No such thing as a "true" Christian

[Minimalist]

Indeed. It used to be said that "patriotism" was the last refuge of a scoundrel. I submit that it is really "religion."

[Strongbad]

All arguments from emotion Strongbad, which is a poor basis for justice. You may never forgive a personal injustice... that isn't to say that you shouldn't.

A flippant, dismissive quip about "justice" does nothing to address the absurd possibilities allowed by your belief system (such as the murderer who joins his victims in heaven). Why don't you try responding to the conundrum in the post, instead of a diversionary tactic?

[Violet]

The fact a person can insist something to be true and yet deem it to be, even theoretically, beyond testing, while at the same time consume oxygen and sequester nutrients that can be immediately be used to fertilize a needy plant, irritates me.

Intersubjectivity is entirely unprovable and cannot be tested.

The word "divine" is but the last resort of scoundrels seeking to overawe the not quite gullible. It is devoid of any other use or meaning.

It means little to you or I. Means a fair amount to some of the religious. It can be put to good use in theocracies.

A word with poor definition is not a word devoid of meaning.

---

A flippant, dismissive quip about "justice" does nothing to address the absurd possibilities allowed by your belief system (such as the murderer who joins his victims in heaven). Why don't you try responding to the conundrum in the post, instead of a diversionary tactic?

What conundrum is that, precisely? If there were a heaven, I should think I could forgive my killer. Murder isn't really all that bad.

Rape would be a stronger suggestion by far. Even still I would over a long time forgive them. Heaven supposedly lasts an eternity...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vb3RjBViO...re=related

[Anomalocaris]

There is nothing intrinsic to the intersubjective that makes it in principle untestable. The subset of it that in theory untestable is also indistinguishable from bullshit. Religious experience as they are thought to mean by the religious generally fall in this group and are indistinguishable from bullshit.

[Violet]

There is nothing intrinsic to the intersubjective that makes it in principle untestable. The subset of it that in theory untestable is also indistinguishable from bullshit. Religious experience as they are thought to mean by the religious generally fall in this group and are indistinguishable from bullshit.

How about the intrinsic principle that it is utterly reliant upon one's faith that theirs is not the only viewpoint? I've never seen someone successfully tell solipsists to stuff it (because they are correct so far as argument goes).

And 'testability' is not even a logical concept... it cannot be proven logically. Proven by testing is one of the best things we've got, but it relies firmly upon our faith that 'we' is not simply me. I cannot logically prove you exist. The only three things which must by necessity exist are nothing, everything, and me.

If you want to argue against solipsists, I wish you bon voyage and won't bother recording your demise

Edit: PLEASE NOTE: this is using their definition of exist. Not mine. Under mine they are fucking annihilated. But none of you use mine

[Anomalocaris]

I hereby tell solipsists successfully, in my mind, to fuck off.

[Violet]

I hereby tell solipsists successfully, in my mind, to fuck off.

They do. Almost daily.

It's great to know that you can't even begin to take on their arguments

[Anomalocaris]

I expect to live 2 trillion milliseconds. Answering their argument is worth much less than one two trillionth of my time.

[Violet]

They are a waste of my time.

Then stop commenting on them... you only encourage it

[Anomalocaris]

They are a waste of my time.

Then stop commenting on them... you only encourage it

I gave you the benefit of the doubt in deference to your demigod status, and was willing to give you 30 seconds more than a solipsist.