Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Religion
In reply to the discussion: You don't have a soul... [View all]patrice
(47,992 posts)52. Not sure why I need faith. What we call "reality" seems enough, to me. Did you see that
scalable model of the universe someone posted somewhere around here earlier?
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
80 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Perhaps your assumptions about what a soul might be are more narrow than Lewis's?
patrice
Feb 2012
#4
At minimum, it is clear that I referred to a "possibility" so you tell me why you refer to that as
patrice
Feb 2012
#31
You may have noticed that #8 made that accusation and I asked a question about that accusation. nt
patrice
Feb 2012
#34
Said an inhabitant of the infinitely regressive mirror world. Speaking of tautologies, btw... nt
patrice
Feb 2012
#39
It WAS a hypothetical analogy. If the shoe doesn't fit ... So, why do you insist on wearing it?
patrice
Feb 2012
#33
Deflection. Avoidance. You need to tell DU -ers they are not permitted to challenge you.
patrice
Feb 2012
#40
I parried your passive aggressive thrust. I'm really not interested in continuing down that line.
darkstar3
Feb 2012
#43
Perhaps, if you are God, you can assume those things absolutely. If you're not, there's
patrice
Feb 2012
#20
Whether it is a tautology or not depends upon how one relates to that which is referred
patrice
Feb 2012
#28
We don't disagree about the definiton of "tautology". We disagree about what is referred to by
patrice
Feb 2012
#37
Seems a simple observation. So easily overlooked and ignored in our daily lives.
bluerum
Feb 2012
#7
Rational empiricism has NOTHING to say about that which is not observed, other than
patrice
Feb 2012
#24
And yet the idea that I adhere to something called "rational empiricism" is an assumption.
darkstar3
Feb 2012
#27
My assumption is based upon the value that you apparently place on observation. nt
patrice
Feb 2012
#29
Thank you, cbayer. It is the only thing that makes this bearable. My dachshunds live
roguevalley
Feb 2012
#59
Thank you, Darkstar3. I hug you back too. What a strange thing to come into a
roguevalley
Feb 2012
#58
Our senses known and to be known help us understand nature composed of energy and matter. We know
jody
Feb 2012
#15
Isn't that the basis of faith, a belief that does not require energy and matter and is not a cause
jody
Feb 2012
#51
Not sure why I need faith. What we call "reality" seems enough, to me. Did you see that
patrice
Feb 2012
#52
Speaking of dogma: I think you don't KNOW crap about what I think. Q.Proof of YOUR hidden ideology?
patrice
Feb 2012
#79
This statement is one of the many reasons I dislike Lewis as a thinker.
ChadwickHenryWard
Feb 2012
#60