fahimknight
05-09-2009, 08:56 PM
THE GREAT DEBATE: RELIGION VERSUS RATIONAL THINKING PART 2 (CONTINUATION)
By Fahim A. Knight-EL
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Religion: Give me a rational formula that we can measure this theory; so we perhaps can come up with a logical base conclusion. Do not give me X=bible + N=God x R=Truth. This is pure non-senses and I believe deep down inside you know that I am right. You have given me enough (in your argument) to know that you have many questions about this snake oil practice. I think you are in this discussion for the mental exercise and nothing else."
Mephibosheth stated: "Again, where's the evidence that this is true?"
Fahim A. Knight-EL: The evidence is this: There is no Mystery God, he does not exist or unless you can prove me wrong.
Mephibosheth stated: "This may surprise and shock you, my friend, but I didn't crack a single book nor surf a single website to post replies to this thread. As I said, nothing I wrote here is 'cut and pasted', despite whatever delusions you have about it."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: You have stated this earlier; I am just not convinced; no I am not working from a position of being delusionary. I do not know if you are using that as a noun, verb or adjective (I did fail English in school; for me it is the slave master’s language). Religion makes people mentally unstable and delusionary perhaps you were a bit confused about the characterization relative to practicing and pursuing rational out comes.
Mephibosheth stated: "Why indeed. Amusement only, I reckon. I merely waded in to make some remarks trying to set folk straight on what logic is and what it isnt--which is clearly necessary given some responses in this thread. Who says I practice 'magic'? Lol, what a comedian!!"
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Sorry! You are doing a poor job and you have left the religious sheep without a rational and logical defense. Mr. religious Savior; your arguments have lacked clarity and no magic believer can talk to me about the definitions of logic and rationality. Religion is irrational.
Mephibosheth stated: "I can say the same about your posts."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Really! You can say that, but what I am talking about has processes that can be counted and measured. Not "SPOOKISM".
Mephibosheth stated: "Since you can't provide any evidence that my writing is plagarized, I'll kindly thank you to stop slandering my good name."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: I would like to respect your good name. I accept your clarity and position. I agree it is not ethical to slander a person, but I must say in my defense that was not my intention. But I accept how you feel about me making those statements.
Mephibosheth stated: "And you, meanwhile, are consistenly conflating logic and the empirical method. A science is any application of logic to a domain of discourse. That is, logic, as a tool of organising information, is applied to a field of study in order to organise the information known therein, and try to sort out the relations in a way that allow for a more effective and efficient analysis--and I stress analysis--of that information."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: How is this relative to religion? and can we use this process to derive at certain conclusions and can we discount certain theories based on the availability of the evidence or the lack of?
Mephibosheth stated: A science is first of all a logical discpline (sp.) An empirical science is a logical displine bounded by specific constraints, eg, that all the results of analysis must conform to some interpretation of empirical facts (which are, ultimately, only narratives dictated by some semiotic agent). This further constraint is what allows a science to move from being merely analytical to being interpretative, predictive, and connected to (what we suppose is) a common standard (ie, 'the world'). It allows science to become practical, and not merely formal. But both the formal and practical are still necessary components.
Fahim A. Knight-EL: No, doubt I will take my chances with "semiotic agent" over some cleric and using a so-called "holy" book trying to validate the story of creation from the book of Genesis. Science and rational theories gives us a lot more definitiveness about our earth and universe and man’s creation; than some contradictory fairy tale written in what the Honorable Elijah Muhammad called the poison book ("Holy" Bible).
Mephibosheth stated: "I don't think any sane person could read my posts and reasonably accuse me of being too 'emotional', LOL. But it takes all kinds."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: To make any defense on behalf of religion has to be emotional. Thus, even you stated: “I haven't experienced God personally, so I can't provide witness testimony for you.” This is a truth and the basis of my contentions and if you are still arguing. Yes. Sir at that point it is an emotional argument that you are making and it is outside of what is rational. Or unless at this point it is EGO.
Mephibosheth stated: "Rational thinkers produce run-on sentences. Must be 'thinking outside the box' eh?"
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Now! When one speaks three and four different languages and English might not be their first language. You need to be careful about making such an arrogant statement; this is an atypical Eurocentric perspective. No, just browse through your post (meaning this one and count the mis-spelled words you have made). Thus, ordinarily when a blogger began to make those types of statements they have nothing else to say. We are debating theories not language grammar. I am not trying to impress you in subject—verb agreement. But I do have a command of the English language when I choose. Now! Personally I do not think your misspelled words and poor sentence structures reflect your intelligence and I know if we both were engaged in a more formalized writing exercise those errors would be corrected. Lets not go there.
