Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [Death To Religion] 430 / zealot

Expand Messages
  • bestonnet_00
    ... You don t have to believe in it. The evidence that it works is right in front of you (you are using a computer to read this right?). ... Your definition
    Message 1 of 72 , Oct 1, 2005
      --- In deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com, "Mark" <parashakti108@y...> wrote:
      > -M: In science, aren't you asked to believe in the Scientific
      > Method?

      You don't have to believe in it. The evidence that it works is right
      in front of you (you are using a computer to read this right?).

      > -M: The way I see it, my definition is much older and well tested
      > than your definition. If semantic games are being played, it by your
      > team. This is why I am for debating over definitions.

      Your definition is well tested yes.

      Well tested and found to be wanting.

      > -M: Science reports aren't testimony?

      Correct.
    • Mark
      ... [...] ... -M: Science, yes, but not material science for what I am aware. The only *God detectors* that I am aware of are biologicals, the best being
      Message 72 of 72 , Oct 17, 2005
        --bestonnet_00 wrote:
        > --n1n31nchn3rd wrote:
        [...]
        > > What, I can't use science and math?

        -M: Science, yes, but not material science for what I am aware. The
        only *God detectors* that I am aware of are biologicals, the best
        being mystics like saints, sages and siddhas.

        Math, logic and other languages are based upon *differentiation* -
        differentiation between objects and their contexts, and
        differeitiation between input and output.

        God is undifferentiated, so math doesn't work towards proving him.

        If you want proof of God, get involved in spiritual practice and
        meditate. If you want to understand the subsiquent religious
        experiences, this is what the scriptures of the philosopher-saints
        are for.

        >B: Science isn't a good thing to use to show that something which
        doesn't exist exists.

        -M: Can you prove this?

        shanti
        Mark, Seattle
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.