I don’t spend much time on personal blogs. But feel free to kick off a conversation.
Hi KingMel, I just stopped by to let you know I posted a reply to one of your comments, over at MDN, on the article about the June release of the iPhone. Hope all is well in the world of Kings
I believe that you should add an “s” to your handle – Artimus Macimus. Macsimus sounds Maximus.
I read your response and, while it is well-written and sound reasonable, it is based upon some fundamental logical flaws and contradictions. If you have spent years pondering this subject and remain unaware of those logical flaws, then I doubt that anything I can say or write will dissuade you from your beliefs. But that was the main point of my post – I do not feel the need to change your mind, because your faith or lack thereof in a higher being is not important to me as long as you do not attempt to force your beliefs upon me. That is, indeed, a fundamental difference. However, as you appear to be a rational and thoughtful individual, I will offer up a few thoughts for your consideration.
You begin your counterargument with, “God is real. Further more, there is no burden of proof.” You start with your conclusion, which leaves no room for debate and represents a quantification fallacy.
You then progress directly into a propositional fallacy:
“Proof implies scientific methodology, which is, by it’s very nature, simply, an abstraction and therefore completely irrelevant. If you insist that science is relevant, than God must also be.”
That is followed by yet another propositional fallacy – one of affirming the consequent:
“Why? Well science is just a construct of the mind, nothing more, nothing less. That being the case, the fact we are discussing God (with our minds) must mean God is real.”
Any yet another propositional fallacy:
“You may believe in science and not God, someone else may believe the opposite, while I believe in both science and god. Therefore our collective reasoning makes God very real.”
Under this rationale, everything that is thought of by any individual is “very real.” As a consequence, you argue that God is no more or less real than anything that can be imagined by human beings.
You ideas regarding “thought” and “metaphysical” constructs are interesting, but can in no way be logically followed to your conclusions.
You state that, “Science cannot explain that, which is bigger than itself.” The key difference between science and religion is that science attempts to explain the universe through a systematic and verifiable exploration of its substance and behavior. Science works on theories and, by its very nature, invites debate and scrutiny.
You state that, “science is an abstraction.” That is inaccurate. Just because science uses symbols and such to represent ideas and processes does not make the field, itself, an abstraction.
You then restate your initial circular argument: “It’s just a part of the thought process, which is just a part of life and which, if life was created, is but a part of God.”
I do not need to disprove the existence of God. I am not trying to disprove the existence of God. If you read and fully understood my post on this subject, then you would understand that I do not care one way or the other. It is truly not important to me.
I also have to point out that just because something cannot be proved does not make it false. Similarly, the corollary is not valid – just because something cannot be disproved does not make it true.
Your argument regarding proselytization is weak. Science seeks the truth. Religion attempts to proclaim the truth.
And your self-proclaim conclusion is similarly weak and circular: “So to end this, God does exist, if only in our minds. This is not to say that people who believe, only believe in their own thoughts. No, quite the opposite, they are every bit as right as anyone who believes in science. Faith in either is just that, simple faith. Faith is believing something that cannot be explained. Science, for all it’s wonder, cannot explain the mysteries of the mind, much less life and therefore God. The dreams each of you had last night are unexplainable , yet they are no less real as a result.”
I can only conclude from your statement that everything that can be conceived or imagined is real and right. Therefore, there is no valid debate…on anything.
You end your post with yet another formal syllogistic fallacy – an affirmative conclusion from a negative premise – as well as a mixture of other logical fallacies. And, yet again, you fail to understand my position. There is no burden of proof upon me, because I neither affirm nor refute the existence of God. I will be more than happy for you to shoulder that burden because it would be a waste of my time.
If you want to persist in your beliefs and comfort yourself with fallacious logic, then feel free to do so. I believe in everyone’s right to attempt to reason their way towards their own conclusions, as long as they do not attempt to impose those conclusions upon me.
Hey KM, great post on my page Re: God. Thanks for the contribution!
