Iraq war documents leak shows US is ****ing awful.

[MrRubix]

Re: Iraq war documents leak shows US is ****ing awful.

It demands unwarranted respect because you can basically argue any ideology you want, no matter how self-serving or socially-grating it may be, and basically tell people "Oh no, you can't question my beliefs -- they're holy. Don't disrespect my religion."

We're seemingly free to criticize politicians and economists but it's considered poor form to tell someone that their religion is batshit.

[Emo_Saur_]

Re: Iraq war documents leak shows US is ****ing awful.

Well, even blabbering about a political stuff can get you into a load of arguing.

[MrRubix]

Re: Iraq war documents leak shows US is ****ing awful.

Right but at least we can debate politics with evidence and proof. I might argue one side of an issue, cite statistics, mention alternative plans that might maximize utility, etc, and you might take another side because you interpret things differently (hopefully also with proof).

Religion doesn't fall into that category. There's no way to disprove or prove anything anyone says, and so it comes down to "Well I will cause harm because I said so," in its most basic form, where war/oppression is concerned. Having no justification is pretty dangerous.

[Emo_Saur_]

Re: Iraq war documents leak shows US is ****ing awful.

Rubix, are you agnostic by any chance?

[MrRubix]

Re: Iraq war documents leak shows US is ****ing awful.

I am an agnostic atheist.

Specifically defined: I do not believe in anything theistic, but I also think that I have to be fair, as a scientist, to say that the concept of God is by definition an unknowable construct (we can't ever disprove God) -- I do not believe the probability split between God possibly existing and not existing is 50%/50%.

[ledwix]

Re: Iraq war documents leak shows US is ****ing awful.

Stargroup.

Take logic and reasoning. You'll find that 100% of mathematicians agree with rushy.

I find that dubious. Rushy did not even make an argument, or if he did, it was non-sequitir. God's existence has no dependence on the corruptness of established earthly religions.

Religion is not bad in general, though anytime one preaches something other than love and understanding, it is. In a way, we are all religious, and we are all philosophers, although the former has a negative connotation among most intellectuals, and so they might take offense to that label.

[MrRubix]

Re: Iraq war documents leak shows US is ****ing awful.

I find that dubious. Rushy did not even make an argument, or if he did, it was non-sequitir. God's existence has no dependence on the corruptness of established earthly religions.

Religion is not bad in general, though anytime one preaches something other than love and understanding, it is. In a way, we are all religious, and we are all philosophers, although the former has a negative connotation among most intellectuals, and so they might take offense to that label.

Considering that religious refers to a state of religion, which refers to God/Gods and arbitrary beliefs, I'd say it's not only offensive, but flat-out incorrect.

[ledwix]

Re: Iraq war documents leak shows US is ****ing awful.

Considering that religious refers to a state of religion, which refers to God/Gods and arbitrary beliefs, I'd say it's not only offensive, but flat-out incorrect.

Religion also includes "a set of beliefs concerning the origin and purpose of the universe," although you seem to have either bunched this into the set "arbitrary beliefs" or overlooked it. Do you therefore not hold any beliefs about the purpose of the universe, since all those beliefs would be arbitrary? If you do not hold any belief about it, then your actions are arbitrary. If you do hold a belief, your beliefs are arbitrary. Which is the case?

[MrRubix]

Re: Iraq war documents leak shows US is ****ing awful.

Religion also includes "a set of beliefs concerning the origin and purpose of the universe," although you seem to have either bunched this into the set "arbitrary beliefs" or overlooked it. Do you therefore not hold any beliefs about the purpose of the universe, since all those beliefs would be arbitrary? If you do not hold any belief about it, then your actions are arbitrary. If you do hold a belief, your beliefs are arbitrary. Which is the case?

Yeah except I have no arbitrary beliefs about the origin of the universe.

Get your terminology right and try again next time.

[ledwix]

Re: Iraq war documents leak shows US is ****ing awful.

Yeah except I have no arbitrary beliefs about the origin of the universe.

Get your terminology right and try again next time.

OR the purpose of the universe? If you do not have arbitrary beliefs about the purpose of the universe, you either have objective beliefs or none at all. Again, which is the case?

[MrRubix]

Re: Iraq war documents leak shows US is ****ing awful.

OR the purpose of the universe? If you do not have arbitrary beliefs about the purpose of the universe, you either have objective beliefs or none at all. Again, which is the case?

Loaded term, because evidence suggests that we live in a purposeless universe by default. Purpose is a humanized concept that we can explain with things like evolution.

That brings us to origin. For one, it again assumes an origin to begin with -- which we don't have *direct* evidence for since we don't yet understand fully the point in time in which Einstein's equations break down, yet we have evidence in terms of quantum cosmology that suggests possible explanations for the universe's "progression" (the simultaneity of events regarding the singularity), but again, none of it is fact yet such that it explains "what the hell really happened." It doesn't mean we have to "believe" in anything until the evidence is more conclusive regarding the question we're addressing directly. Believe it or not, it's okay to say "I don't know." Because nobody does, yet. It's okay to reserve judgment until all the facts are in.

Seriously, quit being a smartass when you have *no idea* what you're talking about. It isn't a "which is it" scenario -- you're loading the terms. "Objective beliefs" in itself is a completely laughable phrasing.

