Respect for Liz Chaney and Kizinger
- Thread starter Skeeter
- Start date
You're still being a bit cryptic. Are you saying that people that believe in life after the mind has separated from the body also believe, in this particular context, that there is "winning" after losing?
Aha. Of course, if there is the most powerful being, understood as our benevolent creator, willing to lead us personally, no one would be against that.
However, we do not dictate the time when that happens. And until then, we can't have a theocracy. Thus, in the meantime, we do the best we can and simply take God's advice on what good ideas for governance would be. Things like; be kind to your neighbor, or don't abuse others, or don't steal, and others things that allow people, whether they believe in God or not, to live in harmony and peace.
Again, though, I think your definition of "proposing theocracy" is "a religious person that disagrees with Skeeter about politics". Is that correct?
I heard she will be rebooting The Apprentice.I heard she's trying to get a seat on "The View"...Can anyone confirm?
They have a higher tendency to do so, than scientifically minded folks.
Right Divider
Body part
Your FALSE DICHOTOMY is just that.
I explicitly used the language of continuum. YOU perceive only dichotomies. That is your main problem.
Right Divider
Body part
Last edited:
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
He's creating a dichotomy between "scientifically minded people" and "people who believe in a life after the mind has separated from the body", which is pretty stupid because all the surveys I've ever seen of people who identify as professional scientists (like ME!!!
) show that a strong preponderance of them believe in some form of afterlife, whether they are Christian or Hindu or Muslim.But "pretty stupid" is his stock in trade which is why I don't usually bother even reading his garbage.
The word tendency acknowledges that the proposed correlation is not categorical, not absolute. Yorshik has pointed out that one difference between the right and the left is belief in absolutes. Belief in absolutes creates dichotomies by definition.
Right Divider
Body part
You're so cute. Some things are absolute, others are not. I have no doubt that you cannot tell the difference.
P.S. You are not "scientifically minded".
Last edited:
Right Divider
Body part
And by "scientists", you actually mean naturalists.
That would depend on your definition of "scientifically minded". If you are simply talking about people that think "scientifically" because they are scientists, then you need to say so. If a more general definition is used - 'people that think logically and reasonably like the thinking required for scientific pursuits' then the tendency to avoid contradictory thinking would be better for those that believe in life after death.
Also, if you'd rather not answer the question that's fine. But I think your definition of "proposing theocracy" is "a religious person that disagrees with Skeeter about politics". Is that correct?
Last edited:
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
Logic, reason and my life long training in science tells me that the spark of life that is the difference between a living organism and a dead organism - the spark of life that can't be created in a lab - the only difference between living and dead - that element is best described as a supernatural phenomenon, one that originates outside of the natural world.
I do not need to do anything. If anyone wants clarification on anything I say, I am happy to provide it. I simply mean those who value the empirical method. This, of course, include scientists. It is helpful to note that upwards of 59% of scientists do not believe in a deity as compared 15% of the general population.
I sometimes try to skip over blatant drivel rather than engage with it, but sense you keep bringing this up: No, it is obviously not correct. People who simply vote based on personal values that are based on religion ( or conservative in general) are not proposing theocracy. People who want to change the structure of government so religious principles automatically reign are. People who want to abolish the separation of church and state likewise are. Where was this unclear?
Intuition is a great resource for creating hypotheses, but an inadequate basis for conclusions.
Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
Same goes for trite platitudes.
So, you think empty overused statements are a great resource for generating hypotheses?
Are trite platitudes as bad as repetitive redundancies?
BTW, the benefits and limits of intuition is a hot research area in social science. So, it's not trite in any way.
Work on word choice.
Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
Your thought disorder is acting up. Is it that time of the month?