RE: Non-overlapping magesteria
February 18, 2015 at 4:53 am
(This post was last modified: February 18, 2015 at 5:13 am by robvalue.)
Emotons can be studied as configurations in the brain though.
It only becomes unstudyable once you abstractly wrap it in different languages. And emotions don't seek truth; or if they do, there is at least some methodology involved. I'm not trying to be a dick, just attempting to explain my point I'm sure we agree anyway and I'm just fighting for 1 square millimetre of ground on an epic battlefield.
But sure, people can decide what is true "for them". But I guess I should have been clearer, I'm talking about things that are true to everyone. Like, for example, a particular God exists or he does not, he doesn't exist for one person and not for another. They may claim it does, but that doesn't make it true.
And religion obviously has an agenda of trying to use this kind of hand waving as a way to sneak in unfalsifiable truths about Religion. And these are usually claims of knowledge, without justification, claiming that there is a "different sort" of justification. What I'm saying is that this is not valid, and stuff doesn't become independently true because you find it "personally" true.
It only becomes unstudyable once you abstractly wrap it in different languages. And emotions don't seek truth; or if they do, there is at least some methodology involved. I'm not trying to be a dick, just attempting to explain my point I'm sure we agree anyway and I'm just fighting for 1 square millimetre of ground on an epic battlefield.
But sure, people can decide what is true "for them". But I guess I should have been clearer, I'm talking about things that are true to everyone. Like, for example, a particular God exists or he does not, he doesn't exist for one person and not for another. They may claim it does, but that doesn't make it true.
And religion obviously has an agenda of trying to use this kind of hand waving as a way to sneak in unfalsifiable truths about Religion. And these are usually claims of knowledge, without justification, claiming that there is a "different sort" of justification. What I'm saying is that this is not valid, and stuff doesn't become independently true because you find it "personally" true.
Feel free to send me a private message.
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.
Index of useful threads and discussions
Index of my best videos
Quickstart guide to the forum
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.
Index of useful threads and discussions
Index of my best videos
Quickstart guide to the forum