[ledwix]

Re: Iraq war documents leak shows US is ****ing awful.

Well, regardless of the purpose or lack thereof of the universe, evidence has absolutely nothing to do with it. It is impossible to scientifically affirm purpose or purposelessness. If you think that evidence collected from the physical world has the ability to tell us whether there is a purpose to the universe, then you are misinformed.

Anyway, that wasn't what I was trying to get at. You believe that the universe is purposeless. But you do things. Therefore your actions are arbitrary like those of religion, in that the preference of one action over another is much like the preference of a flavor of ice cream over another. So to pride yourself in not doing things in a completely arbitrary way like religion is hypocritical.

[MrRubix]

Re: Iraq war documents leak shows US is ****ing awful.

Again, you're an idiot.

Purpose is a human construct. If you want to invoke a "higher purpose," then you might look to religion or something similar because it's assuming something arbitrary and without evidence. We have evidence for purpose where human constructs are concerned.

Way to strawman and misinterpret my argument BTW. Do you even understand evolution? It's not like we can dig in a rock somewhere and "discover purpose." Purpose is an evolved construct just like any other function of the human mind. Why do you think we feel happiness/sadness/emotion/etc? Purpose is a side-effect resulting from our evolved nature to test the consistency of the world through pattern matching and logical inferences regarding causal links. Couple that with human utilitarian concepts and you have "purpose."

Sure, we "do things." But our actions aren't "arbitrary like religion." They're, at the core, utilitarian and causal. Why do you think we "like" one thing over another? You conflate the concept of purpose in a scientific sense with "purpose" as it's typically defined in most religions. We can lead "purposeful" lives where human utility is concerned, and this is well-evidenced in practically every nook and cranny you can think of. But "higher purpose" is an invoked piece of BS that has no basis in anything and is a displacement of the human ego and utility.

I seriously can't tell if you're trying to troll me or if you're genuinely this ignorant/thick. My money's on http://img697.imageshack.us/img697/174/trollface.png but who knows. They let just about any kind of trash into UCLA these days, especially those who need to ask about "retrospective decision making" in a blatant misunderstanding of probability.

What the hell do you even learn in school? Whatever it is, you need to get better at it, because you genuinely suck.

[devonin]

Re: Iraq war documents leak shows US is ****ing awful.

Regardless of why you think he's posting what and how he's posting, at least try to keep a civil tongue?

[ledwix]

Re: Iraq war documents leak shows US is ****ing awful.

Purpose is a human construct. If you want to invoke a "higher purpose," then you might look to religion or something similar because it's assuming something arbitrary and without evidence. We have evidence for purpose where human constructs are concerned.
Way to strawman and misinterpret my argument BTW. Do you even understand evolution? It's not like we can dig in a rock somewhere and "discover purpose." Purpose is an evolved construct just like any other function of the human mind. Why do you think we feel happiness/sadness/emotion/etc? Purpose is a side-effect resulting from our evolved nature to test the consistency of the world through pattern matching and logical inferences regarding causal links. Couple that with human utilitarian concepts and you have "purpose."

I understand the difference between an observed purpose and an ultimate, higher purpose. I’m saying that the biological purpose that we observe in species and particularly in our species, like reproduction, promoting a higher standard of living, or increasing lifespans, isn’t a purpose in itself. It’s only a purpose relative to the fundamentally arbitrary evolutionary goal of survival. “Higher purpose,” something you seem to consider ridiculous and arbitrary, is equally as arbitrary as those purposes we observe in populations like ourselves.

Sure, we "do things." But our actions aren't "arbitrary like religion." They're, at the core, utilitarian and causal. Why do you think we "like" one thing over another? You conflate the concept of purpose in a scientific sense with "purpose" as it's typically defined in most religions. We can lead "purposeful" lives where human utility is concerned, and this is well-evidenced in practically every nook and cranny you can think of. But "higher purpose" is an invoked piece of BS that has no basis in anything and is a displacement of the human ego and utility.

Uh huh, actions are causal and utilitarian. But the same is true for religion. People become religious sometimes when they are feeling sad and are confused about where their lives are going, perhaps. That’s a utilitarian decision directly caused by a lack of drive and fulfillment, since those arbitrary ceremonies they might involve themselves in succeed if they induce utility. The goal of utility is an arbitrary goal in both cases, not only if it’s guided by religion. The truth is that all people strive for something they are not sure even means anything (while trying to avoid the implications of those thoughts), and some strive for something that they know doesn’t mean anything.

The fact that you mention purposeful lives “where human utility is concerned” shows that you believe purpose does not objectively exist but instead exists relative to some cause, in the same way that velocity does not objectively exist except when measured relative to some defined stationary point. If you want a high-paying job, you “ought” to get well-educated. If you want to become a good fisher, you “ought” to have patience. But these are conditionals that assume the purpose of the thing that came before them. I believe you would agree with me if I said that these things had no objective purpose, but instead just did something that would potentially lead to more utility. Utility is an arbitrary purpose, though, and so the rest of activity is, as well. A decision is fundamentally backed by dogma regardless of the logical validity of the argument for that decision.