(February 1, 2015 at 12:48 pm)Drich Wrote: so all genocide, rape, oppression is bad?

Yes, don't you agree?

<edited the rest, erroneous understanding of misquote on my part>

An 'experience of God' doesn't qualify as evidence for the existence of God any more than dropping acid qualifies as evidence for girls with kaleidoscope eyes.

Boru

(February 1, 2015 at 3:31 pm)Drich Wrote:

(January 30, 2015 at 4:38 pm)IATIA Wrote: Empirical evidence is something I can pick up, carry to you and put on display for all to see, i.e., tangible.

Again I provided a dictionary defination that says otherwise.

It is evidence that can also be derived from observation as well as tangible evidence. In short empirical evidence means reasoning drived from some sort of evidence as opposed to position based on pure a theory or logic. A theory Like say the Big Bang.

http://www.simplypsychology.org/science-psychology.html

This explains it when your talking about "Empirical Evidence"

(February 1, 2015 at 3:31 pm)Drich Wrote: ... empirical evidence means reasoning drived from some sort of evidence as opposed to position based on pure a theory or logic.

Your words, my bold.

(February 1, 2015 at 4:49 pm)Sionnach Wrote:

(February 1, 2015 at 4:27 pm)Drich Wrote: An observation like watching God work in your life?

What one cannot witness is god actually doing anything for anyone.

What can be observed, however, is the effect an irrational belief in god has on a person.

That's not true is it. At best all one can say is "I" have never witnessed God doing anything for me. Because if your mind is closed to God then no matter what happens you would simply attribute whatever you wittnesed to something else. It's only when one is face to face with God that He can not be denied.

---

(February 1, 2015 at 4:49 pm)IATIA Wrote:

(February 1, 2015 at 4:27 pm)Drich Wrote: An observation like watching God work in your life?

If it can be shown to be repeatable and not attributed to another cause, bring it on.

Kinda like the Big Bang or macroevolution are repeatable, huh?

---

(February 1, 2015 at 5:39 pm)Roxy904 Wrote: I'm really busy right now, Drich. So I'm only going to adress what I most disliked about your response to me.
"So all genocide, rape, and oppression is bad?"
I cannot think of a single instance where any of these is a good thing.
You claim the foundation of our lifestyles are these things. If this is true, which you didn't provide any evidence for, than that is unfortunate, and does not make genocide, rape, and oppression good. These are problems found in many different places, not just in, because of, or founder of America.

ALL Soceities are built on oppression, rape, and genocide. Like it or not. The idea of soceity it self is the offspring of these things. If you do not believe this to be true name one not built on the backs of these 'all bad things.'

To say you endorse soceity but completely shun rape, genocide, and oppression is like saying you will only eat the fruit of a tree who can only be planted on the mass grave of a nations worth of dead children... If you will only eat this fruit, then You are responsible for the planting of this tree, and all the death who died to bring this tree to life.

Which again, I have no issue with planting. Why? Because the benfits of soceity far out way the mad max/book of Eli world it would be without it.

---

(February 1, 2015 at 6:25 pm)Nope Wrote:

(February 1, 2015 at 12:48 pm)Drich Wrote: so all genocide, rape, oppression is bad? What if I told you none of us would be here is not for these things? Our 'western' lifestyles have these things as a foundation.

Can you provide an example when genocide, rape and oppression are good?

[/quote]

For the establishment of the United States.

Without slavery we would have never been able to seperate our selves from the mash bangers and in turn pull the mash bangers and frogs out of the fire in WWII. Because if you remember the 13 colonies were one of many such colonies held by the Europeans at the time. France, Spain and even germany had a foot hold in what is considered to be greater North America at the time.

No United states Vée, vould all ve sprechen ze deutsch..

---

(February 1, 2015 at 6:59 pm)Mr.wizard Wrote:

(February 1, 2015 at 3:31 pm)Drich Wrote: Again I provided a dictionary defination that says otherwise.

It is evidence that can also be derived from observation as well as tangible evidence. In short empirical evidence means reasoning drived from some sort of evidence as opposed to position based on pure a theory or logic. A theory Like say the Big Bang.

http://www.simplypsychology.org/science-psychology.html

This explains it when your talking about "Empirical Evidence"

The artical clearly states that in psychology they changed the term's meaning to fit a needed defination in that specific field... You do know the discussions we have been having have nothing to do with psychology right?

"Artical"

(February 1, 2015 at 7:13 pm)IATIA Wrote:

(February 1, 2015 at 3:31 pm)Drich Wrote: ... empirical evidence means reasoning drived from some sort of evidence as opposed to position based on pure a theory or logic.

Your words, my bold.

Very Good!


Now look up the word evidence.

You know what let me save you four post of dialog of you trying to convince me that your personal defination trumps what I know the defination to be.
As defined by merrium Webster:
1
a : an outward sign : indication
b : something that furnishes proof : testimony; specifically : something legally submitted to a tribunal to ascertain the truth of a matter
2
: one who bears witness; especially : one who voluntarily confesses a crime and testifies for the prosecution against his accomplices

Now put the two definitions together, and you have an authenticated meaning of the term "empirical evidence" and not the made up crap most of you believe to be the defination. Which can be used more accuratly in the support of God, than in the support of macroevolution and or the Big Bang as both of those theories are indeed based in logic and or pure theory.

---

(February 2, 2015 at 1:21 am)Parkers Tan Wrote: "Artical"

Here one you might want to try: Topical, as in do you think you can manage a post that is 'Topical?'

(February 2, 2015 at 1:24 am)Drich Wrote: As defined by merrium Webster:
1
a : an outward sign : indication
b : something that furnishes proof : testimony; specifically : something legally submitted to a tribunal to ascertain the truth of a matter
2
: one who bears witness; especially : one who voluntarily confesses a crime and testifies for the prosecution against his accomplices

Now put the two definitions together, and you have an authenticated meaning of the term "empirical evidence" and not the made up crap most of you believe to be the defination.

Nonsense. You're not under oath, and subject to penalties for perjury, which is the clear meaning of the condition "legally submitted".

Your claim is not "testimony." Your claim is simply a bald claim.

(February 2, 2015 at 1:24 am)Drich Wrote: Here one you might want to try: Topical, as in do you think you can manage a post that is 'Topical?'

Pointing out your ignorance is indeed topical. You've been corrected on the spelling of article, have been presented citations showing that article is the correct spelling, and yet you refuse to acknowledge your error, and indeed dig your heels in and insist you are right. That obdurate ignorance, running away from facts presented to you, is germane to every thread you post in, because it shows you to be someone who cannot admit even the smallest error; a disingenuous ignoramus incapable of learning and unwilling to bow to facts.

That is very topical. You got any other complaints, Roget?

And you've been asked to provide source material when you make a claim. As in your personal redefinition of the word evidence.

(February 2, 2015 at 12:52 am)Drich Wrote: To say you endorse soceity but completely shun rape, genocide, and oppression is like saying you will only eat the fruit of a tree who can only be planted on the mass grave of a nations worth of dead children... If you will only eat this fruit, then You are responsible for the planting of this tree, and all the death who died to bring this tree to life.

What?

No, to say you endorse society but completely shun rape, genocide, and oppression is like saying "I can't control what happened in the world before I got here. I wish none of the bad stuff happened, and that people had lived in harmony from day 1. I wish no one had ever been raped, or killed; I wish no one had ever felt the need to rape, or kill. But we can't change the past. We can acknowledge it, and remember it, and give our gratitude, our respect, our thanks, our sincere apologies, to those who died to get us where we are today."

If I could go back and undo all the rape, genocide, and oppression, I would. Would you?