For the discussion of all things philosophical.
https://canzookia.com/
Do you know which people influenced you to believe as you do?henry quirk wrote: ↑Tue Mar 01, 2022 4:35 pm*I try.
**Nope. I believe God exists, that I'm a free will, that mind and brain are two separate things, that natural rights/morality is real, and that the world is real and independent of you and me.
I believe as I do cuz I followed what I thought were, still think of as, evidences.
That's refreshingly clear. Thanks. You think there is evidence for the existence of a god, free will, a non-physical mind, and natural rights/morality.henry quirk wrote: ↑Tue Mar 01, 2022 4:35 pm*I try.
**Nope. I believe God exists, that I'm a free will, that mind and brain are two separate things, that natural rights/morality is real, and that the world is real and independent of you and me.
Actually it was, is, the lack of physical/material evidence/explanation for certain aspects of man that led me to reason things out as I have (but you already know this...we've gone back & forth on this stuff a few times..it always ends with you dismissin' me and me dismissin' you).
I googled Bastiat. Should trade be so free that traders are allowed to cheat each other?henry quirk wrote: ↑Tue Mar 01, 2022 5:03 pmI believe as I do cuz I followed what I thought were, still think of as, evidences.
I was an atheistic materialist for a long time, B, which, as I recollect, was a position sustainable only becuz I turned a blind eye to those evidences.
As for influences: Reid and Bastiat come to mind.
Laissez-faire, the reigning economic orthodoxy of the day, held that there should be as little government interference with the economy as possible. Under this doctrine, stopping the export of Irish grain was an unacceptable policy alternative, and it was therefore firmly rejected in London, though there were some British relief officials in Ireland who gave contrary advice.
The influence of the doctrine of laissez-faire may also be seen in two other decisions. The first was the decision to terminate the soup-kitchen scheme in September 1847 after only six months of operation. The idea of feeding directly a large proportion of the Irish population violated all of the Whigs' cherished notions of how government and society should function. The other decision was the refusal of the government to undertake any large scheme of assisted emigration. The Irish viceroy actually proposed in this fashion to sweep the western province of Connacht clean of as many as 400,000 pauper smallholders too poor to emigrate on their own. But the majority of Whig cabinet ministers saw little need to spend public money accelerating a process that was already going on 'privately' at a great rate.
So you think there is no physical evidence for the existence of a god, free will, a non-physical mind and natural rights/morality. So I assume you think there is non-physical evidence for the existence of those things. If so, can you give an example of such non-physical evidence?henry quirk wrote: ↑Tue Mar 01, 2022 8:44 pmActually it was, is, the lack of physical/material evidence/explanation for certain aspects of man that led me to reason things out as I have (but you already know this...we've gone back & forth on this stuff a few times..it always ends with you dismissin' me and me dismissin' you).
Been there, done that, Pete. Most recent example was Penfield's book which you dismissed without readin', based solely on two reviews of the book. I learned my lesson with that.
Okay, leave out the mind. How about non-physical evidence for the existence of a god, free will and natural rights/morality - non-physical evidence that convinces you they exist? We certainly talk about them - but then we also talk about fairies. I'm wondering what non-physical evidence actually is.henry quirk wrote: ↑Tue Mar 01, 2022 9:09 pmBeen there, done that, Pete. Most recent example was Penfield's book which you dismissed without readin', based solely on two reviews of the book. I learned my lesson with that.
As I say: been there, done that, with you.Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Tue Mar 01, 2022 9:17 pmHow about non-physical evidence for the existence of a god, free will and natural rights/morality
With that kinda invite: I pass.then we also talk about fairies.
As you haven't read the book: you don't know what you're talkin' about.Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Tue Mar 01, 2022 9:17 pm (Penfield made a fundamental mistake for a natural scientist: explaining a physical phenomenon by appeal to a non-physical cause, with no evidence for the causal mechanism.)
Sorry. I think the idea of non-physical evidence is incoherent. It isn't evidence at all.henry quirk wrote: ↑Tue Mar 01, 2022 9:22 pmAs I say: been there, done that, with you.Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Tue Mar 01, 2022 9:17 pmHow about non-physical evidence for the existence of a god, free will and natural rights/morality
With that kinda invite: I pass.then we also talk about fairies.
Of course you do: no surprise there.Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Tue Mar 01, 2022 9:30 pmI think the idea of non-physical evidence is incoherent.
You often make me laugh thanks.not sure how to take that...Belinda wrote: ↑Tue Mar 01, 2022 9:42 pm
