A Strange Circularity (Stanley Fish Article)

Graduate Thinker Joined: Mar 26, 2008 Posts: 515

So in other words the only purpose of god is for him to do whatever he or she feels like?

The purpose of life on this planet as I see it isn't really for any higher reason. Life is because it is. What is our purpose? Live life. Why? Because we like to and it's better than nonexistence.

I don't think that god is calling us as you do. Why? Because any god who created man would know that he or she would have to come down here a lot more than a couple thousand of years. Why wouldn't god just unveil everything to everybody at once? I garantee that that would change the world right there.

Posted: Thu Jun 05, 2008 8:12 pm

Missionary wrote:

bagnasty wrote:

missionary wrote:

The answer to life's origin is inherently implanted on everyone's mind. Everyone asks themselves at some point, who am I? Where did I come from? What's my purpose? What will become of me? Or some similar line of questioning.

The answer to life's origin is inherently implanted on everyone's mind? What is the answer? How do you know that? How do you know it is implanted on everyones mind?

If its bad for those advocates of science to make naked assertions, why is it not bad for you to do so as well?

Romans 1:19 (NKJV)
19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them , for God has shown it to them .

We all ask internal questions. We're all looking for answers. We all want the truth. That's the way we're wired.

Its remarkable how you can read science with such a critical eye, but you will take at face value anything writen in the bible. You charge scientists with making naked assertions but swallow whole things written in the bible by people living in the first century that you have never met before. How do you know those writers are right? If some scientist claimed to know something with certainty because god told her it was true, would you believe her?

Posted: Fri Jun 06, 2008 7:43 am

Missionary wrote:

It's (the bible) a historical record of a Semitic people group and the Creator's interaction with them.

Graduate Thinker Joined: Mar 26, 2008 Posts: 515

The Creator's interactions with them, eh?

You don't think it could be like every other tribal religion in Africa where people saw something happen and resort to spirits to explain their superstitions?

Hasn't anyone read Lord of the Flies?

Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 1:11 am

bagnasty wrote:

Missionary wrote:

bagnasty wrote:

missionary wrote:

The answer to life's origin is inherently implanted on everyone's mind. Everyone asks themselves at some point, who am I? Where did I come from? What's my purpose? What will become of me? Or some similar line of questioning.

The answer to life's origin is inherently implanted on everyone's mind? What is the answer? How do you know that? How do you know it is implanted on everyones mind?

If its bad for those advocates of science to make naked assertions, why is it not bad for you to do so as well?

Romans 1:19 (NKJV)
19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them , for God has shown it to them .

We all ask internal questions. We're all looking for answers. We all want the truth. That's the way we're wired.

Its remarkable how you can read science with such a critical eye, but you will take at face value anything writen in the bible. You charge scientists with making naked assertions but swallow whole things written in the bible by people living in the first century that you have never met before. How do you know those writers are right? If some scientist claimed to know something with certainty because god told her it was true, would you believe her?

He doesn't pay attention to all of the Bible.

He insists that:

Isaiah 40:22 (NIV - KJV uses circle also)
He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in.

is a medieval construct and has no basis in scripture. Last time I checked, a circle was a 2 dimensional (flat) construct.

This is where he'll trot out the old chestnut "translation error" which doesn't deal with the fact that the alleged creator should have been able to accurately describe his creation to his ghost writers.

Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2008 9:17 am

Quote:

There's no need for me to undermine the credibility of science as it stands on it's own record of uncertain shifting facts and truths. I wish I had a nickel for every time I've read, "Scientists once believed...". haha

What part of "self-correcting" do you not comprehend? Would you be happy if everyone went back to believing in a flat Earth because the Bible presents it that way?

Quote:

As far as faith in Christ, it's exactly like faith in science only it's far from blind and is 100% certain which science will never be.

Before Christianity came along, people were 100% certain that some other savior, in some other religion, was an absolute, immutable truth. Where are they now? Gone, just as Christianity someday will be.

Quote:

Almost ALL of their articles are like this. Speculation, conjecture, wishy-washy "maybe" and "perhaps" but leading the reader to believe that these are facts and that scientists "somehow KNOW". They don't know jack about what happened there unless it was in writing. Stonehenge could be an alter of human sacrifice for all they know. They can't know the deaths were natural or that the dead were family members much less "royalty". This is science fiction being spoonfed to the ignorant as "True Tales of the Scientifically Fantastic".

And I'm sure you're feeling all smug because the Bible--your favorite childhood fairy tale book--tells you, with 100% certainty, that there was a great flood that covered all the mountains of the world, that a donkey talked, that a flaming chariot came down from the sky and swept a man up to heaven, that fire came from the sky and burned up two cities, and so on. Thus we see that just because someone writes of something with 100% certainty, does not mean it is true.

Quote:

The average reader will walk away from any of those articles believing the subject matter is scientific fact. When they remember the article, they will not remember "may; could be; possibly" etc. all they will remember is, IT IS.

That is the fault of people who read stuff without paying attention, people who have no reading comprehension. When I read such articles, I have no problem at all understanding what is being said.

Quote:

We know in part that His purpose is to create and love. We know He has plans for good in eternity. What those plans consist of are unknown.

HOW do you know this? Because of what somebody wrote in a book? Because your mama told you so? Because you grew up in a culture that accepts such notions?

Confident Learner Joined: Jun 16, 2008 Posts: 75

Missionary wrote:

bagnasty wrote:

missionary wrote:

The answer to life's origin is inherently implanted on everyone's mind. Everyone asks themselves at some point, who am I? Where did I come from? What's my purpose? What will become of me? Or some similar line of questioning.

The answer to life's origin is inherently implanted on everyone's mind? What is the answer? How do you know that? How do you know it is implanted on everyones mind?

If its bad for those advocates of science to make naked assertions, why is it not bad for you to do so as well?

Romans 1:19 (NKJV)
19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them , for God has shown it to them .

We all ask internal questions. We're all looking for answers. We all want the truth. That's the way we're wired.

Hello Missionary.

If you go to the thread I started, "The Missionary Position" you'll read that I (BornAgainAthiest) said that, "I couldn't possibly know what you were thinking when you wrote [about proof of god's existence] it."

Could I have?

If you say "Yes", then we'll just have to factor telepathy into the content of this forum.

If you say "No", then reality reasserts itself and we are back in the realm of sensible, reasoned debate.

Just as it would be presumptious of me to say that I knew the thoughts of others wouldn't it be equally so to say that you know what the major drives are in the minds of others? You say (as if you know with 100% certainty) that questing for the truth is the way we're all wired.

Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that you believe that to be true because it's true for you? If it's true (and vastly, fundamentally important to you every second of every day) then it MUST be true for everyone.
This mind-set then elegantly reinforces what you believe about god, creation, the afterlife, etc. , making you even more certain that we're all wired up in the way that you want to believe.

Hmmm.
What we have here is a feedback loop where the desired result is seen more and more because of the desire to interpret things that way. There's no way out of this circularity and no wish to leave it. Anyone else trying to break this loop has two chances - slim and fat. Just talk to a conspiracy theorist about JFK being shot only by Lee Harvey Oswald or that 9/11 was the just the work of Al Qaida. See how far you get.

O.k., returning to your assertion that we're all hard-wired to want to know the truth of reality.

How do you know this?

Where did you get this information?

Please quote your source/s.

Thanks,

BornAgainAthiest.


Create an account	Home · Articles · Downloads · Video Library · Forums · Chat Room · aStore