Mephibosheth stated: "Why don't you go and ask a scientist if anything--ever--has been 'proven', ie, certain, or whether the results of empirical investigation only yield a measure of probability. And here we come back to my first comment regarding Hume and causality. The scientific results you're talking about are a house of cards, waiting to be overturned by some future super-genius with a better idea."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: You are repeating the same argument. Will not dignify any more.
Mephibosheth stated: "When have I claimed a mystery God?"
Fahim A. Knight-EL: So are you in agreement with me, that the mystery God does not exist? Let me hear it from you straight and plain and at least we might get over that hurdle and do not have keep revisiting that point.
Mephibosheth stated: "Some let me get this straight. You're content to provide merely 'logical assessment' on the validity of religion, but insist that religion itself be empirically testable? You've got nothing but speculation. I'd love for you to prove this, empirically:"
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Simple are you saying that the holy books are divinely inspired (or did ordinary men write these books). Thus, the writers of Bible had no connection to God and there is not one shred of rational evidence to say that they did. If religion is partially validated based on theological books (interpretation) and we no right off the back this is flawed reasoning (I can not call that reasoning). This disproves it-self; I do not have to spend time on trying to disprove something that is outside the realm of a rational explanation. You admitted that "I haven't experienced God personally, so I can't provide witness testimony for you" I am completely satisfied with your response. Nothing else need to added.
Fahim A. Knight-EL: "man and woman functioned and reasoned (determined right and wrong) understood the laws of relativity, understood the universal laws of cause and effect, etc., long before these so-called holy books corrupted and tried to redefine the natural order of things."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: I stand by that point.
Mephibosheth stated: "No, its a request, which only goes to show your poor comprehension skills. You said, and I quote: "your last two responses was someone else’s work", and I said "Please provide evidence that this is the case." I'm waiting."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Please go up a few paragraphs above; I answered the allegation and gave you the consideration that you were requesting.
Mephibosheth stated: "This is not true of all religion nor all religious thinking. Most religions are based on human experience, just as any scientific observation is. The difference is in how that experience is interpreted. And that depends on the worldview or paradigm one adopts to do the interpreting. Reality itself doesn't hand us 'the correct' paradigm. You ought to remember that we are just making it up as we go along, and fitting things together the best we can, because that's all we can do."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Really! Most people I know gather those experiences from religious fairy tales called scripture and from clerics. Please explain to us what is a religious experience and how does that differs from a super natural experience? Bit curious. Sir. your above remarks is a perfect example of an emotional outlook and worldview.
Mephibosheth stated: "Meanwhile, you fail to recognize the fact that logic is not empirical, and hence, that all your empirical sciences are grounded in something that is non-empirical."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: The results of logic is empirical (can be counted and measured) and that is good enough for me and millions of others.
Mephibosheth stated: "Sort of like how you work in the realm of opinion, telling me that my writing is plagiarism."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: We have clarified that point. No need to revisit.
Mephibosheth stated: "LOL, what do you think, that scientists are some kind of robots or Vulcans? How ludicrous. We're all human beings, and we all construct opinions, and these lead us from one bit of narrative to the next. If scientists never had an opinion, very little innovation would ever happen."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: No, you are being a bit loose and condescending. Science use the human extraction (we are not oblivious to human shortcomings) this is why we do everything possible to let the results of data validates what is rational and from that we draw a logical conclusion and not the other way around. Science does not deal in "SPOOKISM" we deal in what can be proven.
Mephibosheth stated: "Well here's a few sources off the top of my head: Kant, Leibniz, Locke, Hegel, Hume, Berkeley, Cassirer, Hartman, Frege, Sartre, Husserl, Haack, Aristotle, Gardernfors, Priest, Suzuki, Buddha, Chinese ch'an masters (zen stories), and a couple of university degrees."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Well respected intellectuals; I too admire and appreciate many of their philosophical works and the contribution they made to field of rational thinking.
Mephibosheth stated: You said. and I quote: "I have taken on the best intellectual minds and Logic and Rational thinking always win out." Which seems to imply that the either the 'best intellectual minds' are irrational, or that you, in particular, possess highly superior rationality to defeat the best intellectual minds. Surely, it's not hard to see how this might be construed as a form of bragging.
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Stand by the statement.
Mephibosheth stated: "Well, I personally am 'against' 'organised religion' if by that we mean a form of politics that enforces a value-paradigm on people. But I don't think it's useful to take a simplistic view of religion either. Religion is multifaceted. It's a politics, it's a metaphysics, it's an ethics. It has many dimensions. Indeed, Islam is instructive here, as it prescribes an entire lifestyle down to the smallest detail. Let's not forget the fact that religion in one form or another has permeated human reality since before the dawn of time. There is no point in known history that you can point to and say 'human beings weren't religious'."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: You are against organized religion. I am glad to hear you make that point and may be you will join us FREE THINKERS and began to advocate a rational approach to answering the six basic questions: Who, What, Where, When, How and Why. And not continue to dupe these people with this simple defense that you are trying to put up for religion. There is no rational defense that you can put up for religion.
