Posts by John

147

Scientism - Nothing But a Childish Insult?

by cofty in

it is not uncommon for theists to accuse rational people on this forum of "scientism".. in my opinion it is nothing but a cheap shot from those who know they lack evidence for their beliefs.

if something like "scientism" actually does exist then i have never encountered it.. here is part of an exchange from another thread - i have brought it here as it was off-topic.... scientism = claim of scientific method being universal and the only valid method of knowledge.

followers of scientism always demand scientific evidence to anything.

John_Mann

This thread is about your baseless accusations of "scientism".

My base of why I define you as a follower of scientism is because you never specify the type of evidence you're talking about when the subject is God.

But considering your position is very easy to imply you are talking about scientific evidence.

So if someone put scientific evidence and God in the same equation then this person is a follower of scientism.

My suggestion to you is only specify the type of evidence when you're talking about the concept of God.

Don't say only evidence but qualify it by saying scientific evidence, testimonial evidence, physical evidence, forensic evidence, logical proof, etc...

147

Scientism - Nothing But a Childish Insult?

by cofty in

it is not uncommon for theists to accuse rational people on this forum of "scientism".. in my opinion it is nothing but a cheap shot from those who know they lack evidence for their beliefs.

if something like "scientism" actually does exist then i have never encountered it.. here is part of an exchange from another thread - i have brought it here as it was off-topic.... scientism = claim of scientific method being universal and the only valid method of knowledge.

followers of scientism always demand scientific evidence to anything.

John_Mann

Cofty I'm not "accusing" you for being a follower of scientism more than I'm "accusing" you for being an atheist.

I'm just defining your position as being scientism.

IMHO you deny even the existence of scientism by only using the word in quotemarks.

In this very thread some people admitted to be followers of scientism.

Sincerely I don't care if people choose to be followers of scientism, atheism or JWism. I believe in free will after all...

But I'm very intrigued with people who deny the very position that they hold. And usually I like to know why they do that. That's really my intention about your position.

Same thing happened with punkofnice when I defined him as nihilist in another topic. His position is even stranger because he knows he's a nihilist but doesn't like the label.

14

Nightmare on memorial night. This cult really sucks.

by Still Totally ADD in

jw
friends

this morning i woke up from a good night's sleep to a horrible nightmare.

as soon as i woke up i asked myself when am i going to get this cult out of my head.

as a disclaimer i just want you all to know my wife would never do this because she is a hard fast atheist.

John_Mann

I used to dream every night about JW related things during the first 5 years (or more) after I left.

I always found it very strange because I never had any doubt about they being wrong since I learned TTATT.

But they have a creepy metaphysical bond with those who ever were one of them.

Sometimes I still dream about them but it's not so frequently now.

I'm convinced this bond will remain until I die. I already desisted to fight against it and accepted that some things are irreversible.

It's hard to explain but I like to keep in touch with all their doctrinal changes because doing that I'm giving them the opportunity to explain themselves better and I can say that I'm not close-minded. This position makes me feel better regarding this creepy bond with them.

147

Scientism - Nothing But a Childish Insult?

by cofty in

it is not uncommon for theists to accuse rational people on this forum of "scientism".. in my opinion it is nothing but a cheap shot from those who know they lack evidence for their beliefs.

if something like "scientism" actually does exist then i have never encountered it.. here is part of an exchange from another thread - i have brought it here as it was off-topic.... scientism = claim of scientific method being universal and the only valid method of knowledge.

followers of scientism always demand scientific evidence to anything.

John_Mann

If you are talking about physical evidence I'd already showed to you a lot of them:

https://churchpop.com/2015/06/28/5-extraordinary-eucharistic-miracles-with-pictures/

There are physical and testimonial evidence to the Our Lady of Zeitoun and Our Lady of Fatima.

147

Scientism - Nothing But a Childish Insult?

by cofty in

it is not uncommon for theists to accuse rational people on this forum of "scientism".. in my opinion it is nothing but a cheap shot from those who know they lack evidence for their beliefs.

if something like "scientism" actually does exist then i have never encountered it.. here is part of an exchange from another thread - i have brought it here as it was off-topic.... scientism = claim of scientific method being universal and the only valid method of knowledge.

followers of scientism always demand scientific evidence to anything.

