Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Is Atheism a religion?

Options
1…910121415…28

Comments

  • Options
    #332
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 51,724 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    DuPLeX wrote: »
    Yes I do!
    well lets see if you do.....
    and that is why I don't confer on it the level of infallibility that you seem to ...
    But if you have some information which you feel you should share on the peer review process and what makes it so infallible and incorruptible . then feel free .
    But condescending comments like "you don't understand do you ?"
    designed to make you feel clever (supposedly at my expense) just wont cut it with me.
    so give it some thought ....

    Doesn't look like it.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Options
    #333
    DuPLeX
    Users Awaiting Email Confirmation Posts: 250 ✭✭DuPLeX


    koth wrote: »
    well lets see if you do.....


    Doesn't look like it.
    So you are saying ...what exactly ... ?
    absolutely nothing !
    I knew that You Athiests were a Religious bunch But Just How religious is a surprise ..
    But really though, Is that the best you got ?


  • Options
    #334
    smokingman
    Registered Users Posts: 3,738 ✭✭✭smokingman


    DuPLeX wrote: »
    You believe that a peer review process is about trying to disprove a hypothesis ?

    This is exactly what the purpose of peer review is. If it's disproven, it doesn't pass peer review.
    DuPLeX wrote: »
    Yes I do! and that is why I don't confer on it the level of infallibility that you seem to ...
    But if you have some information which you feel you should share on the peer review process and what makes it so infallible and incorruptible . then feel free .
    But condescending comments like "you don't understand do you ?"
    designed to make you feel clever (supposedly at my expense) just wont cut it with me.
    so give it some thought ....

    No you don't! :D

    Now, in fairness, there will never be anyone infallible, even engineers or scientists. I assumed you were describing the purpose of peer review which is the complete opposite of your description above.

    In that, you were wrong. It's no biggie getting something wrong so don't worry too much about it. Plenty of people are wrong all across the planet right now as I type. You may have taken my comment as condescending but it was not meant like that (just stating an observation).

    Why is it so wrong in your eyes to be wrong?


  • Options
    #335
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 51,724 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    DuPLeX wrote: »
    So you are saying ...what exactly ... ?
    absolutely nothing !
    I knew that You Athiests were a Religious bunch But Just How religious is a surprise ..
    But really though, Is that the best you got ?

    take a breath, re-read my post and pay attention to the highlighted parts.

    The point was that you're accusing people of claiming the peer-review process is infallible and incorruptible. Where has anyone made such a claim?

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Options
    #336
    DuPLeX
    Users Awaiting Email Confirmation Posts: 250 ✭✭DuPLeX


    koth wrote: »
    take a breath, re-read my post and pay attention to the highlighted parts.

    The point was that you're accusing people of claiming the peer-review process is infallible and incorruptible. Where has anyone made such a claim?

    I actually said "you seem to" which is not an accusal and which actually invites a reply! but that is not the point . Do you have anything to say about The peer review process ?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #337
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 51,724 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    DuPLeX wrote: »
    I actually said "you seem to" which is not an accusal and which actually invites a reply! but that is not the point . Do you have anything to say about The peer review process ?

    Not a scientist, so can't really give an explanation that it deserves. From what I do know, it's a good system. It corrects and refines information as it goes, it's not stagnant.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Options
    #338
    DuPLeX
    Users Awaiting Email Confirmation Posts: 250 ✭✭DuPLeX


    smokingman wrote: »
    This is exactly what the purpose of peer review is. If it's disproven, it doesn't pass peer review.



    No you don't! :D

    Now, in fairness, there will never be anyone infallible, even engineers or scientists. I assumed you were describing the purpose of peer review which is the complete opposite of your description above.

    In that, you were wrong. It's no biggie getting something wrong so don't worry too much about it. Plenty of people are wrong all across the planet right now as I type. You may have taken my comment as condescending but it was not meant like that (just stating an observation).

    Why is it so wrong in your eyes to be wrong?

    Just stating that I'm wrong does not make me so, can you demonstrate how I'm wrong ? How exactly ? I haven't heard an intelligent rebuttal yet.
    Maybe you are wrong ?

