(April 22, 2018 at 9:15 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: Keep up daily prayers his whole life as prescribed by the Messenger of time.

...... do you think the atheists here will consider prayer a moral action? Lol.

(April 22, 2018 at 11:39 am)chimp3 Wrote: Name one moral action or statement that a believer can perform or state that an atheist can not.

Any action motivated by love for the Lord. Checkmate.

(April 22, 2018 at 9:40 pm)henryp Wrote: What's great about symbolic logic and math, is that you can't trick it. There's no bias. There's no semantics. 

True, but then I'd miss the fun of spotting other people equivocate.

I love semantics.

But yes, I love the accuracy of that. But I'd pick symbolic logic over math. Because I find argumentation a lot more interesting than sums.

There don't appear to be any philosophy or logic courses in my area, so I am entirely self taught on the very little I've educated myself in.

One day, I would love to learn symbolic logic and see if I can learn to remember what all the symbols stand for.

To be fair, I've never even had a basic introduction to it lol. But seeing symbolic logic in action before I know what symbol stands for what, certainly doesn't help lol.

Quote: Bullshit only enters the equation when people start using words. 

True I agree. But then the fun is spotting the bullshit. I see myself kind of as an error-checker lol.

Quote: That's why everyone here is always bickering over fallacies. 

Right. And fallacies fascinate me. I love pointing out errors. And when you eliminate the incorrect you get the correct.

Quote: You talk about thinking in words, rather than symbols/numbers, but symbols/numbers is so much better.

Yeah... but I have to actually be able to remember that shit. My anaytical skills may indeed be superb, and I may indeed have never actually encountered a person who understands something that I seem incapable of understanding.... I've never known that happen. However, my short term memory/working memory sucks balls. I'm not even very well educated either. So I'm doing pretty awesome considering lol.

Quote:  Take an argument, reduce it to symbolic logic, test it for soundness, find an example that shows it's not valid, present it, and get told you're strawmanning 100% of the time. 

There are definitely people who think/communicate in symbolic logic/numbers rather than words, they just rarely have anyone to talk to.

I can imagine thinking in symbolic logic. I can't imagine thinking in numbers.

I can imagine thinking ABOUT numbers. But thinking in numbers? You can make the symbols of symbolic logic stand for anything... but with numbers it's just... numbers.

Quote:Regarding Poker and Game Theory, math plays so heavily into those things. 

True, but I play no limit texas hold em. And it's more about implied odds and reverse implied odds than calculating specific odds. You have to guess how much you think you will be able to make or how much you think you will lose, on future streets, so.... in many cases the actual explicit odds are nowhere near good enough, but you know your opponents will pay you off later because they suck ass so you can get away with drawing for a big hand anyway. And in other cases, you know that you've got a hand that is either going to win a small pot or lose a big one, so you have reverse-implied odds... even if the explicit odds are good.

I can't do Omaha because i suck at math and it's a lot more mathy.

I am not sure if it's just my memory or if it's just my lack of interest in math. I guess if I learn symbolic logic and find it fascinating and I still struggle with it too much... then it's not my lack of interest it's my lack of a good memory. However, if I am able to find symbolic logic a lot easier than math... then I struggle with math because it bores the crap out of me. Working memory is basically concentration skills, more or less, and they both require actually being interested in what you're doing.

Quote:You're putting a really low ceiling on how good you can be at either.  It's interesting your impression of what's happening at the next level is intuition.  Something that's more of a trait rather than a skill.  Just like you've reduced your poor math skills to a trait rather than intelligence.  You could be great at math, but you've got a bad memory.  You can't do anything about a bad memory or intuition, so it doesn't reflect on your intelligence that you can't move up in poker or be better at math.

I think a big part of math is about short term memory/concentration though. If as soon as I start doing a sum I've already lost the numbers in my head, that's not going to work.

If I could do it on paper maybe I could be good. I always was as a kid. And I grasped probability theory better than my teacher. That was many years ago though, I can't remember any of it.

I'd definitely rather type than write though. I can't stand handwriting it just seems like a total waste of time. I've been able to touch type since I was 6, it took me half an hour, I was practically born with my ability to type, it's weird... so I have never wanted to write because it's slow and annoying. My handwriting is still like a 6 year old's because I've never needed to do it lol.

Quote:When we were arguing in another thread, you brought up how stupid I was a lot of times.  Is it fair to say that you place a lot of value in perceiving yourself as being much more intelligent than others? (not saying you are or aren't, just that it's very important to you.)

I do place a lot of value on it because it's one of my only good points lol.

And also, it helps me cope with feeling so alone. But it also adds to it. I'd feel less alone if I felt like my intelligence level was the same as most people's. So I have to accept I'm different, other people's lack of understanding stares me in the face, and so I may as well try and embrace the good aspect of it.

The answer is none

(April 22, 2018 at 6:16 pm)Khemikal Wrote: I don't have any trouble thinking that my moral values are correct.  I wasn't aware that anyone had such an inconvenient problem.

This^.  I consider myself a moral person.  If I didn't think my moral values were correct, I'd pick different moral values.  Anyone would, I think.

Boru

(April 22, 2018 at 10:49 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote:

(April 22, 2018 at 11:39 am)chimp3 Wrote: Name one moral action or statement that a believer can perform or state that an atheist can not.

Any action motivated by love for the Lord. Checkmate.

This is getting repetitive. Motivation is not an action.

---

(April 22, 2018 at 8:20 pm)MysticKnight Wrote:

(April 22, 2018 at 8:18 pm)chimp3 Wrote: You have not addressed the central question!

They can't bring about world peace or justice to the world.

They can't enjoin the truth and unite humanity on love.

Etc... 

Believers can but only if they find the true guidance of God by sincerity to God, which they have not so far.

This is pure hubris considering the amount of bloodshed by believers today. If it were true, which moral actions would bring about world peace and justice? Seems to me those are results and not actions.

Can a JW perform the moral act of refusing a blood transfusion for religious reasons and die?

(April 23, 2018 at 5:47 am)ignoramus Wrote: Can a JW perform the moral act of refusing a blood transfusion for religious reasons and die?

Religious reasons are motivations not actions. Atheists can refuse transfusions. Why would that be a moral decision?

Don't we accept the challenge from a real world perspective? Why would an atheist refuse?
Since morality is subjective, for a theist it would be a moral decision (as in it is the right thing to do by the teachings of their sacred texts).

If theists didn't receive their morals from the bible, we wouldn't have apologists.

(April 23, 2018 at 5:54 am)ignoramus Wrote: Don't we accept the challenge from a real world perspective? Why would an atheist refuse?
Since morality is subjective, for a theist it would be a moral decision (as in it is the right thing to do by the teachings of their sacred texts).

If theists didn't receive their morals from the bible, we wouldn't have apologists.

An atheist could decide to refuse transfusions because further treatment would be futile and a waste of resources. Decide not to place an undo burden on the survivors.