Posts by bohm

36

What is Circular Reasoning?

by God_Delusion in

i know what circular reasoning is because i wrote about it, so i know i'm right .

http://www.jehovahswitnessblog.com/2010/01/what-is-circular-reasoning.html.

carlos.

Perry: The topic is about circular reasoning and i gave you some thoughts about that. Then you asked me of the falsifiability of the geological column and i gave you two examples.
I have no idea about the new evidence you ask me to review. I cant tell if its a tree or a large rock or how it got there nor how the layers around it formed. I cant tell what i am seing in the microscope or what that mean.

We can both agree that any theory that predicts there can be no rock where that rock is positioned or that biological stuff in the picture cannot exist are made false by the evidence you present but thats it and it does not really shed any light on the question i raised, namely that a theory should be judged on how well it predicts nontrivial properties of the world.

36

What is Circular Reasoning?

by God_Delusion in

i know what circular reasoning is because i wrote about it, so i know i'm right .

http://www.jehovahswitnessblog.com/2010/01/what-is-circular-reasoning.html.

carlos.

bohm

I am not a geologist. Perhaps a rabbit and a dinosauer lying together or that the irridium layer from the extinction 65mio years ago began to appear unexpected (eg multiple) places? Stuff like that i suppose.

But i am not really talking about popper. I am talking about a theory gaining evidence when it predicts nontrivial stuff. its not philosophy, its more like inference i think.

36

What is Circular Reasoning?

by God_Delusion in

i know what circular reasoning is because i wrote about it, so i know i'm right .

http://www.jehovahswitnessblog.com/2010/01/what-is-circular-reasoning.html.

carlos.

bohm

Perry, i am not qualified to answer the statements in details, and i hope someone here will give them proper attention. They seem pretty well-researched perhaps they deserve a topic for themselves?

One thing you must keep in mind is that all science is about the probability that something is true, and those probabilities are never 100%. The second thing to keep in mind is that probabilities are subjective. Because of this there are no no a-priori contradiction in the statements you offer, even though i will agree it should warrent additional investigation.

Finally. ANY theory should be judged PRIMARELY (SOLELY) on how it allows you to PREDICT nontrivial properties of the world. I can show you how this follows from the rules of probabilities if you are interested.

ANY theory will become more true the more it predicts about the world. That is why the question: "What can you predict about animal/human anatomy and distribution in the earth with the bible (or the theory of evolution) in your hand" is really THE MOST (some would say ONLY) important question you can ask if you want to investigate creation and evolution.

145

GETTING SUCKED IN? Ask the right questions to get the right answers.

by Terry in

it is too easy to get sucked in to the wrong argument at the wrong time.. asking the wrong question leads to the wrong answer.

a wrong answer does nobody any real good.. i once had a heated discussion with an old friend who is still an active jehovah's witness.. he came back at me with this:.

"okay, then--if jehovah's organization is a false religion, where is the true one?

bohm

Perry, let me get this straight. Are you saying that the christian God is there because he communicate to you by giving you a 'spriritual' feeling when you read about him or try to talk to him? OR because you believe in him being an a-priori truth like eg. logic is an a-priori truth? OR both?

21

The Probabilty of there being an Intelligent Designer part 2. (some responses)

by hooberus in

on the thread "the probabilty of there being an intelligent designer" the poster "elsewhere" wrote:.

http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/beliefs/187282/1/the-probabilty-of-there-being-an-intelligent-designer.

here is my basic reasoning on why i reject id:.

bohm

This thread has really been haunting me, especially this:

"Secondly, you claim that the creator must be "after all, more complex than the universe itself" This assumes that a creator must be a material entitity composed of interdepenant parts. This is not something that the design argument logically requires, nor is it an attribute theologians believe that the God of the Bible posesses.

...

There is nothing in such an argument that requires the designer himself to also be composed of organized complexity, nor even to have an origin at all, hence there is nothing in the above design argument that necessarily requires the designer to himself have his own creator."

Im going to assume that our designer is God for the rest of this discussion. What i am thinking is that we have a lot of things thrown around, such as a non-material designer and the concept of complexity which require a lot of work. So let me propose the following add-argument: An intelligent designer is certainly able to do computations, and so is this universe if arranged properly (note: the concept of what constitute a computation may be somewhat hard to nail down, but stay with me!). But thermodynamics also put a limit on how many classical computations it is possible to carry out with a specific quantity of matter, and thus also on the universe (i think a quantum computer would only move this limit upwards, not remove it).

