• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Why would a reasonable person believe in God?

That's not what 'works' means. In this context, it has nothing to do with desirable or undesirable outcomes for society and the world at large, and everything to do with how good it is at predicting empirical observation.

I'll repeat that another way: an alternative science, one that resulted in a peaceful society where people lived harmoniously with nature and each other, could still be based on completely false premises, and in THAT sense, it would be a failure AS SCIENCE. As a behavioral motivator, maybe it would be lovely.

Your beef isn't with science, it's with how people behave.
 
No Robots said:
bilby said:
The Anglo-Americans have dominated the world for three centuries.FTFY.

The easiest way to spot the difference between science and woo is that science gets results.
Click to expand...

Erm, they've brought us to the brink of global ecological catastrophe. Results, indeed.
Click to expand...


According to the doomsayers, we have always been on the brink of global catastrophe. We haven't gone over yet though.

And if we do avoid catastrophe this time it will be hard science and engineering that saves us. Philosophy builds no solar panels.
 
It takes a lot of hubris to insist that the universe have the same moral sensibilities as we do.
 
No Robots said:
bilby said:
The Anglo-Americans have dominated the world for three centuries.FTFY.

The easiest way to spot the difference between science and woo is that science gets results.
Click to expand...

Erm, they've brought us to the brink of global ecological catastrophe. Results, indeed.
Click to expand...
Catastrophe like the Himalayas ice melting by 2010 for example. The Antarctica been ice free by about the same time scale. Some major cities been under water. Oops, hold on. We're in 2014 now and none of those things have eventuated.
Nevertheless, science marches on regardless.
 
rrr6 said:
For a placebo effect. imho

r6
Click to expand...

The last post in this thread was from November of last year. It's kind of annoying when a new member shows up and resurrects an old thread without adding anything to the discussion. You really don't need to chime in on everything that has been talked about in 2015.
 
PyramidHead said:
rrr6 said:
For a placebo effect. imho

r6
Click to expand...

The last post in this thread was from November of last year. It's kind of annoying when a new member shows up and resurrects an old thread without adding anything to the discussion. You really don't need to chime in on everything that has been talked about in 2015.
Click to expand...

Oh well. At least nobody compounded his error by responding.
 
bilby said:
PyramidHead said:
The last post in this thread was from November of last year. It's kind of annoying when a new member shows up and resurrects an old thread without adding anything to the discussion. You really don't need to chime in on everything that has been talked about in 2015.
Click to expand...

Oh well. At least nobody compounded his error by responding.
Click to expand...

Good point. We wouldn´t want that.
 
Want what, a reasonable answer to why reasonable, otherwise intelligent people believe in gods? I believe Freud had an answer to that timeless question.
 
Juma said:
angelo said:
Want what, a reasonable answer to why reasonable, otherwise intelligent people believe in gods? I believe Freud had an answer to that timeless question.
Click to expand...

No, he didnt.
Click to expand...
Angelo didn't say Freud had the right answer... just a reasonable answer. You can make up many reasonable answers based on faulty information.
 
Keith&Co. said:
Juma said:
No, he didnt.
Click to expand...
IIRC, he said religion was a neurosis? So, not the act of a reasonable person.
Click to expand...

He did divide all of humanity into three categories. The neurotics, obsessed by social rules and to obey them. The perverts, also obsessed by social rules but to break them. And psychotics, who are locked away in institution because they don´t acknowledge social rules at all. So basically everybody is crazy in his model. Whether that makes everybody reasonable or unreasonable is another matter. Freud is funny.
 
DrZoidberg said:
Kharakov said:
Angelo didn't say Freud had the right answer... just a reasonable answer. You can make up many reasonable answers based on faulty information.
Click to expand...

Btw, best summary of Freud´s theory I´ve heard: "Great penis in the sky".

It gets me every time. Succinct, accurate AND funny.
Click to expand...
The great penis in the sky gets you every time? That's amazing. Reminds me of Jimi singin' "scuze me while I kiss this guy".
 
One of my worst nightmares is getting crushed by a giant penis that falls out of the sky. I wonder what Freud would have said about that?
 
To mess with other peoples minds.

Chain-yanking is another expression of the same and is what some guards do to the prisoners to keep them from going to sleep as a form of torture and cruelity. Sad :--)

Guards and prisoners referfence differrent Gods for the special-set of circusmtances.

r6

rrr6--For a placebo effect. imho
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom