- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Satanic Temple puts up display at Michigan Capital
Posted on 12/22/14 at 12:36 pm to Hog on the Hill
Posted on 12/22/14 at 12:36 pm to Hog on the Hill
quote:Wut?
I can tell you're trying to find a way to concede
quote:Sounds like the Brits claiming victory at Dunkirk
I'll let you sidestep this one.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 12:43 pm to Hog on the Hill
quote:I'm understanding "verifiable" to mean that a particular truth claim (belief) is able to be confirmed or denied. If I, personally, am able to verify whether or not my belief is true when I die, I count that belief as verifiable.
No, that's only provisionally verifiable to the person who dies, if it's true. That's kind of a goofy way to define something as verifiable.
quote:Why is the sharing of the outcome necessary for a proposition to be verifiable? Let's use this as an example:
If a proposition cannot be verified in a substantive way that can be shared with others, it's not verifiable.
Proposition - I believe that when the body dies, the soul goes to either Heaven or Hell depending on what a person believes while alive.
Outcome - Upon death, my goes to Heaven.
Does the outcome verify my proposition (belief)? I would say it does in this example, regardless of whether or not it can be shared with other living persons.
quote:What you are asking for is a scientific measure that can objectively prove or disprove a belief. What if no scientific measure exists due to the limitations of science, itself? Does that mean a person cannot verify a belief through experience?
Otherwise, the crazy lady next door could "verify" that she's being abducted by aliens every night. If she can't provide substantive evidence of this belief to others, then it's not verifiable
Posted on 12/22/14 at 12:49 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
Atheism is the default. When you are born, you have no belief in a God of any sort. You are effectively, an atheist. If no one EVER introduced the idea of God to you, then you'd have to create the idea on your own but you weren't born with it either way.
I disagree. Under this definition we could say a rock or a tree is an atheist. A rock doesn't have a belief in God, but it would be ludicrous to call it an atheist.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 12:53 pm to Porkchop Express
quote:What this boils down to is whether or not a truth claim is actually true, and whether or not such truth can even be known "for a fact".
This is not a timeline issue.
A fact is verifiable in the present.
A belief is not verifiable in the present.
Try to philosophize this all you want, but it does not change it
Not all truth is verifiable in the present. We see examples of this all the time. Take any case where, at the time, all of the evidence pointed towards a person's guilt in a court of law, yet the truth of innocence wasn't able to be proven until years later with advances in technology. The truth was always the truth, but the verification of it wasn't able to be made "in the present" at that time.
Similarly, either Heaven exists or it doesn't. There's no scientific way to prove it, but that doesn't mean it cannot be verified. The only known possible verification of it is death, which, unfortunately, renders communication about said verification impossible. You have to experience it to know whether or not the truth claim is actually true.
Some beliefs are verifiable in the present while others aren't. Like I said before, my wife can tell me something and I can believe it as true. I can accept her at her word (faith) or I can verify it. I can still believe something while having the ability to verify it in the present. When it comes to religious truths, those aren't necessarily verifiable in the present, but it doesn't mean that they can't be verified in the future (such as at your death).
Posted on 12/22/14 at 12:54 pm to dawg2357
so much butt hurt from team jesus in this thread
Posted on 12/22/14 at 12:56 pm to FooManChoo
quote:That's the thing, you can't. Your premise is not true.
I'm understanding "verifiable" to mean that a particular truth claim (belief) is able to be confirmed or denied. If I, personally, am able to verify whether or not my belief is true when I die, I count that belief as verifiable.
Premise: If I, personally, am able to verify whether or not my belief is true when I die
The bolded is the problem. You can't verify if your belief is not true if you are wrong. You won't exist. That means the conditions are not met to satisfy your premise.
