(March 6, 2019 at 8:45 pm)Shell B Wrote: This doesn't matter. Even if not believing something is a belief (which sounds absurd, but whatevs), it doesn't change anything. It's not a "gotcha." It doesn't mean god is real or that atheists have a dogma all their own. It doesn't make it less valid. Religious belief is most often absolutely absurd, but there are plenty of beliefs that aren't, so quit trying to lump atheism in there just to take a crack at atheists.

I can't see how atheism could possibly, in any sense of the word, be called a religion, whether it be the soft or hard variety, or whatever you think about monaxial vs. biaxial diagrams.

You might check "atheist" if someone was dumb enough to still have a checklist for religious affiliations on an application or something, but other than that. . . just no.

---

(March 6, 2019 at 8:51 pm)Gae Bolga Wrote: The irony of watching someone from canadia hedge their bets as a neck from the southern american swamp is something that anyone can appreciate.  Mind, I'm not commenting on the validity of it, only the spectacle.

lol

Ever tell you the exchange?  On my old farm, a certain canadian kept calling toe-may-toes... to-mah-tos...so I kept calling Canada canadia.  Finally, after much prodding, she says "It's can-a-da" - to which I replied, "It's toe-may-toe.".

(March 6, 2019 at 10:48 pm)Gae Bolga Wrote: Ever tell you the exchange?  On my old farm, a certain canadian kept calling toe-may-toes... to-mah-tos...so I kept calling Canada canadia.  Finally, after much prodding, she says "It's can-a-da" - to which I replied, "It's toe-may-toe.".

To mah toes, you grotty foreigner!!

(March 6, 2019 at 10:48 pm)Gae Bolga Wrote: Ever tell you the exchange?  On my old farm, a certain canadian kept calling toe-may-toes... to-mah-tos...so I kept calling Canada canadia.  Finally, after much prodding, she says "It's can-a-da" - to which I replied, "It's toe-may-toe.".

Hmmmmm. . . I'm trying to think if my grandfather called them that.  Maybe?

I don't think I've heard any Canadians say to-mah-toes.  Some do say "aboot" though, that's real.

---

(March 6, 2019 at 11:09 pm)The Valkyrie Wrote:

(March 6, 2019 at 10:48 pm)Gae Bolga Wrote: Ever tell you the exchange?  On my old farm, a certain canadian kept calling toe-may-toes... to-mah-tos...so I kept calling Canada canadia.  Finally, after much prodding, she says "It's can-a-da" - to which I replied, "It's toe-may-toe.".

To mah toes, you grotty foreigner!!

Oh no you di'n't!

a-Valk
Maybe , in The Shire. This is Mordor.

a-Benny
It's a NE coastal thing, shared by people in murrica and canadia. To me..that's just two words for "weirdo".

I wasn't calling atheism a religion, so maybe I wasn't clear?

(March 7, 2019 at 12:03 am)Shell B Wrote: I wasn't calling atheism a religion, so maybe I wasn't clear?

Oh, I'm sorry.  I read that last post as something like "People are putting atheism in with religious traditions, and subjecting it to the BOP, straw manning dogma that we don't actual hold, and so on."

Quote:EgoDeath

On the other we have man who went his entire life thinking that the expression was "tow the line."

I cannot live with this shame.
I shall commit seppuku at sunset.

I also did not know my "it's and itses" until hoc and Girly taught me my "it's and itses" on TTA.
So much for prep school and the Ivy League.
It's very important to know your it's and itses.
I have never done penance for this ignorance either ... so I'll throw that onto the fire of my fake seppuku this evening, also.

There is not a shred of evidence for "mind", and invoking it is nothing but woo.

Quote:My problem with waving toward the brain and saying "there it is" is that it doesn't really explain on what level of organization the most essential "magic" happens: at what degree of complexity would you say there was no consciousness at all under it, but now there is some element of subjective awareness?

.... so here we have an argument from ignorance. Neuro-science will answer that question some day,
There is no "magic".
https://www.scientificamerican.com/artic...ciousness/

Quote: Clearly, an entire brain can experience subjectively. Brain damage studies show that quite massive brain injuries still leave some ability to experience, but in radically altered ways. But what about, say, a few dozen neurons which fire in response to parallel lines? If you could isolate them (say by carefully removing them from the retina and the visual cortex), would there be an isolated "parallel line experience" all on its lonesome? What about a single neuron-- is there some elemental experience in the simple firing of a neuron? What about a single chemical exchange?

No. A reductio ad absurdum argument.
Every single day in almost every medical center in the entire world, people come in with catastrophic brain injuries, ischemic strokes and various bleeds (aneurysmal, hypertensive) and trauma, and are declared brain dead. They really are dead. Totally brain. They have NO ability to experience anything, and before they are compassionately extubated or made "comfort measures only" they are TESTED for brain death. Their bodies are alive, their brains function IN NO WAY, and there is NOTHING they experience.

This guy knows NOTHING about how humans LEARN, what memory is, how it is formed, and how it is referenced when a human "has an experience".

Quote:If you could isolate them (say by carefully removing them from the retina and the visual cortex), would there be an isolated "parallel line experience" all on its lonesome? What about a single neuron-- is there some elemental experience in the simple firing of a neuron? What about a single chemical exchange?

No, no, and no.
It does not work that way AT ALL. And the fact it would be asked that way demonstrates he knows nothing about the subject.
First a human has to learn (normally as a child), by trial and error what "parallel lines'' mean, and that his sensation of that pattern matches what others call "parallel lines", and that memory is laid down. Later when the complex systems of sensory input, (in this case photons excite the cells at the back of the eye, if they are healthy), and the sensory input is referenced to the learned memory, and "organized" by the brain so recognition occurs, "Oh those are parallel lines". It's a complex series of chemical/physical events. Science KNOWS what that COMPLEX SERIES is. Obviously he doesn't.
http://news.mit.edu/2015/how-brain-recog...jects-1005

(March 7, 2019 at 6:53 am)bennyboy Wrote:

(March 7, 2019 at 12:03 am)Shell B Wrote: I wasn't calling atheism a religion, so maybe I wasn't clear?

Oh, I'm sorry.  I read that last post as something like "People are putting atheism in with religious traditions, and subjecting it to the BOP, straw manning dogma that we don't actual hold, and so on."

Something like that, but not that atheism is a religion. More like they're trying to say it's a religion so they can have some sort of "gotcha" moment. I really don't know why.

It's a scorched earth policy of apologia....and because of it's long prominence and constant hard sell..even non-apologists pick it up and repeat it.