Mephibosheth stated: "Meanwhile, what have secular systems gotten us? Communism, nihilism, atomic bombs, sexual degradation, moral corruption. So take a good hard look at the fruits of human nature, expressed in both the spiritual and secular domains. There's more of an argument for humans to reject science and technology because of the dangers it haphazardly throws upon the world than for humans to reject religion and spirituality that try to formulate a moral imperative to improve the quality of human life."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Religion is more lethal than science because the damage it does mentally (this is the worst sought of lynching) to humanity. Many of my fellow human beings are intoxicated off this sedative and will commit all types of atrocities in its name. For example, murder, create mayhem, and behind every conflict on globe today; you will find religion lurking not to far behind. Yes, them damn missionaries are dangerous. The collapse of the social orders that you mentioned had more to do with the Invisible Rulers than some imperfection in the systems it-self. Yes. Someone has the power to induce human conflict and I do not mean God. True; technology has its shortcomings, but you and I perhaps would not be having this conversation if it was not for the benefit of science. I am not for scientific and intellectual stagnation (I see science as a good and important necessity in our human evolution). Now! I am saying that I am for responsible science that takes into account what is ethical and value the lives of humanity.
Mephibosheth stated: "Come come now, you know that Shakespeare was a front for Francis Bacon."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Perhaps you think Sir Frances Bacon was divinely inspired. My point is King James (was a slave making pervert) and he authorized the Bible--King James Version and you expect me to see this flawed book as some sought of divine theological treatise. Please! I prefer a good novel
Mephibosheth stated: "No, its better if you hear it from the actual Muslims on this forum. Go have a peruse of the 'Islam--Ask you Questions' thread."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Send them my way, I will gladly entertain their foolishness too.
Fahim A. Knight-EL: There is nothing you have given that deserves to be challenged. Your defense for religion is emotional, but you make a good attempt to disguise this magic and superstitious snake oil practice in intellectual terms. Religion has very little empirical properties and logic moves us away from thought processes that can not be validated. Please produce that mystery God and give us some defensiveness that he exist; other than in your illogical imagination. This one of the greatest con games they have played on humanity. Philosophy allows us to think outside the box. Tell me more about this mystery God that does not exist
Mephibosheth stated: "Unfortunately, it's clear to me that you have no idea what logic is or how it works, otherwise you might be more careful when throwing the term around so casually, especially when there are philosophers about".
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Really!
Mephibosheth stated: "Where’s the evidence? Please demonstrate that this is anything BUT a baseless conjecture".
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Science and Rational thinking do not believe in nor accept conjecture, we prefer what can be counted and measured. Now! Religion is full of conjecture (along with unscientific theories that stands outside the realm of logic). Perhaps you a have rational equation for what translate as faith and belief. (I got a grandmother would called it the unexplainable) lol.
Mephibosheth stated: "And is it also illegal to slander people".
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Thus, perhaps I should have said it is unethical to use or paraphrase someone else work and not give them a citation. You pulled a lot of things that I have seen in the past and you are parroting other's work
Mephibosheth stated: "This proves that you have no idea what I'm talking about, or what you're talking about. You are the one posing as an intellectual here, but there's no substance behind your words."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: This is a relative comment; coming from a person who practice magic. Why are you debating a person with no substance; thus, irrational statement and self fulfilling motive?
Mephibosheth stated: "Nothing from any of my posts here has been 'cut and pasted'. Everything I wrote was off the top of my head, from the tips of my fingers. I challenge you to prove otherwise".
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Really! I am not convinced; not that I am doubting your ability to think, but your argument has been repeated by many and the wording sounds often familiar
Mephibosheth stated: "My influences in philosophy are broad, but its been years since I earnestly studied it. Although that in no way invalidates the content of my posts."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Philosophers are rational thinkers who uses logic (correlated) as an external variable to produce an empirical fact; you are much to emotional and to caught up in theories that can not stand-up to the scientific method of being tried and tested; yielding a rational and logical conclusion
Mephibosheth stated: "Truth is a semantic relation, friend. It is entirely relative to context. The empirical world must first be interpreted before it can be communicated via symbols (representing concepts). Words don't really convey 'facts'; only a direct and immediate apprehension of the phenomenal manifold gives access to the facticity of being, such as it is."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: No, truth has been ascertained by the rigors of being proven based on being tested and giving proof to verify and it leaves little to no doubt that this hypotheses is reliable enough to determine it as a fact (can be counted and measured).
Mephibosheth stated: "More conjecture. Where's the evidence that this is 'true'? Please demonstrate".
Fahim A. Knight-EL: I have provided you with a rational and logical assessment. You have no defense for religion. When are you going to produce that mystery God?
