Posts by TheClarinetist

181

The Dawkins Delusion

by brotherdan in

so, i recently finished reading "the god delusion" by richard dawkins.

i read it with a certain amount of hesitation.

after all, i am still recovering from my disappointment at realizing that the wts is not god's organization.

TheClarinetist

If I wrote a book called, "Why Unicorns are fake"...then yes I would show what unicorn believers believed and I would show how they are most likely wrong due to my own belief and experience.

Fair enough.

Do you have faith in the quantum singularity? You have not beheld that. Do you have faith in dark matter? Do you have faith that there is not a God? Again, something not beheld. But you've seen proofs that these things could exist or not exist. Religious faith is the same. I have seen proof that God exists.

In the end, it comes down to what constitutes proof for you... assuming you don't try to thrust it down other peoples throats... Then its GO TIME.

I really wasn't trying to turn this into a atheist vs theist debate. It was supposed to be more like a friendly game of Dawkins bashing.

We should at least debate whether he needs bashing or not.

181

The Dawkins Delusion

by brotherdan in

so, i recently finished reading "the god delusion" by richard dawkins.

i read it with a certain amount of hesitation.

after all, i am still recovering from my disappointment at realizing that the wts is not god's organization.

TheClarinetist

He... focused ONLY on his opinions and philosophies.

If I asserted to you that Unicorns were real, would you explain your philosophy of A-Unicornism or simply attempt to show me that it was illogical to believe in Unicorns?

181

The Dawkins Delusion

by brotherdan in

so, i recently finished reading "the god delusion" by richard dawkins.

i read it with a certain amount of hesitation.

after all, i am still recovering from my disappointment at realizing that the wts is not god's organization.

TheClarinetist

Dawkins main argument against the existence of God is based on evolution and what he calls his "Ultimate Boeing 747 idea. He dismisses the idea that the universe could have been created and designed by a Supreme Being because that Being would need to be even more complex, even more intricate that the universe he created. In other words, God would need to be more complex than the laws of physics, or the human brain or a virus or a Boeing 747. Dawkins argues that such a complex God explains nothing, because something else is then required to explain how such a complex God could himself arise. Now Dawkins draws his conclusion based on his own experience of the world and his belief that complex things can only arise from simple things through natural selection or the laws of physics. But even Dawkins has no experience of things that occur outside of the known universe. It is just not valid to dismiss the possibility of a creator God in this way - and certainly SOMETHING had to exist 'in the beginning' - even if it was just the laws of physics or the quantum singularity.

I had issues with this argument, too. It doesn't change the fact that there is no (as far as I know) evidence for God, but you cannot state that God is more unlikely than X, because both of them exist out of space/time/reality as we know it. The rules are fundamentally altered in ways which we cannot be sure about.

(And because I'm taking logic class right now and we're working on Informal Fallacies [test today], I'll add that citing this argument from Dawkins is an "Appeal to an Unqualified Authority"... I'd be interested to know what a theoretical physicist would say about it, but I probably wouldn't understand anyway)

181

The Dawkins Delusion

by brotherdan in

so, i recently finished reading "the god delusion" by richard dawkins.

i read it with a certain amount of hesitation.

after all, i am still recovering from my disappointment at realizing that the wts is not god's organization.

TheClarinetist

No, it's not an opinion when you are defining something. When you say that the DEFINITION OF FAITH IS THIS, that is not the statement of opinion. He does not give any source for that definition. That, to me, is intellectual dishonesty. It presupposes something that is entirely untrue. It says, as I already stated, that faith CANNOT be based on anything substantial or factual.

I have to admit that I don't quite understand how this is dishonest. He says exactly what he is arguing against and then goes from there. If you take a particular quote, it might look like a straw man, but taking the work as a whole, he admits that there are more liberal/open viewpoints, acknowledges them, and moves on from there. [I think it was Chapter 2 was pretty much devoted to defining everything?]

@Chalam: What part of Expelled was that? The link didn't show up. EDIT: NVM... It came up.

181

The Dawkins Delusion

by brotherdan in

so, i recently finished reading "the god delusion" by richard dawkins.

i read it with a certain amount of hesitation.

after all, i am still recovering from my disappointment at realizing that the wts is not god's organization.

