Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Merlyn_LeRoy

Happy Blasphemy Day

Recommended Posts

The sword cuts both ways. Not just against those speaking out against faith. There are places in the world were openly practicing your faith is a dicey proposition. (i.e. China, the former Soviet Union, Nepal, Cambodia, Vietnam, Cuba etc.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gwd, you have no idea how much fun it is to strip them of their illusions and then watch their responses. As for sacred cows, I'm feeding a student group a BBQ lunch next week. Pork. I'll make sure the lightning rods are in good order.

 

Edited Part: Oops, I guess that should have read, 'sacred pigs'. Maybe I need to include some BBQ beef.

Has nothing to do with anything but I just remembered that one time I was eating a great sausage sandwich in Philadelphia and bit into a mangled wedding band in the sausage. I'm fairly certain that I had eaten at least part of a human finger. Still have the gold, maybe I should sell it. But it was a good sandwich.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... and you still ate the whole thing?

 

Cannibalism crosses the line for me.

 

But on reflection of this subject, and to be a bit blasphemous, what about the Eucharist?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the words of Mark Twain, "(i)t ain't those parts of the Bible that I can't understand that bother me, it is the parts that I do understand."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The US doesn't have any because of the first amendment .........

 

Thanks for clearing that up Merlyn because it sounded like you were referring to the USA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"... and you still ate the whole thing?"

Yep. If you'll pay a little more attention to what you commonly think of as 'food' you'll understand that many of us eat things that are far less palatable or acceptable, except we just don't think about it. In the case of my sausage sandwich, you are repelled mostly by an idea...not on a strictly rational basis. Just a 'taste': http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/04/health/04meat.html?_r=2&th&emc=th

Read the whole article, you'll never think about hamburger the same way again. The Eucharist thing is also just an idea. True believers really do believe this 'magic' but on a strictly rational basis, it is merely rather tasteless crackers and wine (or grape juice). It'd be a hoot if the wine was Mogen David. ;)

Bon Apptit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yah, to folks 250 years ago, electricity and electronics would be considered "magic", eh? And talkin' about the possibility of man flying a heavier-than-air craft a bit over 100 years ago would have engendered da same ridicule by the "rational" people that packsaddle trumpets in smugness here.

 

As a Christian, I don't believe in "magic" or da "supernatural", eh? What I know as God and "miracles" and such are the very epitome of the Natural, because they spring from the source and fundamental nature of all things. As much as electricity or aerodynamics.

 

I can only sympathize with da folks who call that "magic". It just shows how limited their knowledge and experience is. They are the Geocentrists of da philosophical world, eh? Everything must revolve around us.

 

Beavah

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

. . . I just don't see how blasphemy = progress.

 

I can appreciate that there are many individuals who get an adrenaline rush and/or deep satisfaction from poking at whatever is sacred to others. Most of this sort of poking is sophomoric, but a small bit can have value. Overall, God is God and the source of our being. "In the end, the Good Guys win."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The well-placed lure is so enticing...I rise to the bait.

(or was that a thrown shoe?)

 

"Everything must revolve around us." No, that is your spin, your attempt to state something I didn't say in a manner that you hope casts the greatest possible aspersion on whatever I didn't say. (This is where another person might accuse you of lying ;))

I said nothing like that. Whatever it is you mean by 'everything' merely revolves and evolves and we are part of it. No sense of purpose or position, no intent. Merely there.

I'm open to a clear distinction between magic and miracles because I don't understand a distinction. My null hypothesis is that there is no distinction. Provide me with clear, understandable evidence to reject the null.

Incidentally, are you a Ron Hubbard follower?

 

Just for fun, there was this a while back:

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/news_education_edblog/2008/07/ucf-student-who.html

All this for a cookie?

 

Edited part: Mr. Boyce, in the spirit of humor, I'll quote my wife to provide an alternative view, "Scum rises to the top."(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I said nothing like that.

 

No, I did.

 

The attempt to impute my motives in so doing (and thereby communicate disdain for positions other than your own) is amusin'. Not particularly rational, since yeh have no basis on which to judge my intent.

 

Now, let us take a step back and recall that it was packsaddle (among others) who attempted to equate religious belief (of the Catholics, I think), with belief in "magic." So since it was you makin' the claim, I reckon that the burden of proof lies with you, eh? We all await your proof of Christianity or Eucharist or whatnot = "magic."

 

It's just so much easier to critique (dare I echo the claim of "cast the greatest possible aspersion on") da beliefs of others, while not holdin' yourself to your own standard of rationality. To paraphrase Feynman, the first duty of a scientist is to not fool himself with his own claims.

 

Beavah

(who casts good bait because he tries to follow in da footsteps of some famous fishermen :) )(This message has been edited by Beavah)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Everything must revolve around us." Beavah

"I said nothing like that." me

"No, I did." Beavah

I am satisfied.

 

I have been fairly consistent in asking what the difference is between miracles and magic? I remember some humorous explanations from others in the past but nothing serious. If you think asking the question amounts to equation, then that's your spin. I am asking, if they are different, then what is the difference? If you won't explain the difference then what evidence is there that you know the answer any better than I do?

I'm amazed that you invoke Richard Feynman.

His view was that of 'god of the gaps'.

 

Richard Feynman: "God was invented to explain mystery. God is always invented to explain those things that you do not understand. Now, when you finally discover how something works, you get some laws which you're taking away from God; you don't need him anymore. But you need him for the other mysteries. So therefore you leave him to create the universe because we haven't figured that out yet; you need him for understanding those things which you don't believe the laws will explain, such as consciousness, or why you only live to a certain length of time -- life and death -- stuff like that. God is always associated with those things that you do not understand."

 

Or you can listen carefully:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zeCHiUe1et0&feature=player_embedded#

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yah, I think it's always a mistake to assume that because a fellow is knowledgeable in one area, that he must be knowledgeable in another. Just because a man is a fantastic plumber doesn't mean he's goin' to know anything about being an electrician.

 

I used Feynman to comment on da ethics and responsibility of a scientist, eh? From his commencement address to CalTech students, IIRC. I figure Feynman is competent to comment on science.

 

I don't reckon Feynman is competent to comment on religion or religiosity. Dat's not at all his area of expertise or study. About as useful as Brad Pitt commenting on international relations.

 

And, BTW, there is nuthin' particularly honorable and certainly nuthin' to brag about beatin' on the ideas of young undergraduates or novices in any profession. Any of us can. Just most of us don't. Doin' that sort of thing doesn't make you a professor, and certainly not a teacher. Just makes you a bully.

 

Beavah

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Feynman wasn't talking about religion or religiosity, he was talking about god. I don't see any reason to think that anyone is more 'expert' than anyone else when it comes to commenting on gods.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...