RE: Non-existing objects
June 26, 2017 at 3:52 am
(This post was last modified: June 26, 2017 at 4:29 am by KerimF.)
(June 25, 2017 at 2:17 pm)Brian37 Wrote:(June 25, 2017 at 2:05 pm)KerimF Wrote: By just accepting there is a Creator, it doesn't reflect any useful information in one's life.
In my case and when I was teen (many decades ago), I felt the need to discover the real image of the Will/Power (God if you like) which forced me to exist in the time/space realm for a certain period of time and on certain places (actually on a planet we call Earth) in a huge universe.
But I also noticed that most people, I had the chance to know or live with, didn't have such a need. They are atheists or followers of a religion which they are used to or brings them services/benefits they are looking for and are not provided by other systems.
So I am just passing by and I will be around here as long I am allowed to (I am just a guest here after all).
So I have no intention to convince anyone about anything. I know in advance that every one is right the way he sees things. In fact, I didn't meet yet a mature sane person who thinks that any of his beliefs (or disbeliefs) is wrong.
None of this post is evidence for anything and yet another mere act where you pontificate.
Quote: In fact, I didn't meet yet a mature sane person who thinks that any of his beliefs (or disbeliefs) is wrong.
No, plenty of both theists and atheists can think they are right but admit they don't know absolutely for certain. That is possible too.
But that is not the point in any case.
WHEN you have something credible, WHEN you have something testable and falsifiable, and WHEN you can turn all that over to someone else who can repeat it and come to the same conclusions REPEATEDLY, that is when you have evidence.
You are dodging again. Your post was not evidence it was mere commentary.
Here is how determining evidence works.
1. Collect data on prior established method of data collection.
2. Form hypothesis based on that data.
3. Plug that data into established formula with control groups.
4. Repeat the tests over and over to establish a decent sample rate.
5. Write down your conclusions explaining your data collection and methodology and formula.
6. Hand your findings over for independent peer review to people in the same field.
If the vast majority who independently review it come to the same conclusions, then you are onto something. If they don't then you go back and find where the errors are and fix them, or even scrap it if you are that way off.
Nothing in your OP Kerm is doing that. It is simply making naked assertions and trying to sound sciencey.
You are free to believe whatever you like as being the right path for you in order to know/discover the truth; I mean the truths that you are looking for.
First, by following your method, I should not take advantage of whatever I may discover in my life (to have a better life without harming others) till it is approved or blessed by certain people who are stronger than me and, therefore, privileged to do so legitimately while having all necessary means to control my actions. I mean; in this case I should stop producing my new electronic controllers I used designing for my local customers till they are approved by some privileged Elite of Science (the counterparts of god's representatives in Religions or the People's representatives in Politics).
Second, I agree with you that the scientific method you mentioned above is indeed one of the best ways that helps those (calling themselves theists or atheists) who have to serve the world while they are alive (guided by the instructions, not necessarily the same in all of them, that are embedded in their living cells).
(June 25, 2017 at 2:37 pm)mh.brewer Wrote:(June 25, 2017 at 2:05 pm)KerimF Wrote: [edit]
So I have no intention to convince anyone about anything. I know in advance that every one is right the way he sees things. In fact, I didn't meet yet a mature sane person who thinks that any of his beliefs (or disbeliefs) is wrong.
A mature sane person is one that holds their belief until such time that evidence indicates that the belief may be flawed. Then the mature sane person reassess his belief in light of the evidence and can continue to hold the belief, alter the belief or eliminate the belief.
Do you mean you, as a mature sane person, can accept evidence from sources other than the ones you used trusting lately?
And, among these other sources, could you trust your personal observations and your logical reasoning more than of your trusted sources?
In reality, billions of people prefer to follow some others as good sheep do, so that they can be on the safe side (with the hope they will not be chosen among the sheep that should be slaughtered under one pretext or another).
(June 25, 2017 at 3:57 pm)Brian37 Wrote:(June 25, 2017 at 2:03 pm)mh.brewer Wrote: I asked and was ignored. What makes you think you're better than ME???
(June 25, 2017 at 3:54 pm)KerimF Wrote: I am afraid that you have no time to read attentively all what I write on this thread.
I try discovering things (in any field that could be related to my nature) with the hope to have a better life.
In reality, knowing how to have a better life is a relative matter because it depends on one's nature in the first place. I mean what is good for someone may or may not be so to others. But rare persons, even on these days, can perceive clearly this 'Relativity' because it is much easier for them to believe in the 'Absolute'.
Anyway, it is not a crime if someone thinks that all humans should have the same nature (structure) of his. But, in this case, this person has no choice but seeing anyone who doesn't have his same main priorities in life as having illusions at best.
Should I repeat that, along history, the various religions then politics were created by men for the same main purpose?
So talking about ruling gods (religions) or human Elite (politics) sounds much like the same to me.
By the way, do you think a free independent person could exist in this world?
If you don't, you, unlike I, are used to be a follower of a certain ruling system (obviously not a religious one since you are not a formal theist).
I do have time, but how much of an naked assertion apology does one have to read before you know it is still ultimately a naked assertion?
Got a peer reviewed journal, formula? No, then all you have is a personal like. So do Muslims and Jews and Hindus and Buddhists, get in line take a number.
Oh, did you really meet even one Muslim, Jew, Hindus, Buddhist or formal Christian who thinks he has the right to believe things other than what his supposed holy sources present as true?
If you did, I wish you can give me more details about this so that I can add it to my personal observations. Thank you in advance.