    By the way..... The existence of a God and the creation myth have not been dis proven so can we consider it Peer reviewed then ? . and obviously once something is peer reviewed then it is fact . No ?


  • Options
    #339
    DuPLeX
    Users Awaiting Email Confirmation Posts: 250 ✭✭DuPLeX


    koth wrote: »
    Not a scientist, so can't really give an explanation that it deserves. From what I do know, it's a good system. It corrects and refines information as it goes, it's not stagnant.
    So you don't understand it fully, but you place your faith in it ..
    Nothing wrong in that per se


  • Options
    #340
    shizz
    Registered Users Posts: 1,506 ✭✭✭shizz


    DuPLeX wrote: »
    Just stating that I'm wrong does not make me so, can you demonstrate how I'm wrong ? How exactly ? I haven't heard an intelligent rebuttal yet.
    Maybe you are wrong ?

    By the way..... The existence of a God and the creation myth have not been dis proven so can we consider it Peer reviewed then ? . and obviously once something is peer reviewed then it is fact . No ?

    The existence of God has not been dis proven but neither has it been proven. No experiment has been put forward that is repeatable which can undergo peer review for God. The two are completely different things and the fact that you try and compare the two as the same thing proves how little you know on the subject.


  • Options
    #341
    celticcrash
    Registered Users Posts: 849 ✭✭✭celticcrash


    celticcrash wrote: »
    Malpaisian 1 Militant atheists 0

    Sorry I stand to be corrected.

    Malpaisian 1 Religious Militant atheists 0


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #342
    smokingman
    Registered Users Posts: 3,738 ✭✭✭smokingman


    DuPLeX wrote: »
    Just stating that I'm wrong does not make me so, can you demonstrate how I'm wrong ? How exactly ? I haven't heard an intelligent rebuttal yet.
    Maybe you are wrong ?

    Ok, you are wrong to describe peer review as not "about trying to disprove a hypothesis". It is.

    Moving on....
    DuPLeX wrote: »
    By the way..... The existence of a God and the creation myth have not been dis proven so can we consider it Peer reviewed then ? . and obviously once something is peer reviewed then it is fact . No ?

    Peer review usually needs some kind of evidence to work on. It doesn't usually get to peer review without that sort of thing.

    I may as well claim that you live in a semi-D with someone you don't really love. No evidence to suggest that (unless you were some kind of hacker or something) but in your peer review definition, it would somehow pass?


  • Options
    #343
    shizz
    Registered Users Posts: 1,506 ✭✭✭shizz


    celticcrash wrote: »
    Sorry I stand to be corrected.

    Malpaisian 1 Religious Militant atheists 0

    Why don't you weigh in here and explain why you feel that's the scoreline instead of just stating it?


  • Options
    #344
    Zillah
    Registered Users Posts: 17,371 ✭✭✭✭Zillah


    DuPLeX wrote: »
    If the peer review process has any more validity than this then please point out how and don't resort to more childish nonsense.

    Ok well you show me the last time clerical peer review put a satellite in space or something of equivalent objective validity, then we'll talk.


  • Options
    #345
    Penn
    Registered Users Posts: 33,330 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    I really wish people would look up the definitions of 'faith' and 'religious', because from what I can see, most of the discussion on this thread boils down to:

    Person A: Do you think atheism is a religion?
    Person B: No
    Person A: WELL YOU'RE RELIGIOUS ABOUT YOUR VIEWPOINT!
    Person C: YEAH, AND THEY HAVE FAITH IN SCIENCE, SO IT'S A RELIGION!
    Persons B, D-Z: .....


  • Options
    #346
    celticcrash
    Registered Users Posts: 849 ✭✭✭celticcrash


    shizz wrote: »
    Why don't you weigh in here and explain why you feel that's the scoreline instead of just stating it?
    Right now I am going out to my sungod and chillin.
    I am not getting into an argument with a gang of militant bullys who threaten to ban people off threads because they dont like what they hear.


  • Options
    #347
    DuPLeX
    Users Awaiting Email Confirmation Posts: 250 ✭✭DuPLeX


    smokingman wrote: »
    "Ok, you are wrong to describe peer review as not "about trying to disprove a hypothesis". It is."

    Moving on....