John_Mann

I have never demanded scientific proof of God I just challenge you to provide evidence.

Ok, let's try again...

If not scientific evidence then what is exactly the type of evidence you're talking about?

147

Scientism - Nothing But a Childish Insult?

by cofty in

it is not uncommon for theists to accuse rational people on this forum of "scientism".. in my opinion it is nothing but a cheap shot from those who know they lack evidence for their beliefs.

if something like "scientism" actually does exist then i have never encountered it.. here is part of an exchange from another thread - i have brought it here as it was off-topic.... scientism = claim of scientific method being universal and the only valid method of knowledge.

followers of scientism always demand scientific evidence to anything.

John_Mann

But it's a cult.

I keep saying not as insult but trying to make you see you are following a cult and are not even aware of that.

But you keep demanding evidence and I know you are actually referring to scientific evidence.

I already explained to you that physical evidence its not the same as scientific evidence.

You seem to be totally blind about the existence of several types of evidence.

You're in a serious denial mode.

147

Scientism - Nothing But a Childish Insult?

by cofty in

it is not uncommon for theists to accuse rational people on this forum of "scientism".. in my opinion it is nothing but a cheap shot from those who know they lack evidence for their beliefs.

if something like "scientism" actually does exist then i have never encountered it.. here is part of an exchange from another thread - i have brought it here as it was off-topic.... scientism = claim of scientific method being universal and the only valid method of knowledge.

followers of scientism always demand scientific evidence to anything.

John_Mann

Interesting but none of this justifies John_Mann's frequent and unjustified use of "scientism" as an insult in this forum.

Actually I don't use scientism as an insult because ultimately scientism is a metaphysical position. I just consider scientism logically flawed.

Catholicism for instance is a metaphysical position too and is non-scientific. But the problem of scientism is that are not just unscientific but pseudoscience. Scientism tries to pass as science.

When you demand scientific evidence for the existence of God you are mixing up science with metaphysics in a very messy way and this is scientism. Liking you or not.

But my intention it's not to insult you, I'm trying to help you.

I recognize a searcher of truth in you but you're following a very contradictory path.

If you want to refute the existence of God you must do that with philosophy and not by demanding scientific evidence.

You could start by refuting the St. Anselm's ontological argument for instance and not just calling it sophistry.

147

Scientism - Nothing But a Childish Insult?

by cofty in

it is not uncommon for theists to accuse rational people on this forum of "scientism".. in my opinion it is nothing but a cheap shot from those who know they lack evidence for their beliefs.

if something like "scientism" actually does exist then i have never encountered it.. here is part of an exchange from another thread - i have brought it here as it was off-topic.... scientism = claim of scientific method being universal and the only valid method of knowledge.

followers of scientism always demand scientific evidence to anything.

John_Mann

rule of thumb based on intuition.

Exactly!

Totally unscientific but it works.

147

Scientism - Nothing But a Childish Insult?

by cofty in

it is not uncommon for theists to accuse rational people on this forum of "scientism".. in my opinion it is nothing but a cheap shot from those who know they lack evidence for their beliefs.

if something like "scientism" actually does exist then i have never encountered it.. here is part of an exchange from another thread - i have brought it here as it was off-topic.... scientism = claim of scientific method being universal and the only valid method of knowledge.

followers of scientism always demand scientific evidence to anything.

John_Mann

Lately there's a better awareness about scientism like these funny memes around the Internet:

147

Scientism - Nothing But a Childish Insult?

by cofty in

it is not uncommon for theists to accuse rational people on this forum of "scientism".. in my opinion it is nothing but a cheap shot from those who know they lack evidence for their beliefs.

if something like "scientism" actually does exist then i have never encountered it.. here is part of an exchange from another thread - i have brought it here as it was off-topic.... scientism = claim of scientific method being universal and the only valid method of knowledge.

followers of scientism always demand scientific evidence to anything.

John_Mann

So basically just maths then?

Actually we use more the heuristic method than the scientific method.

And it works.

The scientific method is very very limited. Even between areas of science the scientific method must be adapted. The scientific method is not even universal among the areas of science.

John_Mann

Posts by John_Mann