Mephibosheth stated: "Please provide evidence that this is the case. I guarantee you are mistaken, which only makes you look foolish."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: This is an insult statement will not dignify.
Mephibosheth stated: "You repeating this line again and again doesn't make it a 'fact' or a 'truth'".
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Redounded teaching is a good method to get a student like yourself to retain the lesson.
Mephibosheth stated: "I can conceive of a way that a religious system can be a coherent rational system, which puts it on par with other domains of discourse. Its a simplification to say that they are 'diametrically opposed', especially when we consider that they aim at the same thing--understanding and describing reality. The real difference is the starting premises and axioms uncritically accepted. Religion, often, starts from a different place than empirical science. But empirical science itself is based on logic, which is NOT an empirical science."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: You are way off base, rational system through empirical process reaches the highest level of reliability and works to put forth tried and tested evidences that verify the highest possibility of an outcome. Religion is steeped in faith and determines its worldview to be rooted outside of rational and empirical findings and is not required to be even close to a fact base analysis
Mephibosheth stated: "Well, that's your OPINION. Obviously, you can't prove that this is a 'fact' or a 'truth' so all you can do is try to convince us that your OPINION is attractive, hence, that we ought to share it. I think its possible that some religious texts are inspired by real mystical experiences. That, like poetry, religion trys to express the unexpressable, and, like science, it attempts to order the world of perceptions into a coherent picture."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Rational and logic thinkers do no deal in "opinions" we prefer facts and empirical out comes. You see you are confusing the language and the two theories. Religion works in the realm of "opinion" and does not have to be based in a fact reality.
Mephibosheth stated: "Sure it is. I think you are confusing 'plagarism' with the expression of someone who actually LEARNED something from a text book or two and is able to express their own ideas in their own words. Nothing you've said is 'new', so I guess you're just plagarising everything you write."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Please give us your source and even if you are paraphrasing. I will not snitch you out (lol).
Mephibosheth stated: "Really. I suggest you go back to 'academia' and hang around there for a while's while longer. Your vision is pretty poor."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: No, academia prepared me to think outside the box. I have acquired all that I need from classroom academics. My vision is not tied to emotional and flawed theories.
Mephibosheth stated: "Bragging now eh. OK, I'm beginning to understand your game. You're not a mature intellectal looking for honest debate and discussion. You're an immature demagogue. Dr. Clark would be soo disappointed!! Me, I actually spoke to my professors and challenged them on ideas, and wasn't afraid that they could 'see right through me'. LOL."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: No, not bragging just confident. To brag is a form of arrogance, but to be confident is a form of being self-assured; you can not compare the two.
Mephibosheth stated: "So now religion is a form of social science? Ok, well that's something."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Better yet it is confused Magic.
Mephibosheth stated: "Somehow, I don't think you have the foggiest idea about what religion does and does not try to 'prove'. Anyway, I never said that a religious system was an empirical system, or that religious ideas were empirically valid, in general."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: I know what religion does; just look around you--past, present and future. It has devastated humanity politically, socially, and economically. They used it as an imperialistic tool to enslave, steal and corrupt. I do not want the God that religion proclaims. Magic, Magic, Magic, Magic!!!!!!! Oh. Lets not forget lies and deceptions.
Mephibosheth stated: "The bible was written by lots of different folk. But there's still lots of question about its validity as a historical document".
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Who King James and Shakespeare. I guess they were divinely inspired. Please!
Mephibosheth stated: "Now the Quraan, OTOH, there's a book that simply had to be written by God."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: I do no think you know what you are saying; your thoughts are unintelligible and your deductive reason is based in pseudo intellectualism with no real point of contention. I do consider myself halfway intelligent, but there was very little that I could discern from your argument that made much sense. You have no logical defense for organized religion: how about this sheer MAGIC AND SUPERSTITION and you can not present any logical argument to prove us Free Thinker wrong. Yes, I base all my positions in the realm of logic and rational thinking, free of "Holy Book" and "clerics". Thus, I do not accept that Mystery God and that Spook teaching that you are trying to intellectualize means absolutely nothing to me. What is your defense for this "SNAKE OIL" belief system? I gave you a 5000 word thesis; you in turn have giving me a weak religious defense that is rooted in outer space. You have no defense for religion, I know that and you know that.
Fahim A. Knight-EL Chief Researcher for KEEPING IT REAL THINK TANK located in Durham, NC; our mission is to inform African Americans and all people of goodwill, of the pending dangers that lie ahead; as well as decode the symbolisms and reinterpreted the hidden meanings behind those who operate as invisible forces, but covertly rules the world. We are of the belief that an enlightened world will be better prepared to throw off the shackles of ignorance and not be willing participants for the slaughter. Our MOTTO is speaking truth to power. Fahim A. Knight-EL can be reached at fahimknight@yahoo.com.
