence. cleanhippie Oct 2012 #93

Let me know when you get those lights turned on, because it's still very black in this room. cbayer Oct 2012 #44

To which "dogma" do you refer? Silent3 Oct 2012 #18

And it don't mean only religion ether. zeemike Oct 2012 #25

Dogma, however, is insisted upon without evidence Silent3 Oct 2012 #28

Even religion can produce evidence.to support dogma. zeemike Oct 2012 #31

You aren't making sense Silent3 Oct 2012 #36

Well perhaps because dogma does not make sense zeemike Oct 2012 #39

the evidence for spiritual existence .... AlbertCat Oct 2012 #95

So saying it in Latin makes it sound more convincing. zeemike Oct 2012 #100

logic of science that tells us that the Pharaohs ruled Egypt for thousands AlbertCat Oct 2012 #106

What physical evidence is there for Plato, or Socrates? zeemike Oct 2012 #107

You're obviously joking AlbertCat Oct 2012 #114

And you have no response to any point I made. zeemike Oct 2012 #117

I think he is fucking with you. No one can be that obtuse. cleanhippie Oct 2012 #110

you are simply conducting an exercise in futility. AlbertCat Oct 2012 #113

things they can't possibly know AlbertCat Oct 2012 #97

Oh the examples are legion. zeemike Oct 2012 #99

You don't know what a theory is AlbertCat Oct 2012 #104

You have not told me anything I did not already know. zeemike Oct 2012 #111

I don't think you are using your metaphors correctly. cleanhippie Oct 2012 #19

I did not know there is a correct way to use metaphors. zeemike Oct 2012 #26

Well, for starters, they need to be coherent and related to what is being compared. cleanhippie Oct 2012 #33

I stuck with the black cat analogy didn't I ? zeemike Oct 2012 #34

It was your additions to the Black Cat analogy that is lacking coherence. cleanhippie Oct 2012 #35

Scientific PROOF: when you enter the religion forum and cast Flame Bait Berlum Oct 2012 #11

Fuming & weeping & whining? Silent3 Oct 2012 #15

THANK YOU ! whathehell Oct 2012 #55

Your welcome whatthehell Berlum Oct 2012 #58

It certainly needs to be said whathehell Oct 2012 #84

The Bilind Men and the Elephant rug Oct 2012 #12

I've seen that old tale rolled out before... Silent3 Oct 2012 #17

I don't think it illustrates everyone has a piece of truth. rug Oct 2012 #20

It could be that the purpose of the entire universe... Silent3 Oct 2012 #22

Lol, there seems to be evidence to support that position. rug Oct 2012 #23

Yes, some who see the world one way are vastly superior to those who see if differently. cbayer Oct 2012 #46

You mean like those who call others "dumbasses" when they merely see the world differently? trotsky Oct 2012 #50

If they do more than merely entertain the possibility of the black cat in such a situation... Silent3 Oct 2012 #52

A delusion is a firmly held false belief. cbayer Oct 2012 #54

Except Columbus didn't find what he was looking for. trotsky Oct 2012 #57

One can't be said to have avoided delusion... Silent3 Oct 2012 #60

Another requirement for delusion is that it is a belief generally held by no one cbayer Oct 2012 #61

I can find no definition of delusion(al) that says what you are claiming. trotsky Oct 2012 #62

It's even easier to label them as dumbasses, isn't it? skepticscott Oct 2012 #63

Good catch. trotsky Oct 2012 #64

Delusions aren't, at least necessarily, "psychiatric conditions" Silent3 Oct 2012 #67

So when you use the word, you have some unique definition not shared by others? cbayer Oct 2012 #74

I think that is the question you should be asking YOURSELF! cleanhippie Oct 2012 #79

I don't know about you, but I checked a dictionary. Silent3 Oct 2012 #80

Which one? OED? cbayer Oct 2012 #81

Note "typically", not "always" Silent3 Oct 2012 #82

Go for it, but I think it weakens your argument to do so. cbayer Oct 2012 #83

It makes them delusional if the belief is wrong. trotsky Oct 2012 #85

Wow, a triple-lindy of rationalization! cleanhippie Oct 2012 #78

Wow, that is one AMAZING feat of rationalization! cleanhippie Oct 2012 #76

And Zen Warpy Oct 2012 #59

that is insightful in so many ways. zeemike Oct 2012 #69

Chickens and rabbits tama Oct 2012 #103

love this Hamlette Oct 2012 #70

If you encounter this problem in real life, make a noise like a can opener. n/t dimbear Oct 2012 #71

lol but I'm taking the flashlight! Hamlette Oct 2012 #90

Science also invented the flashlight lalalu Oct 2012 #77

Intuition is like a black cat looking for you and after finding you, sits on your lap and purrs. meti57b Oct 2012 #91

And English is like .... Nihil Oct 2012 #98