Re: Explicit Knowledge
Posted: Sun May 07, 2017 5:36 pm
The Bible says insects have four legs whereas reality says they have six so which one do you think is telling the truth
For the discussion of all things philosophical.
https://canzookia.com/
What about all the other earthly creatures that innocently get caught up in natures wrath....don't see them moaning about it.Belinda wrote:DontAskMe wrote:
WWe should not surrender to a Being Who is so stupid or so malign that He made a world in which children are tortured to death by being buried alive by landslides.e should surrender to God Himself.
Babies buried alive in landslides is one of many many examples of God's incredibly stupid planning ability. I can give you many more examples.
Lets not confuse mythology with bona-fide real historical documents.surreptitious57 wrote:
The Bible says insects have four legs whereas reality says they have six so which one do you think is telling the truth
Would those passages include all the ones which are most definitely not true because they cannot be soDontaskme wrote:Some passages were never intended to be taken with exact literalnesssurreptitious57 wrote:
The Bible says insects have four legs whereas reality says they have six so which one do you think is telling the truth
Some authors wrote in metaphorical prose as the only method available with the intent of pointing the reader to the fact that there is an invisible force in operation which is clearly visible to those who believe, not by seeing with their physical eyes, but by seeing with the invisible all knowing eye.surreptitious57 wrote:Would those passages include all the ones which are most definitely not true because they cannot be soDontaskme wrote:Some passages were never intended to be taken with exact literalnesssurreptitious57 wrote:
The Bible says insects have four legs whereas reality says they have six so which one do you think is telling the truth
Since if they do then the whole raison d etre of Christianity simply ceases to be as a direct consequence
But if they do not then how do you explain that which is demonstrably impossible actually being possible
There is no such stuff as protoplasm but I get your drift. Some of us take responsibility for self and don't look to a god to make it all come right.Okay, according to Belinda, there is no God..so all we are is just an elaborate blob of protoplasm that's just appeared out of nowhere from nothing and evolved into a form of pond scum which la
Belinda wrote:DontAskMe wrote:
There is no such stuff as protoplasm but I get your drift. Some of us take responsibility for self and don't look to a god to make it all come right.Okay, according to Belinda, there is no God..so all we are is just an elaborate blob of protoplasm that's just appeared out of nowhere from nothing and evolved into a form of pond scum which la
I want to ask you a question about taking responsibility for self?Belinda wrote: Some of us take responsibility for self and don't look to a god to make it all come right.
It seems like you are saying .. until society makes the judgement call that we can only be the earners and sole judges of our own self authored lives when our society deems us fit to do so ?... is that right?surreptitious57 wrote:
I think Belinda assumed full responsibility for her life once society deemed her capable of doing so
Some societies, past and present, hardly infantilise children at all, and what we in Western Europe class as 'children' in other parts of the world go to work to support themselves and their families, or are abandoned to die or learn to be street children ,instead of going to school and instead of getting the protection of parents until they are seventeen or eighteen or even older. Yes, societies do make the judgement of when we are able to take responsibility for ourselves.It seems like you are saying .. until society makes the judgement call that we can only be the earners and sole judges of our own self authored lives when our society deems us fit to do so ?... is that right?
Oh really, well I would never have thought that!Belinda wrote:DontAskMe wrote:
Some societies, past and present, hardly infantilise children at all, and what we in Western Europe class as 'children' in other parts of the world go to work to support themselves and their families, or are abandoned to die or learn to be street children ,instead of going to school and instead of getting the protection of parents until they are seventeen or eighteen or even older. Yes, societies do make the judgement of when we are able to take responsibility for ourselves.It seems like you are saying .. until society makes the judgement call that we can only be the earners and sole judges of our own self authored lives when our society deems us fit to do so ?... is that right?
Modern education in free democracies ideally aims to educate children to be as able as possible to make knowledgeable, independent, and considered judgements. It's called 'critical thinking'.
No.IS Belinda are the sole author of Belinda's life? ..YES OR NO ?
So here you are saying no to the idea that you have a free will to choose to be for or go against the will of what your society says is morally right?Belinda wrote:DontAskMe wrote:
No.IS Belinda are the sole author of Belinda's life? ..YES OR NO ?
I am not free to break my country's laws. And if I transgress against certain moral laws I will have a bad conscience.
I cannot go against the natural laws of my biology; similarly i cannot walk through walls.
When I was a child I was even less free as at that time I was being taught how to take care of myself and others.
When I am ill and have to go to a hospital I will allow myself to be ruled by the experts there.
I cannnot normally choose when my life will end.
Within those and probably other boundaries I take responsibility for my decisions and my beliefs.
It depends on what you mean by "free will". There are causes for what I do. I don't do anything without cause, including when i don't know what the cause is.So here you are saying no to the idea that you have a free will to choose to be for or go against the will of what your society says is morally right?
And according to you, when you are living from a good conscience you are cultivating that conscience for yourself as the only acceptable way to live life....is that right? ..yes or no