Stay Awake Until We Meet Again,
Fahim A. Knight-EL
By Fahim A. Knight-EL
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Religion: Give me a rational formula that we can measure this theory; so we perhaps can come up with a logical base conclusion. Do not give me X=bible + N=God x R=Truth. This is pure non-senses and I believe deep down inside you know that I am right. You have given me enough (in your argument) to know that you have many questions about this snake oil practice. I think you are in this discussion for the mental exercise and nothing else."
Mephibosheth stated: "Again, where's the evidence that this is true?"
Fahim A. Knight-EL: The evidence is this: There is no Mystery God, he does not exist or unless you can prove me wrong.
Mephibosheth stated: "This may surprise and shock you, my friend, but I didn't crack a single book nor surf a single website to post replies to this thread. As I said, nothing I wrote here is 'cut and pasted', despite whatever delusions you have about it."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: You have stated this earlier; I am just not convinced; no I am not working from a position of being delusionary. I do not know if you are using that as a noun, verb or adjective (I did fail English in school; for me it is the slave master’s language). Religion makes people mentally unstable and delusionary perhaps you were a bit confused about the characterization relative to practicing and pursuing rational out comes.
Mephibosheth stated: "Why indeed. Amusement only, I reckon. I merely waded in to make some remarks trying to set folk straight on what logic is and what it isnt--which is clearly necessary given some responses in this thread. Who says I practice 'magic'? Lol, what a comedian!!"
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Sorry! You are doing a poor job and you have left the religious sheep without a rational and logical defense. Mr. religious Savior; your arguments have lacked clarity and no magic believer can talk to me about the definitions of logic and rationality. Religion is irrational.
Mephibosheth stated: "I can say the same about your posts."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Really! You can say that, but what I am talking about has processes that can be counted and measured. Not "SPOOKISM".
Mephibosheth stated: "Since you can't provide any evidence that my writing is plagarized, I'll kindly thank you to stop slandering my good name."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: I would like to respect your good name. I accept your clarity and position. I agree it is not ethical to slander a person, but I must say in my defense that was not my intention. But I accept how you feel about me making those statements.
Mephibosheth stated: "And you, meanwhile, are consistenly conflating logic and the empirical method. A science is any application of logic to a domain of discourse. That is, logic, as a tool of organising information, is applied to a field of study in order to organise the information known therein, and try to sort out the relations in a way that allow for a more effective and efficient analysis--and I stress analysis--of that information."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: How is this relative to religion? and can we use this process to derive at certain conclusions and can we discount certain theories based on the availability of the evidence or the lack of?
Mephibosheth stated: A science is first of all a logical discpline (sp.) An empirical science is a logical displine bounded by specific constraints, eg, that all the results of analysis must conform to some interpretation of empirical facts (which are, ultimately, only narratives dictated by some semiotic agent). This further constraint is what allows a science to move from being merely analytical to being interpretative, predictive, and connected to (what we suppose is) a common standard (ie, 'the world'). It allows science to become practical, and not merely formal. But both the formal and practical are still necessary components.
Fahim A. Knight-EL: No, doubt I will take my chances with "semiotic agent" over some cleric and using a so-called "holy" book trying to validate the story of creation from the book of Genesis. Science and rational theories gives us a lot more definitiveness about our earth and universe and man’s creation; than some contradictory fairy tale written in what the Honorable Elijah Muhammad called the poison book ("Holy" Bible).
Mephibosheth stated: "I don't think any sane person could read my posts and reasonably accuse me of being too 'emotional', LOL. But it takes all kinds."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: To make any defense on behalf of religion has to be emotional. Thus, even you stated: “I haven't experienced God personally, so I can't provide witness testimony for you.” This is a truth and the basis of my contentions and if you are still arguing. Yes. Sir at that point it is an emotional argument that you are making and it is outside of what is rational. Or unless at this point it is EGO.
Mephibosheth stated: "Rational thinkers produce run-on sentences. Must be 'thinking outside the box' eh?"
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Now! When one speaks three and four different languages and English might not be their first language. You need to be careful about making such an arrogant statement; this is an atypical Eurocentric perspective. No, just browse through your post (meaning this one and count the mis-spelled words you have made). Thus, ordinarily when a blogger began to make those types of statements they have nothing else to say. We are debating theories not language grammar. I am not trying to impress you in subject—verb agreement. But I do have a command of the English language when I choose. Now! Personally I do not think your misspelled words and poor sentence structures reflect your intelligence and I know if we both were engaged in a more formalized writing exercise those errors would be corrected. Lets not go there.
Mephibosheth stated: "Why don't you go and ask a scientist if anything--ever--has been 'proven', ie, certain, or whether the results of empirical investigation only yield a measure of probability. And here we come back to my first comment regarding Hume and causality. The scientific results you're talking about are a house of cards, waiting to be overturned by some future super-genius with a better idea."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: You are repeating the same argument. Will not dignify any more.
