b3ta.com board

Home » Messageboard » XXX » Message 8404747 (Thread)

Do we have to go with any?

All avenues should be open to exploration and an assessment of either simplicity or likelihood is always going to be flawed until you know the full truth, if such a thing is even possible. You could always found a belief based on paradox instead of reason as any reason you have is unlikely to be precise at best.

(Guineapiggy Fuzzeh!, Tue 27 May 2008, 4:21, archived)

Oh, sure.

By "go with an idea" I don't mean "banish all alternatives from your mind and never contemplate them again".

(_Felix 's school of dance and occult sciences, Tue 27 May 2008, 4:34, archived)

To me that does sound like what you're doing

(Guineapiggy Fuzzeh!, Tue 27 May 2008, 4:35, archived)

All ideas we encounter have a place somewhere in our minds

and I fully accept that ideas about deities are ideas. I keep them near my ideas about unicorns and gnomes.

(_Felix 's school of dance and occult sciences, Tue 27 May 2008, 4:45, archived)

Well that clenches shut that avenue of discussion...

(Guineapiggy Fuzzeh!, Tue 27 May 2008, 4:53, archived)

Hey,

we can also discuss whether tinkerbell exists. I say no and it's a silly idea.
The discussion is still possible, though. Evidence that she exists in reality
can be presented to me, and I will listen. It would be a bad thing if I gave
the impression I thought the idea was sensible, though. It would be a bit like
lying about my ideas about reality in general, because of the implications on
related ideas. This is what we do when we respect religious viewpoints.

(_Felix 's school of dance and occult sciences, Tue 27 May 2008, 5:06, archived)

You're just too stubborn to admit the difference between being a git

and disagreeing. I see no reason to continue this discussion.

(Guineapiggy Fuzzeh!, Tue 27 May 2008, 5:34, archived)

Religion

is able to demand respect in discussions which it doesn't deserve.
Its success in obtaining undeserved respect distorts the conclusion
of discussions, usually in the direction of "maybe God exists, who
indeed can say, ahhhh."

Meta-comment about arguments being ludicrous - that is, founded in
a collection of other ideas commonly agreed to be false, or self
contradictory in trivially obvious ways, or otherwise weak - can be 
part of truth-seeking, and not an attempt to shut down discussion,
but rather an attempt to avoid being tricked into an inconclusive
admission that anything is possible, which implies the ideas are
sort-of-true even though there's no reason at all to think that.

(_Felix 's school of dance and occult sciences, Tue 27 May 2008, 14:19, archived)