So lets think of our immaterial God. IF God was able to imagine the entire universe in his mind and calculate 2+2 at the same time, he would do more computations than the entire universe. Here i assume God is able to do that, so i am not talking about some wussie God, but a great, omnipotent, mighty God who can do all he set his mind to.

Does this not make God more complex than the universe?

(a similar argument could be produced with entropy creation taking the role of computation)

I think there are two choices: Either our immaterial God must be of limited mental powers, or he is indeed in all practical sences of the word more complex than our universe. Again, it boils down to precicely what kind of God we are arguing about, and that is for Elsewhere and hooberus to know.

21

J. W. Man charged in 8 rural Virginia shooting deaths

by koolaid-man in

jw
friends

http://www.twincities.com/ci_14236171?nclick_check=1.

bohm

Around here it is not unusual for JWs to hunt, even elders.

21

The Probabilty of there being an Intelligent Designer part 2. (some responses)

by hooberus in

on the thread "the probabilty of there being an intelligent designer" the poster "elsewhere" wrote:.

http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/beliefs/187282/1/the-probabilty-of-there-being-an-intelligent-designer.

here is my basic reasoning on why i reject id:.

bohm

Just some thoughts..

First off, i dont want to put words in the mouth of Elsewhere, but i believe the thread was a very odd mix of the cosmological argument and a whole lot of other stuff. I believe the main points Elsewhere put forth are valid, but it is not meant as a 'strict' but rather an intuiative argument.

I dont think anyone would claim ID is a-priori illogical. It is likely that we are all entities in a large 'cosmic' computer simulation, or parts of a physical reality made by very powefull aliens, or made by a God - these are all valid ideas that incoorporate ID in the creation of the universe, or of how life evolved. But before i go into details i think we need to make something clear - when you discuss ID, do you then mean in the context of evolution, or in the contex of Big Bang? I think it is two very different discussions because of how little is known of the physical processes around Big Bang.

29

JAPAN Bethel downsizes with layoffs!

by Alligator Wisdom in

jw
friends

twenty+ year veteran japanese bethelites sent to the field as special pioneers.

i don't have the exact number laid off.

however, there are a total of 550+ members at the ebina branch, so if the trend reflects the same as in the u.s. and europe branches, then we can assume at least between 10% - 20%.. in order to counterbalance the need for a work force but without having to incur expenses by housing and feeding them, japan bethel is considering opening the door to "commuting bethelites".

bohm

I once read that laying off people in japan was a big problem - there is (was?) a cultural thing where people assume (or assumed?) that once you were employed at a company, and you did not screw up, you could not get fired.

11

WT Book on Jeremiah?

by bohm in

jw
friends

hey - quick question.

i had a pretty confusing bs today, and at the end the elder said something about a verse-by-verse commentary on jeremiah chapter 25. im trying to find it on the cd-rom but so far no luck.

does this ring any bells with you?

bohm

Thanks slimboy, but dont waste anymore time on this. i regret i started the topic. Two times ago, when we agreed what we should study next, we had the same confusion. I drew a large diagram with jeremiahs 70 years, how they related to the destruction of jerusalem and how daniels profecy was used to get the 2520 years and finally get to 1914. I made it very clear i was interested in jeremiah only. We even agreed on study questions we should have answered (Which i started another topic about here).

After the initial confusion was cleared up and two copies of 'pay attention to daniels profecy' was put away, we read a WT article from 94 where jeremiahs profecy is discussed in light of relevation and applied to the coming armageddon. It was a 'how happy it make us to think of the bodies piled high in the streets'-kind of article, and i am VERY sure he didnt mean for me to read it.

After that 'Insight in the Scripture' was found and the questions answered (well, ofcourse some of them are wrong, for example we have that the 70 years ended the moment people returned, not when they prayed at the temple site, but i digress). Fun fun.

I got to admit, i thought every elder knew this stuff on his fingertips..

3

Just read about the Pyramid scheme

by sd-7 in

jw
friends

i was checking up on the references regarding the great pyramid of giza as found on jwfacts.com.

it's not that i doubt people who mention that issue, but i needed to see it with my own eyes, what with the whole not trusting anyone on spiritual matters thing.. 1922, 1925: pyramid is god's witness.

studies in the scriptures volume iii spells out that the pyramid is not considered as on par with the bible, but is merely an extra witness to god's plan.

bohm

My favorite part is where the length of the corridors change size to adjust for the revized years in the 'new light'. Truly a witness of God!

If you want to really try something fun, read 'The finished mystery'. Its so full of crap its impossible to selectively quote from it and still capture the full crappyness.