Mephibosheth stated: "When have I claimed a mystery God?"
Fahim A. Knight-EL: So are you in agreement with me, that the mystery God does not exist? Let me hear it from you straight and plain and at least we might get over that hurdle and do not have keep revisiting that point.
Mephibosheth stated: "Some let me get this straight. You're content to provide merely 'logical assessment' on the validity of religion, but insist that religion itself be empirically testable? You've got nothing but speculation. I'd love for you to prove this, empirically:"
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Simple are you saying that the holy books are divinely inspired (or did ordinary men write these books). Thus, the writers of Bible had no connection to God and there is not one shred of rational evidence to say that they did. If religion is partially validated based on theological books (interpretation) and we no right off the back this is flawed reasoning (I can not call that reasoning). This disproves it-self; I do not have to spend time on trying to disprove something that is outside the realm of a rational explanation. You admitted that "I haven't experienced God personally, so I can't provide witness testimony for you" I am completely satisfied with your response. Nothing else need to added.
Fahim A. Knight-EL: "man and woman functioned and reasoned (determined right and wrong) understood the laws of relativity, understood the universal laws of cause and effect, etc., long before these so-called holy books corrupted and tried to redefine the natural order of things."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: I stand by that point.
Mephibosheth stated: "No, its a request, which only goes to show your poor comprehension skills. You said, and I quote: "your last two responses was someone else’s work", and I said "Please provide evidence that this is the case." I'm waiting."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Please go up a few paragraphs above; I answered the allegation and gave you the consideration that you were requesting.
Mephibosheth stated: "This is not true of all religion nor all religious thinking. Most religions are based on human experience, just as any scientific observation is. The difference is in how that experience is interpreted. And that depends on the worldview or paradigm one adopts to do the interpreting. Reality itself doesn't hand us 'the correct' paradigm. You ought to remember that we are just making it up as we go along, and fitting things together the best we can, because that's all we can do."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Really! Most people I know gather those experiences from religious fairy tales called scripture and from clerics. Please explain to us what is a religious experience and how does that differs from a super natural experience? Bit curious. Sir. your above remarks is a perfect example of an emotional outlook and worldview.
Mephibosheth stated: "Meanwhile, you fail to recognize the fact that logic is not empirical, and hence, that all your empirical sciences are grounded in something that is non-empirical."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: The results of logic is empirical (can be counted and measured) and that is good enough for me and millions of others.
Mephibosheth stated: "Sort of like how you work in the realm of opinion, telling me that my writing is plagiarism."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: We have clarified that point. No need to revisit.
Mephibosheth stated: "LOL, what do you think, that scientists are some kind of robots or Vulcans? How ludicrous. We're all human beings, and we all construct opinions, and these lead us from one bit of narrative to the next. If scientists never had an opinion, very little innovation would ever happen."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: No, you are being a bit loose and condescending. Science use the human extraction (we are not oblivious to human shortcomings) this is why we do everything possible to let the results of data validates what is rational and from that we draw a logical conclusion and not the other way around. Science does not deal in "SPOOKISM" we deal in what can be proven.
Mephibosheth stated: "Well here's a few sources off the top of my head: Kant, Leibniz, Locke, Hegel, Hume, Berkeley, Cassirer, Hartman, Frege, Sartre, Husserl, Haack, Aristotle, Gardernfors, Priest, Suzuki, Buddha, Chinese ch'an masters (zen stories), and a couple of university degrees."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Well respected intellectuals; I too admire and appreciate many of their philosophical works and the contribution they made to field of rational thinking.
Mephibosheth stated: You said. and I quote: "I have taken on the best intellectual minds and Logic and Rational thinking always win out." Which seems to imply that the either the 'best intellectual minds' are irrational, or that you, in particular, possess highly superior rationality to defeat the best intellectual minds. Surely, it's not hard to see how this might be construed as a form of bragging.
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Stand by the statement.
Mephibosheth stated: "Well, I personally am 'against' 'organised religion' if by that we mean a form of politics that enforces a value-paradigm on people. But I don't think it's useful to take a simplistic view of religion either. Religion is multifaceted. It's a politics, it's a metaphysics, it's an ethics. It has many dimensions. Indeed, Islam is instructive here, as it prescribes an entire lifestyle down to the smallest detail. Let's not forget the fact that religion in one form or another has permeated human reality since before the dawn of time. There is no point in known history that you can point to and say 'human beings weren't religious'."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: You are against organized religion. I am glad to hear you make that point and may be you will join us FREE THINKERS and began to advocate a rational approach to answering the six basic questions: Who, What, Where, When, How and Why. And not continue to dupe these people with this simple defense that you are trying to put up for religion. There is no rational defense that you can put up for religion.
