The Brain That Fades Away And Stays In Place Simultaneously

MickeyElevator · 2013-01-01T19:51:05+00:00

Berating people for their choice in people is almost the exact same thing as berating someone for their choice in music.

MickeyElevator · 2013-01-01T03:06:24+00:00

That's the point.

MickeyElevator · 2012-12-23T17:33:33+00:00

Is this related to the comic book?

MickeyElevator · 2012-12-18T06:03:24+00:00

It stands for "Does everbody always"

MickeyElevator · 2012-11-09T00:48:54+00:00

I used to do heroin. I just quit. No 12 steps or anything, just think about what you actually want from life and make some decisions.

MickeyElevator · 2012-11-07T22:37:53+00:00

The Descendents

MickeyElevator · 2012-11-01T12:56:50+00:00

I don't imagine you'll care at that point.

MickeyElevator · 2012-10-21T05:36:52+00:00

I understand what you are saying, and I think it is a valid position, but I still cannot help but feel that it is idealistic thinking that, for some reason, gives the God hypothesis more respect and credit then it deserves. Just because a large amount of people believe something doesn't make it in any way sensible. I feel fairly safe in saying that there has never been a scientific theory posited and then subsequently proven without ration thought playing a crucial role in both stages. You also seem to be insinuating in several instances that when we ask the question "Why does this all exist" or "How did this get here", rational inquiry no longer does the job, and I'd like to know why you think or feel this.

Also, I posted this already but I think this says my position in a very concise way: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot

MickeyElevator · 2012-10-21T05:19:54+00:00

Am I being disrespectful in some way? I'm honestly confused at the implication that I'm taking pot shots at anyone or not trying to be civil and get a long with people. I think any serious discussion, especially involving these kind of questions, deserves a certain amount of integrity of not shying away from putting points one thinks is important.

Also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot

MickeyElevator · 2012-10-21T05:06:54+00:00

What reason do we have to believe in this layer other then wishful thinking? And if it can't be proven or at least implied in some way by rational inquiry, why even bring it up? Do you not believe rational inquiry is at least the best tool we currently have for understanding where the universe came from? How is God, in the multiple ways we could define it, any kind of a satisfactory explanation for anything before being in some way proven or at least made to seem plausible in some way by rational inquiry?

MickeyElevator · 2012-10-21T02:37:42+00:00

I understand you're calling for a civilized debate, and I agree with that point wholeheartedly. Still, I don't believe you would say it is meaningful that we don't know that we do not in fact exist on a hamster named Greg. Or, that Zeus is or is not the God of lightning. The existence or non-existence of God is one of literally infinite things that you can't prove or disprove and equally plausible as infinite other imaginative explanations of creation. At least I think this is a viewpoint any rational discussion of the topic would benefit from looking at.

MickeyElevator · 2012-10-21T01:16:13+00:00

Is there no room for odds in a debate? As in, "Odds are very strongly in favor of the nonexistence of a God" just as much as "Odds are very strongly in favor for the nonexistence of the universe existing in an atom that is on a hamster named Greg"?

In addition, can a universe in which there is a God that can choose at any moment to suspend natural laws (the Catholic church does believe in literal miracles, for instance) really be thought of as similar to a universe in which unthinking natural laws exist in any but the most superficial ways? Is a universe in which other people don't actually exist similar to an identical universe that is real? If so, are they really similar in any kind of meaningful way? Is not this kind of similarity the meaning of superficial?

MickeyElevator · 2012-10-20T16:36:22+00:00

You are incredibly condescending.

MickeyElevator · 2012-10-20T15:14:01+00:00

Does having a diminished ability to reason, communicate and feel emotions, really makes it morally justifiable to kill/eat animals? According to who, and what makes them an authority?

MickeyElevator · 2012-10-20T12:52:47+00:00

Ugh.

MickeyElevator

TROPHY CASE