This post was edited on 12/22/14 at 12:57 pm
Posted on 12/22/14 at 12:58 pm to monsterballads
Ok substitute "atheist" for metaphysical naturalist. I would say you now have a belief.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 1:06 pm to dawg2357
quote:Dude, he didn't mean that atheists don't have ANY beliefs, period. He meant they don't have a belief with respect to the existence of a god or gods. The word "atheism" literally means "without theism" or "without belief in god or gods"
Ok substitute "atheist" for metaphysical naturalist. I would say you now have a belief.
This post was edited on 12/22/14 at 1:07 pm
Posted on 12/22/14 at 1:09 pm to Hog on the Hill
quote:Here's where it gets tricky because you get into a lot of caveats based on the particular belief and the particular outcome. If there is nothing and my consciousness just disappears for eternity, the truth of an afterlife is verified to be untrue, even though I'm no longer aware to be able to know or understand it. That's an example where I cannot knowingly verify the truth claim, even if the truth claim is verified by my death.
That's the thing, you can't. Your premise is not true.
Premise: If I, personally, am able to verify whether or not my belief is true when I die
The bolded is the problem. You can't verify if your belief is not true if you are wrong. You won't exist. That means the conditions are not met to satisfy your premise.
If, though, my soul goes to Heaven (or even Hell) and I'm aware of it, my death has allowed me to verify the existence of the afterlife, and assuming I still have awareness of some kind, I should be able to compare my current state with what I believed about my that state while I was alive to determine if my beliefs were true or false. Either way, the outcome verifies my beliefs one way or the other. The question is whether or not I'm able to know or understand it.
My initial point was that certain religious beliefs can theoretically be verified by an individual even if it doesn't (or can't) happen in the here-and-now.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 1:10 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:Not really for you to say.
It serves no purpose except to make others less comfortable.
It's sad these folks are not happy and comfortable enough with their own choices so as to feel need to make others unhappy with them. If this lady was pleased with her own belief-set, she would place something honoring atheism, or atheists.
Weird person. Weird concept.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 1:11 pm to dawg2357
quote:
Under this definition we could say a rock or a tree is an atheist.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 1:11 pm to dawg2357
quote:
I disagree. Under this definition we could say a rock or a tree is an atheist. A rock doesn't have a belief in God, but it would be ludicrous to call it an atheist.
when did we start labeling belief systems on inanimate objects?
*ETA:
Posted on 12/22/14 at 1:12 pm to FooManChoo
quote:I strongly disagree. If you don't exist, nothing can be verified to you. The existence of an observer is implicit and essential in the concept of 'verification'--you can't separate the two and still have verification. At least that's the way I see it.
Here's where it gets tricky because you get into a lot of caveats based on the particular belief and the particular outcome. If there is nothing and my consciousness just disappears for eternity, the truth of an afterlife is verified to be untrue, even though I'm no longer aware to be able to know or understand it. That's an example where I cannot knowingly verify the truth claim, even if the truth claim is verified by my death.
This post was edited on 12/22/14 at 1:12 pm
Posted on 12/22/14 at 1:14 pm to Hog on the Hill
Ah but that is the belief the atheist needs to defend for I would argue that it is key to atheism. It is the philosophical position of the atheist.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 1:15 pm to dawg2357
I think you're overthinking this. are you an atheist because you don't believe in thousands of other gods except the one you believe in?
This post was edited on 12/22/14 at 1:18 pm
Posted on 12/22/14 at 1:16 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
when did we start labeling belief systems on inanimate objects?
that was one of the worst arguments i've ever seen lol
Posted on 12/22/14 at 1:16 pm to SlowFlowPro
He was arguing atheism wasn't a belief system. Unless you want to say absence of belief is a belief system.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 1:17 pm to dawg2357
i fail to see how objects that cannot believe or not believe or do anything mentally fit in with either side of the argument
Posted on 12/22/14 at 1:18 pm to dawg2357
quote:
Unless you want to say absence of belief is a belief system.
you're making my point for me
Posted on 12/22/14 at 1:20 pm to SlowFlowPro
Most atheists are really agnostic when it comes down to it.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News