Non-existence

[Edwardo Piet]

Religion is almost always untrue... yet it makes a huge difference in our practical reality. It does not have to be true, proven, or even logical to make a difference... yet it effects all of our lives in many aspects.

True. I'm still interested in the truth of the matter though. And I do think that on the whole religion does more bad than good.

'so until proven it's just semantic'... can you prove anything without logic?

I'm referring to his argument, how the scenario he was describing appeared to make no actual difference to the one I believe in, and the only difference was he was using different labels.

To dismiss logic as something non-important

Which I'm obviously not doing. I'm saying that even logic itself you have to believe in or not, hence you have to either have the experience that it works which is evidence. As we do so as we grow up, our experience tells us the world is logical.

All beliefs are based on Evidence or lack thereof (Faith), evidence is rational, faith isn't. By definition. If you have a reason to believe something is true then that=evidence. If you don't then the only alternative is faith, in which you'd be believing without reason=irrational.

You are EvidenceVsFaith... and all of your views are strictly non-religious... yet you would seem to suggest that logic is irrelevant as evidence,

No. I'm saying that it seems as though the logic he's speaking of either 1. Makes no actual difference to the world I believe in and the only difference is the labels or 2. Is flawed due to the fact that when he gets to the 'God part' it's a non-sequiter or flawed in some other way.

Refusal to discuss that which does not concern oneself rationally, is responsible for a great deal of injustice in our world.

I'm not refusing to discuss. Far from it - I'm happy to contuine discussing anything here with anyone. In fact, I've never once wanted to end a discussion on these forums or been the first to 'agree to disagree', I'm happy to discuss any subject indefinitely here - it's no trouble for me.

How, in a logical community, could such a lapse of reason occur that people of unusual color, sex, and deformities be given unfair treatment?

I don't see how this is relevant to what I said?

It could not happen... if ours was a "semantic" world. But ours is not a semantic world... ours is a world populated mostly by non-thought, and mistake.

I agree, the world is not just a matter of semanitcs. And what I was saying was that the world JP was describing was exactly the same I was describing it seems but he was just using different labels, hence "a semantic thing" - to say everything is 'not real' when he hasn't described it to be any different to if it's real...when he hasn't qualifed the actual difference=a semantic thing. You can say that reality is 'real', 'not real', or 'bazon on toast' untill you actually qualify a difference you're giving nothing but different labels. It's just a semantic thing in that case.

hence All of our knowledge is the assumption that we are right... and we are often wrong.

Well I don't assume I am right - I know I could be wrong about anything that I believe to be right.

Recognize this fact, and your brain won't cement its misinformation into your 'database'. Lack of recognizing this truth is one of the easiest ways to lose, or at least stall, one's ability to learn...

Sure - I don't know what you're referring to though lol.

Evidence deals with the truth of beliefs.

If something gives credence to a belief being more likely to be true than not, then that is by definition: Evidence.

EvF