The real religion?
August 11, 2016 at 10:14 am
(This post was last modified: August 11, 2016 at 10:41 am by LadyForCamus.)
(August 11, 2016 at 9:58 am)SteveII Wrote:(August 11, 2016 at 9:46 am)LadyForCamus Wrote: Lol, sure, people reliably and predictably SAY they have a personal relationship with God without an OUNCE of measurable, demonstrable evidence to back that claim up. This is in no way empirical, and it is in no way proof of cause and effect. I think you need to read up on the basic principles of scientific research and the difference between 'correlation' and 'cause'. If you are claiming proof of cause and effect here, you better be able to back that up with a double-blind, controlled, clinical trial or two involving your god. An individual ascribing the effect to 'salvation and God' when they ALREADY believed that to begin with is blatant confirmation bias, and not scientific in any way.
em·pir·i·cal
əmˈpirik(ə)l/
adjective
based on, concerned with, or verifiable by observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic.
This discussion is not scientific. You can't put a persons brain under a microscope and examine experiences and why they do or say things. So, 'scientific' standards of proof do not apply.
Are you willing to throw out human intuition as a source of knowledge? It seems so. How do you justify that?
News flash, Steve: you don't get to throw around phrases like "proof", "evidence", and "cause and effect", and then declare this isn't a scientific discussion. You can't have your cake, and eat it too. Sorry. Thanks for playing though.
Human intuition? Do I think it is relevant? Yes. Do I think it's important? Sure, up to a point. Does it, by itself, qualify as indisputable "proof" of ANYTHING without corroborating scientific evidence? Of course not.
Nay_Sayer: “Nothing is impossible if you dream big enough, or in this case, nothing is impossible if you use a barrel of KY Jelly and a miniature horse.”
Wiser words were never spoken.
Wiser words were never spoken.