Mephibosheth stated: "Meanwhile, what have secular systems gotten us? Communism, nihilism, atomic bombs, sexual degradation, moral corruption. So take a good hard look at the fruits of human nature, expressed in both the spiritual and secular domains. There's more of an argument for humans to reject science and technology because of the dangers it haphazardly throws upon the world than for humans to reject religion and spirituality that try to formulate a moral imperative to improve the quality of human life."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Religion is more lethal than science because the damage it does mentally (this is the worst sought of lynching) to humanity. Many of my fellow human beings are intoxicated off this sedative and will commit all types of atrocities in its name. For example, murder, create mayhem, and behind every conflict on globe today; you will find religion lurking not to far behind. Yes, them damn missionaries are dangerous. The collapse of the social orders that you mentioned had more to do with the Invisible Rulers than some imperfection in the systems it-self. Yes. Someone has the power to induce human conflict and I do not mean God. True; technology has its shortcomings, but you and I perhaps would not be having this conversation if it was not for the benefit of science. I am not for scientific and intellectual stagnation (I see science as a good and important necessity in our human evolution). Now! I am saying that I am for responsible science that takes into account what is ethical and value the lives of humanity.
Mephibosheth stated: "Come come now, you know that Shakespeare was a front for Francis Bacon."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Perhaps you think Sir Frances Bacon was divinely inspired. My point is King James (was a slave making pervert) and he authorized the Bible--King James Version and you expect me to see this flawed book as some sought of divine theological treatise. Please! I prefer a good novel
Mephibosheth stated: "No, its better if you hear it from the actual Muslims on this forum. Go have a peruse of the 'Islam--Ask you Questions' thread."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Send them my way, I will gladly entertain their foolishness too.
Fahim A. Knight-EL: There is nothing you have given that deserves to be challenged. Your defense for religion is emotional, but you make a good attempt to disguise this magic and superstitious snake oil practice in intellectual terms. Religion has very little empirical properties and logic moves us away from thought processes that can not be validated. Please produce that mystery God and give us some defensiveness that he exist; other than in your illogical imagination. This one of the greatest con games they have played on humanity. Philosophy allows us to think outside the box. Tell me more about this mystery God that does not exist
Mephibosheth stated: "Unfortunately, it's clear to me that you have no idea what logic is or how it works, otherwise you might be more careful when throwing the term around so casually, especially when there are philosophers about".
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Really!
Mephibosheth stated: "Where’s the evidence? Please demonstrate that this is anything BUT a baseless conjecture".
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Science and Rational thinking do not believe in nor accept conjecture, we prefer what can be counted and measured. Now! Religion is full of conjecture (along with unscientific theories that stands outside the realm of logic). Perhaps you a have rational equation for what translate as faith and belief. (I got a grandmother would called it the unexplainable) lol.
Mephibosheth stated: "And is it also illegal to slander people".
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Thus, perhaps I should have said it is unethical to use or paraphrase someone else work and not give them a citation. You pulled a lot of things that I have seen in the past and you are parroting other's work
Mephibosheth stated: "This proves that you have no idea what I'm talking about, or what you're talking about. You are the one posing as an intellectual here, but there's no substance behind your words."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: This is a relative comment; coming from a person who practice magic. Why are you debating a person with no substance; thus, irrational statement and self fulfilling motive?
Mephibosheth stated: "Nothing from any of my posts here has been 'cut and pasted'. Everything I wrote was off the top of my head, from the tips of my fingers. I challenge you to prove otherwise".
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Really! I am not convinced; not that I am doubting your ability to think, but your argument has been repeated by many and the wording sounds often familiar
Mephibosheth stated: "My influences in philosophy are broad, but its been years since I earnestly studied it. Although that in no way invalidates the content of my posts."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Philosophers are rational thinkers who uses logic (correlated) as an external variable to produce an empirical fact; you are much to emotional and to caught up in theories that can not stand-up to the scientific method of being tried and tested; yielding a rational and logical conclusion
Mephibosheth stated: "Truth is a semantic relation, friend. It is entirely relative to context. The empirical world must first be interpreted before it can be communicated via symbols (representing concepts). Words don't really convey 'facts'; only a direct and immediate apprehension of the phenomenal manifold gives access to the facticity of being, such as it is."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: No, truth has been ascertained by the rigors of being proven based on being tested and giving proof to verify and it leaves little to no doubt that this hypotheses is reliable enough to determine it as a fact (can be counted and measured).
Mephibosheth stated: "More conjecture. Where's the evidence that this is 'true'? Please demonstrate".
Fahim A. Knight-EL: I have provided you with a rational and logical assessment. You have no defense for religion. When are you going to produce that mystery God?
Mephibosheth stated: "Please provide evidence that this is the case. I guarantee you are mistaken, which only makes you look foolish."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: This is an insult statement will not dignify.