ChrissyOne, it has been quite a while since I have seen you post on MDN. The forum is not the same without you. I started riding when I was around twelve – bought an old Kawasaki 125 street/trail bike. I rode trails, but it was really too heavy for that. Later got a sweet Honda Hawk 400 for only $250. I would have liked to investigate racing, but my dad was apparently a crazy rider when he was a teenager, and he figured that I would be like him, or worse. So he made me sell it when I got my license. After I moved away to Texas to start my career, I bought a 1981 Suzuki GS750E. I later inherited a Honda 750 Shadow Ace (not the best way to get a bike, and not really my type of bike). And I bought a Honda 250R enduro to have a little fun on the trails before I get too old. But work and family take most of my time, and my bikes are gathering dust with a battery tender providing life support. No more Saturday morning rides with my wife snugged up against me and poking me in the side when I took a sweeper too fast for her liking.
There is nothing like riding. People who do not ride do not understand the connection with the road and nature that a motorcycle provides. People who ride horses might understand. Some of my best rides were on the Blue Ridge Parkway in the spring and fall. And the rides at night were special, too. It gets so very dark on the Parkway once you get away from the cities and towns, and you are wrapped close by the darkness and the wind and the sweet rumble of the engine. People who do not ride just cannot understand.
you suck, Mel.
I approved your comment, botvinnik, because it humors me to let you humiliate yourself with your childish responses. Enjoy your sordid little life.
Hello King of the Mevlinzzzz
KingMel, you know me as hannahjs, and before that, janeshepard (the js in hannahjs). I recently quit MacDailyNews because of a ceaseless pattern of harassment. This is my swan song. I write to you because I want to acknowledge the value of your exemplary comments. They were an important reason that I decided, some years ago, to come out of my shell and post comments of my own. By some accounts I blossomed. But on occasion, I failed to live up to the ethical standard it seems the two of us share, and you were there to admonish me.. I have to thank you for that. I have learnt much from you.
hannahjs (using your familiar MDN handle!), please don’t leave the MDN forum because of the jerks. It just means that there are fewer voices of reason who are interested in discussing Apple-related topics. I have gone through similar cycles on MDN…periods in which I decided not to even glance at the posted comments or just to refrain from commenting. Now, I just try to follow the Greek philosophy of moderation. I often (but not always!) ignore the political baiting by Fwhatever and I try to stick to Apple topics. The MDN forum will be poorer without you.
If you have to leave MDN and end up finding an Apple forum that does not suffer as much as MDN from idiot infestation, please let me know. I have to admit that the old Mac fan camaraderie of MDN has largely disappeared.
If I ever flamed you, please forgive me. The Internet has a way of accentuating the poorer aspects of human psychology. A person can get full of their own ideas and rip off a snarky comment that would never be made in person.
Whatever path you choose, please do not return to your shell. You have a lot of wisdom and humor to offer the world.
Melanie/hannahjs/janeshepard, are you still out there using Macs and thinking deep thoughts? It has been nearly eighteen months since you departed the MDN forums, and we are the poorer for your absence.
KingMel, I could not stay away from such a vital bazaar. Muslim women are amongst the most curious and adventurous of souls, owing to their social confinement and seclusion. Our intelligence must find outlets, our thirst for intellectual fulfilment a yearning to reach the next oasis.
Nature Herself has declared women an underclass, sidelined from ascendent mental pursuits according to our biological mission. There is little redress available, save the human rights initiative launched by Thomas Jefferson et al., but lately even that seems fraught.
Since you kindly reached out to me—as no one else has—I will tell you that I have created a collective (consisting mainly of housemates) that deposits opinions at MDN, for better or worse, under the rubric Herself. I admitted this fact publicly to Predrag.
Please, think kindly of me and my sisters in bondage, even though we seek to challenge male prerogatives behind our veils, however beguiling.
Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:
You are commenting using your WordPress.com account.
( Log Out /
You are commenting using your Google+ account.
( Log Out /
You are commenting using your Twitter account.
( Log Out /
You are commenting using your Facebook account.
( Log Out /
Connecting to %s
Notify me of new comments via email.