Re: Can't get more crappy than this


John Jones wrote:
Dava wrote:

John Jones wrote:
Dava wrote:

Beyond Belief - - - By an Octogenarian.

To date, 'Beliefs' I have ignored - They've never really struck a
chord
But ageing - Getting more a wreck - I deemed it wise to run a check

Pondered long - Far back in time - & I declare with thoughts sublime
Faith's nebulous starting point was found - I was correct the first
time round!

So here are my profound reflections - Just plain FACTS - No deceptions!

****************

Science? I can, and will, show you more idocies from science than ever
came out of religion. I've been there, read the books, done the
homework. You are confusing tool-use (technology) with conceptual
clarity. Here are some crazy ideas that you and the logic crowd adhere
too:

**************************************

John - What in Hell's name are you on about.

Your 'conceptual clarity' is a prime example of an observation made
in my first post, of there being no need at all for the meandrine
moonshine of 'erudite intelligentsia'.

Keep your feet firmly on the ground. You are in serious danger of
floating off to a Shangri-La of inner space occupied by airy-fairy
quixotic ideals. Get back down to earth!

Clarity in your last piece is totally absent! We have to deal with
facts as we know them! You'll not find anything in my posts that are
not pure fact. Pragmatism is essential in our lives.

All I am saying is. In order to live a decent & considerate life,
'practical logicality' has to be maintained in our thoughts & actions.
Religious 'belief' is not 'logical' to any person who really
cares to think about it.

Are you trying to tell us that tool use in science is not of the
essence? That belief in religiosity is sensible? Your quote is needed
here - - - Sheesh!

John - You give me no cause to worry. Your piece will not be understood
by the vast majority of 'normal' people. Getting to grips with your
'logicality' is like trying to penetrate dense fog.

*******************************

Make no mistake. Most people on sci/logic are without the resources to
tackle issues of source and genesis of logic, science, or mathematics
and are quite fixated upon mere technicalities. Stupidity looms large
here, but what looms larger is their fixation to the textual Given.

I will explain my first point - "man Evolves".
If Man evolves then we cannot say that he evolves into another creature
for that other creature would not be human. But if we assert
nevertheless, that a creature can retain its identity by evolving into
another creature, then we are also entitled to assert that bacteria can
retain their identity when they evolve into Man - so Man is bacteria
(if there is ancestral lineage).

All of my other points made sense. Superstition is an invention of
science. It is a tool that is used to misread non-materialist ideas.

******************************

Many thanks for your 'explanation'.

Serves me right for starting this with a purely factual account of the
initiation of rubbishy religiosity.

I think I need a need a long lie down.

Clear the head!

.

Relevant Pages