Mephibosheth stated: "You repeating this line again and again doesn't make it a 'fact' or a 'truth'".
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Redounded teaching is a good method to get a student like yourself to retain the lesson.
Mephibosheth stated: "I can conceive of a way that a religious system can be a coherent rational system, which puts it on par with other domains of discourse. Its a simplification to say that they are 'diametrically opposed', especially when we consider that they aim at the same thing--understanding and describing reality. The real difference is the starting premises and axioms uncritically accepted. Religion, often, starts from a different place than empirical science. But empirical science itself is based on logic, which is NOT an empirical science."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: You are way off base, rational system through empirical process reaches the highest level of reliability and works to put forth tried and tested evidences that verify the highest possibility of an outcome. Religion is steeped in faith and determines its worldview to be rooted outside of rational and empirical findings and is not required to be even close to a fact base analysis
Mephibosheth stated: "Well, that's your OPINION. Obviously, you can't prove that this is a 'fact' or a 'truth' so all you can do is try to convince us that your OPINION is attractive, hence, that we ought to share it. I think its possible that some religious texts are inspired by real mystical experiences. That, like poetry, religion trys to express the unexpressable, and, like science, it attempts to order the world of perceptions into a coherent picture."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Rational and logic thinkers do no deal in "opinions" we prefer facts and empirical out comes. You see you are confusing the language and the two theories. Religion works in the realm of "opinion" and does not have to be based in a fact reality.
Mephibosheth stated: "Sure it is. I think you are confusing 'plagarism' with the expression of someone who actually LEARNED something from a text book or two and is able to express their own ideas in their own words. Nothing you've said is 'new', so I guess you're just plagarising everything you write."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Please give us your source and even if you are paraphrasing. I will not snitch you out (lol).
Mephibosheth stated: "Really. I suggest you go back to 'academia' and hang around there for a while's while longer. Your vision is pretty poor."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: No, academia prepared me to think outside the box. I have acquired all that I need from classroom academics. My vision is not tied to emotional and flawed theories.
Mephibosheth stated: "Bragging now eh. OK, I'm beginning to understand your game. You're not a mature intellectal looking for honest debate and discussion. You're an immature demagogue. Dr. Clark would be soo disappointed!! Me, I actually spoke to my professors and challenged them on ideas, and wasn't afraid that they could 'see right through me'. LOL."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: No, not bragging just confident. To brag is a form of arrogance, but to be confident is a form of being self-assured; you can not compare the two.
Mephibosheth stated: "So now religion is a form of social science? Ok, well that's something."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Better yet it is confused Magic.
Mephibosheth stated: "Somehow, I don't think you have the foggiest idea about what religion does and does not try to 'prove'. Anyway, I never said that a religious system was an empirical system, or that religious ideas were empirically valid, in general."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: I know what religion does; just look around you--past, present and future. It has devastated humanity politically, socially, and economically. They used it as an imperialistic tool to enslave, steal and corrupt. I do not want the God that religion proclaims. Magic, Magic, Magic, Magic!!!!!!! Oh. Lets not forget lies and deceptions.
Mephibosheth stated: "The bible was written by lots of different folk. But there's still lots of question about its validity as a historical document".
Fahim A. Knight-EL: Who King James and Shakespeare. I guess they were divinely inspired. Please!
Mephibosheth stated: "Now the Quraan, OTOH, there's a book that simply had to be written by God."
Fahim A. Knight-EL: I do no think you know what you are saying; your thoughts are unintelligible and your deductive reason is based in pseudo intellectualism with no real point of contention. I do consider myself halfway intelligent, but there was very little that I could discern from your argument that made much sense. You have no logical defense for organized religion: how about this sheer MAGIC AND SUPERSTITION and you can not present any logical argument to prove us Free Thinker wrong. Yes, I base all my positions in the realm of logic and rational thinking, free of "Holy Book" and "clerics". Thus, I do not accept that Mystery God and that Spook teaching that you are trying to intellectualize means absolutely nothing to me. What is your defense for this "SNAKE OIL" belief system? I gave you a 5000 word thesis; you in turn have giving me a weak religious defense that is rooted in outer space. You have no defense for religion, I know that and you know that.
Fahim A. Knight-EL Chief Researcher for KEEPING IT REAL THINK TANK located in Durham, NC; our mission is to inform African Americans and all people of goodwill, of the pending dangers that lie ahead; as well as decode the symbolisms and reinterpreted the hidden meanings behind those who operate as invisible forces, but covertly rules the world. We are of the belief that an enlightened world will be better prepared to throw off the shackles of ignorance and not be willing participants for the slaughter. Our MOTTO is speaking truth to power. Fahim A. Knight-EL can be reached at fahimknight@yahoo.com.
Stay Awake Until We Meet Again,
Fahim A. Knight-EL