Saying the rosary doesn't work. Fact

Started by smelmoth, August 27, 2017, 04:37:43 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

LCohen

Quote from: omaghjoe on September 13, 2017, 04:17:05 AM
Quote from: LCohen on September 12, 2017, 07:24:41 PM
Quote from: omaghjoe on September 08, 2017, 04:37:08 AM
Quote from: LCohen on September 07, 2017, 10:30:02 PM
Quote from: omaghjoe on September 07, 2017, 09:01:13 PM
Quote from: LCohen on September 07, 2017, 08:34:46 AM
Quote from: omaghjoe on September 06, 2017, 05:11:30 AM
Quote from: LCohen on September 05, 2017, 02:36:41 PM
Quote from: Esmarelda on September 05, 2017, 10:27:49 AM
I completely get omaghjoe's view that everything in the universe shouldn't necessarily be viewed empirically. That's fine. The existence of God needn't necessarily be evidence-based.

So much of what was "explained" by gods has subsequently been proved empirically to have a rational scientific explanation. We should at the very least be deeply suspicious of any remaining matters that people attempt to "explain" by gods

The issue that I have with spiritualists is not that they believe, or that this belief is not rationally based or indeed that they choose to order their lives around these beliefs. The fact that all that guff originates within them and is not evidence based is amusing rather than harmful. The issue is when it crosses the line and becomes harmful. When these spiritual stirrings within in them manifest into declarations of how others should order their lives and matters of public policy then they have the habit of being harmful. There is then the sense of entitlement that faith, typically their personal faith should be afforded some special protections that other opinions should not. That is harmful to society as it stifles progress
To prove anything empirically you'd have to prove empirism logically empirism, deductive reasoning, and causality are flawed as a complete view of the cosmos.

Throughout history religion and faith have been the main driver of society in fact there is alot of evidence that would suggest its the reason civilisation began. So I'm wondering how they could stifle its progress.
But anyway if you can define exactly what progress in a society is so all we know what we're talking about and while your at it explain why you conform to a society or are interested in it as neither of those two things don't really exist scientifically.

I said that affording religious faith special protection special faith stifles progress. Look at the news this morning about the Caribbean storms. Was it faith in god and his mysterious ways that told us where that storm was and is headed? Will prayers to him influence its path or ferocity? Thankfully some people try to advance knowledge of the world to progress our lot.

We have issues of equality today. Some are standing in the way of progress without seemingly any need to produce evidence. They simply state that they believe something is wrong.

I can see that equality of gender, race and consensual sexual orientation would be progress. Maybe you cannot? I can see that those who simply object to this progress, claim that there is no evidential burden on them to substantiate their claims and demand what we give them this special exemption out of respect to their faith are blocking progress.

Why do you care where the storm is headed?
Why is equality for these things progress? How will it advance society? What evidence do you have to back this up? Historically Civilisations have thrived in inequality. Not to mention that human gravitate away from such societies as they also seek opportunity.

The French and the Dutch seem to take some early steps to minimise the damage. Less human lives taken. Less human lives destroyed. Maybe you are going to argue that that is unimportant and we shouldn't care. Maybe you are going to argue that spiritualists have bigger things to worry about.

The rest of your drivel post is argument for arguments sake. Would you argue that discrimination against you on grounds of gender, race or consensual sexual orientation could represent progress? I think not.

Apologies Typo in bold up there

No Im not saying you shouldn't care. I not opposing  your position I am asking what is the reason for it, is there evidence to support it?

And again Im not saying those things arent progress I am asking why you think they are progress? Whats the evidence?

Evidence of inequality is fairly basic stuff. Evidence of the impact of inequality is also fairly basic. Do you wanted it listed?

A quick look at the history of anthropology can give us many pros and cons to perceived inequality in terms of the growth of a civilization. But is growth progress? If so why? If not why?and more importantly why do you care?

Improving the lot of people is progress.

I care because I'm human and our brains have evolved to think that way