Posts Tagged ‘experience’

In search of truth

April 1, 2014

The viewers are advised to visit the link given below to know the context of discussion and then from their independent and sincere opinion.

http://anaivethinker.wordpress.com/2014/03/10/how-i-became-an-atheist/comment-page-1/#comment-121

paarsurrey | April 1, 2014 at 2:53 pm

@ anaivethinker
“. . I would have to try to make evolution and religion work together. . .
. . .
. . .
Do you have a similar experience? Do you know someone with a similar experience? Feel free to comment or question about anything.” Unquote

The observation was correct that evolution/science work together; but the decision was incorrect to become Atheist/Agnostic/Skeptic.

If Bible/Christianity was wrong on occasions; it does not prove Atheism/Agnosticism/Skepticism automatically correct. Truth of Atheism/Agnosticism/Skepticism must be proved correct on its own merit.

Truth must be proved of every religions or non-religion on some common criteria.

So your search for truth is incomplete. You went from one extreme to another extreme.

Thanks and regards

Of shifting the burden of proof by Atheists

July 27, 2013

I give just comments of friend Debilis and my comments on the post <http://fidedubitandum.wordpress.com/2013/07/18/arguing-with-preschoolers/> by Debilis;  to  view comments of Keith Pinster, please click on the date of his comments:

  • Debilis
    July 24th, 2013 at 9:21 pm

    I’d agree that I ought to give a reason to believe in something other than the material. In fact, I’ve done exactly that in many places in this blog (and elsewhere).

    But the point is that you can’t simply reject those points simply by asserting that they are wrong. You need to give a reason.

    This is where burden of proof gets abused. Yes, I should offer reasons, and I do. But this doesn’t mean using the phrase burden of proof means that the negative case doesn’t need to actually address those reasons.

    But, when it comes to the assertion that only the physical senses, and not other experience is valid, it is indeed the materialist who has the burden of proof. This is a particular claim–that there is something validating in physical senses that does not exist in other experience.

    You are free to make that case (and I will address it, rather than simply demand that you offer more proof), but you do need to make it.

    This is preaching a dogma, unless you can provide some reliable evidence that only the physical senses, and not other experience, are valid. I know of no such evidence, but am willing to be corrected on this.

    The “fairy-tale” you seem to be accepting (though I’d personally rather use more neutral terms). Is the idea that physical experience is trustworthy in a way that other experience is not.

    Personally, I’m inclined to accept experience until I have a good reason not to. But let me know if you’d disagree with that.

    • paarsurrey
      July 27th, 2013 at 5:48 am

      They- the New Atheist won’t reply, in my opinion; they don’t have a single reason to offer. They shift burden of proof to others while they are engaged preaching their dogma; and if insisted for a reason, they will come to foul words. They are a separate class/group/section/denomination of the Atheists and should be identified distinctly.

One could believe in on witnessing of others

July 20, 2013

I commented on the blog < http://independentsguide.wordpress.com/2013/07/16/its-not-only-2/> and then a discussion ensued; the same is given here-under for the viewers of this blog.

 

  1. @ Argus

    Quote from your post
    If you had to write; would’t it had been better if you have visited it?

    Thanks

    Argus Says:
    July 16, 2013 at 10:43 pm | 

    I’m an older guy in New Zealand carefully balancing a budget—budget doesn’t allow for popping over to all (or any) of the things that most intrigue me. So I have to rely on other folks …

    Sadly many folks are either easily deluded (stage magicians, priests, and politicians make a good living from it) or look at different aspects of whatever’s there than I would. Some are out to impress; many just gush. So I sift the sand an hope to find a gem or two.

    • paarsurrey Says:
      July 17, 2013 at 4:35 pm | 

      So one could benefit from the witnessing of other persons who have seen or observed another phenomenon or experience themselves till such times that one has is able to experience/witness them oneself.

      If we carry this reasoning forward; the messengers prophets have seen/witnessed the one true God themselves; one should benefit from their experience.

      Don’t you agree with it?

      Thanks for visiting my blog and sharing your thoughts.

      New Zealand is a good country.

    • I don’t believe in angels (have never met one) any more than I believe in gnomes, imps, elves, and goblins (never met one of those either). I also cannot believe in the Abrahamic God any more than in Odin, Vishnu, Aphrodite, Isis (insert name of own choice here, and there’s millions of them).

      By the same token I’ve never floated in space or set foot on the moon; yet somehow I’m hard-wired to give more credibility to the eyewitness reports of those guys than ‘angels’.

      My own sister is a spiritualist medium who talks routinely to dead guys. Sadly the dead guys all seem to say the same stuff, and when I asked her for the coded message agreed between our Father and I before he passed away; no joy. She tried, a few wild stabs and educated guess, but ol’ Dad was a bit remiss with the codes (I guess crossing over must’ve wiped his memory a bit.) To each his own …

      • If you don’t believe in angles; you miss one pillar of the true faith.

        • I miss most of the pillars—

          I do believe that people should be nice to each other, and get along like rational reasoning (dare I say ‘compassionate’?) beings.

          Instead we have vicious slaughter, stonings, burnings at the stake, crusades, torture, beheadings, napalm, holy war etc etc all in the name of the One True God (insert deity of own choice here) (there’s lots of them). Not good.

          • The Humanists must have to be nice with others; otherwise they shall have to morally change their name from the Humanist as they had previously changed from Atheist, a meaningless name, in my opinion.

            You have however been nice to me; a man committed to reason must be.

            Anyway I will call them with the name they like for themselves.

            Pillars are important for a building, you know.

            • A building is no good without a reliable foundation (even the Bible says as much); and yes, as an atheist I am allowed to quote from it … peace …

  2. Our friend Argus never visited the pyramids in Egypt; but preferred to comment on their construction; merits and demerits. The same way he could believe in the one true God on the witnessing of messengers and the prophets. If not, why not?

Do the dreams have scientifically proven evidence of real existence?

April 8, 2013

One believes, regardless one is a theist or an atheist, seeing a dream or a certain dream that others have not seen; and as long as one is asleep one perceives it a reality without doubt; but this is on the basis of one’s experience; and not by any scientific experiment done in a lab or evidence that atheists are so fond of asking of the theists.

So things could be believed by even the atheists on the basis of mere experience.

And that is what the theists want to tell the Atheist friends.

Am I right?