well we get the obvious first:
- You can't prove they're myths.
- Perception is a delicate issue and even when you're sure you're right you can never guarantee that what you see is either accurate or what anyone else sees.
( ,
Tue 27 May 2008, 3:16,
archived)
- Perception is a delicate issue and even when you're sure you're right you can never guarantee that what you see is either accurate or what anyone else sees.
perception is the point
one man's truth etc
ultimately whatever is said, things are what they are in reality, irrespective of what is chosen to be true or false
so, in summary: bollocks
( ,
Tue 27 May 2008, 3:18,
archived)
ultimately whatever is said, things are what they are in reality, irrespective of what is chosen to be true or false
so, in summary: bollocks
Yes.
However, we can identify bullshit. When faced with sincerely presented ideas such as a celestial teapot (or "the moon landings were faked" or "breaking a mirror is unlucky"), we can call bullshit, and scathingly. Why should religious belief be treated any more gently, given that it is on the same level of implausibility by common standards?
( ,
Tue 27 May 2008, 3:21,
archived)
Unreliably, yes.
Do you think there's something wrong with calling an idea ridiculous when it appears to you to be ridiculous?
( ,
Tue 27 May 2008, 3:27,
archived)
I think it makes you a tool if you do mostly
there are ideas I don't believe and I'll discuss them and all surrounding reason and issues but I don't think calling someone a liar or a bullshitter for believing something you don't, (say, god, faked moon landings, the illuminati, any of the counter-theories etc. etc.) is big or clever.
( ,
Tue 27 May 2008, 3:30,
archived)
As an expressed opinion with a view to continuing discussion
it's perfectly valid
( ,
Tue 27 May 2008, 3:35,
archived)
I believe that's known as heresy
often punishable to varying extremes :)
( ,
Tue 27 May 2008, 3:36,
archived)
there is when someone points a gun to your head to remind you the idea isn't ridiculous and it's the only correct idea
as sometimes thinking for oneself is not an available option
( ,
Tue 27 May 2008, 3:30,
archived)
yes
I think that's the part I don't like
a new king turns up and has his own religion "my subjects are now [x]" of course all the right minded followers of [y] will be "I can't do that! I will offend my deity[ies] if I do not follow the one true way"
"you will if you want to stay alive"
I suspect more have suffered with forcing one religion over another belief, than have suffered from forcing athiesm
oh my, an opinion without researched factual basis!*
*and unlikely to be proven wrong
( ,
Tue 27 May 2008, 3:43,
archived)
a new king turns up and has his own religion "my subjects are now [x]" of course all the right minded followers of [y] will be "I can't do that! I will offend my deity[ies] if I do not follow the one true way"
"you will if you want to stay alive"
I suspect more have suffered with forcing one religion over another belief, than have suffered from forcing athiesm
oh my, an opinion without researched factual basis!*
*and unlikely to be proven wrong