TheClarinetist

I have issues with some of the arguments he uses in the book... but I don't think that his definition of faith is one of them. While it may not be your definition of your own personal faith, I know of a lot of Christians that make almost indistinguishable statements... It kind of scares me when they do, too.

He also explicitly says in the introduction to the soft cover version that there are religious faiths he has no issues with, and if the majority of Christians were as well educated and reasonable as some modern apologists/theologians, he would "be writing a completely different book".

27

What wrong with being a witch?

by free2beme in

jw
friends

as someone who is wiccan, i do not have a problem with someone in politics like o'donnell saying she did witchcraft in the background.

however, i must say, i think she is full of crap.

as if she did 'date a witch' like she said ... she would not have had her first date on a 'satanic alter.

TheClarinetist

Besides, Satanists are worshipping a Christian demi-god, so in a twisted way, they're validating the attitudes and behaviors of characters in the bible...

Laveyan Satanism, at least, is more of a worship of yourself. Satan is a symbol, not a God.

There is nothing wrong with being a witch... Ignorant Christians are ignorant. What else is new?

29

Airman spreads AIDs at swinger parties

by MsDucky in

sergeant charged in hiv casesby deb gruverthe wichita eaglewichita tech.

sgt.

david gutierrez, stationed at mcconnell air force base, has been charged with aggravated assault, accused of knowingly exposing others at "swinger" parties to hiv, the virus that causes aids.. charges were read this morning in military court.. u.s. district court documents that had been available online briefly said gutierrez attended at least 21 such parties, where promiscuous sex is common among multiple sexual partners.. .

TheClarinetist

Are you SURE about that, clarinetist? Strange, I don't recall ever hearing such a prosecution in the civilian world - not to my knowledge even when somebody died from AIDS over it.

That's my understanding in the state of Texas. I have a friend that was raped by someone with AIDS, and in addition to all the rape charges, they charged him for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon because he was knowingly attempting to infect her (which is probably legally different than getting drunk and having a one night stand). Of course, this was years ago, so I can't say for sure I remember it correctly. Double checking now just in case...

EDIT: See this site. It specifically mentions Texas, and it also has some interesting information.

29

Airman spreads AIDs at swinger parties

by MsDucky in

sergeant charged in hiv casesby deb gruverthe wichita eaglewichita tech.

sgt.

david gutierrez, stationed at mcconnell air force base, has been charged with aggravated assault, accused of knowingly exposing others at "swinger" parties to hiv, the virus that causes aids.. charges were read this morning in military court.. u.s. district court documents that had been available online briefly said gutierrez attended at least 21 such parties, where promiscuous sex is common among multiple sexual partners.. .

TheClarinetist

Just as a side question - could (or would) this piece of trash have been charged if he had not been in the military?

Yes. Its aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, whether you're in the military or not.

21

How about a "Watchtower and Awake" BURNING party!!!

by johnnyblazedog in

hey how about we all make a nice bonfire with the watchtower and awake magazines!!

kind alike that guy from florida but instead we do jw literature!!

that would be awesome!

TheClarinetist

Or a smut for smut campaign... an extension of the old trading pornography for the bible... trading pornography for JW literature... which you then burn.

18

What's wrong with my friends?

by Alan_56 in

jw
friends

i really can't stand it when i can't go to someones house just because they are "worldy".

why can't i just be a normal teenager and be able to choose my friends whom ever they may be?

i told my mom i don't have any witness friends then she told me "well you better find some or else your gonna have some serious problems".

TheClarinetist

Why can't have a normal life as a teenager and be able to make friends that share similer interest as me other then the fact that we are in the same religion?

That's the nature of the JW religion... and a large part of why it is good to get out of it. You can find friends in all sorts of places, and hopefully they'll be understanding about the crazy parents... Just don't push your mother too much until you have an escape plan. If your parents think you're going south, there might (depending on the parents) be a good possibility of them kicking you out.

Getting a car/job would help a lot... Though I got past that particular one by getting a girlfriend with a car and lying my butt off about everywhere I went. (Don't lie... It's bad)