Free Counselling for Theists!

[Ned Kelly]

It has nothing to do with 'look at me.' It is all to do with 'look at you wankers," and your mutual admiral society. Where is Doc Mercury when I need him?

Here you geniuses are discussing a subject for which there is no answer, yet ye all claim you have it in your grasp. Do you not realise that you can drill down over and over and over and get sweet fuck all? There is no answer. If there was........................?

That is my view boxhead, and if you don't like it, live with it and, eat it.

[boxy]

Yes, we get it, Aussie. You want us to stop talking to each other.

Thanks for your input.

Here, have a pretty picture.

[Ned Kelly]

Yeah, that gets exactly my point. Ye all know jack shit, and I could not care less if you want to exchange gibber........but do not bitch, whinge, moan or groan when I tell you that you that you are exchanging gibber. You can close me down whenever you have some evidence that you are not exchanging gibber.

Buggered if I know why you even bother. Any ants around your joint boxhead?

[Swami Dring]

If we are using the Chambers' definition of mystic, then Bohm was seeking to stroke his ego and/or his fear. Religious people are all cowards and/or morons and/or egomaniacs. It seems we can eliminate the moron category in the case of Bohm, so that leaves the other two.

You yourself admitted Krishnamurti wasn't religious. Neither was Bohm.

I was relying on wiki which told me he wasn't religious.

You say he is a mystic, which according to the Chambers' dictionary, necessarily makes him religious.

What is your definition of the word mystic?

[J.W. Frogen]

Dickhead is one word.

A monopenisist hey?

[Ned Kelly]

Sappho, do you post honestly, or is some of what you say the truth, is any of it the truth, or is all of it the truth? Have you ever lied in any Post?

[Sappho]

Sappho, do you post honestly, or is some of what you say the truth, is any of it the truth, or is all of it the truth? Have you ever lied in any Post?

I'm discussing the reliance on faith to support belief which is impossible to dispute, and in that regard, absolutely I believe what I am saying. I am also saying that faith is not a religious concept, but a concept that under pins many schools of thought. At D&R I have discussed Maths as being yet another school of thought for which the axioms must be accepted on faith as true if all else in that stream of thought is to be believed.

For example: (a+b=b+a)
It cannot be proved logically.
It is not a self evident truth.
It is only an assumption, and axiom if you prefer.
It also happens to be one of the foundations upon which arithmetic was developed.
We must accept on faith alone the axiom if we are to believe the arithmetic which follows.

Now people like you and Dring can argue that arithmetic serves us well and has a function... well so does religion for many millions of people. What of it? That says nothing about the fact that in both cases the belief system rests and turns upon an axiom that cannot be proven or disproved.

[Ferombah Hynde]

For example: (a+b=b+a)
It cannot be proved logically.

Grab yourseelf five apples. Separate them into a group of two and a group of three. Call the group of two "a" and call the group of three "b".

Next, add a to b. How many apples do you have?

Separate them again.

Then add b to a. How many do you have now?

This also works with other fruit. There's your proof.

[boxy]

Precisely. Pure logic is nothing but a wank. Logic is fine, as long as it is open to being tested in the "real world".

This is where science excells... and mysticism gets pwned.

[Sappho]

Precisely. Pure logic is nothing but a wank. Logic is fine, as long as it is open to being tested in the "real world".

This is where science excells... and mysticism gets pwned.

Science relies of mathematics and mathematics relies on axioms that cannot be proven via logic or any other means, so must be accepted on faith alone.

I guess that means that science is not so excellent as your faith in it would allow.