    "Peer review usually needs some kind of evidence to work on. It doesn't usually get to peer review without that sort of thing."

    Once again you are stating as facts,these things which you have been told .If you can demonstrate and verify these "facts" then Fine ...I'm wrong
    If not then it is a matter of FAITH. you believe in Science because The Scientists told you that you can ,, sounds familiar.


  • Options
    #348
    coffee_cake
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Politics Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 81,309 CMod ✭✭✭✭coffee_cake


    help help im being persecuted because im not popular after insulting everyone


  • Options
    #349
    El_Duderino 09
    Registered Users Posts: 20,018 ✭✭✭✭El_Duderino 09


    smokingman wrote: »
    A bunch of cardinals would not however be trying to disprove any hypothesis though. "Jesus is great, move on and now how do we do the HR bit?" That's not peer review or anything like it.

    Thanks Smokingman thats what I was thinking.

    To Duplex.
    Science works with hypothesis and theories. I put forward an hypothesis which has explanatory power and you use empirical evidence to falsify it or at least determine its truth value (Verisimilitude in Karl Popper's language). It can then be tested in controlled conditions to determine if it is reliable and valid.

    I admit that I don't have any experience of how peer review in theology works but I imagine it would be more like the following. I put forward an hypothesis and you use other hypothesis to determine it it works or not. I have no idea how you could determine if a theological hypothesis is valid or reliable and so i cant imagine how a theological hypothesis could ever become a theory.

    So from than point of view theological peer review is as powerful as the lads down the pub hypothesising that Messi is the new Maradona. If there is no way to test it, it can never be theory.

    Theological peer review does not equal scientific peer review.


  • Options
    #350
    Zillah
    Registered Users Posts: 17,371 ✭✭✭✭Zillah


    Definition of irony: Taking the ball and storming off while calling everyone else childish.


  • Options
    #351
    Bannasidhe
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 19,219 Mod ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Zillah wrote: »
    Definition of irony: Taking the ball and storming off while calling everyone else childish.

    not realising we have our own balls to play with. :)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #352
    Sarky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    celticcrash wrote: »
    Right now I am going out to my sungod and chillin.
    I am not getting into an argument with a gang of militant bullys who threaten to ban people off threads because they dont like what they hear.


    Ah, the old "Saying something stupid and then pretending you're far too cool to say something stupid by saying something stupid" defense, eh? Airtight, so it is. You've got us there.


  • Options
    #353
    VinLieger
    Registered Users Posts: 17,742 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    DuPLeX wrote: »
    Once again you are stating as facts,these things which you have been told .If you can demonstrate and verify these "facts" then Fine ...I'm wrong
    If not then it is a matter of FAITH. you believe in Science because The Scientists told you that you can ,, sounds familiar.

    I believe in science because im reading what you just wrote on a screen in front of me that is wired up to a computer that has a wireless connection to the internet that you are also connected to and could possibly be writing these comments from the other side of the world on a similar setup. I dont have "faith" in any of that, it is happening in front of my eyes and therefore it is a fact that it works.
    Yes the scientists may have told me something worked but then they also gave me said device and guess what? it works just as they said it would


  • Options
    #354
    coffee_cake
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Politics Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 81,309 CMod ✭✭✭✭coffee_cake


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    not realising we have our own balls to play with. :)

    :eek:


  • Options
    #355
    The Mad Hatter
    Registered Users Posts: 4,718 ✭✭✭The Mad Hatter


    VinLieger wrote: »
    Yes the scientists may have told me something worked but then they also gave me said device and guess what? it works just as they said it would

    BSOD_Main.png


  • Options
    #356
    VinLieger
    Registered Users Posts: 17,742 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    The Mad Hatter wrote: »
    BSOD_Main.png

    Touche :)


  • Options
    #357
    shizz
    Registered Users Posts: 1,506 ✭✭✭shizz


    celticcrash wrote: »
    Right now I am going out to my sungod and chillin.
    I am not getting into an argument with a gang of militant bullys who threaten to ban people off threads because they dont like what they hear.

    Well best not go onto the Christianity forum then.


  • Options
    #358
    DuPLeX
    Users Awaiting Email Confirmation Posts: 250 ✭✭DuPLeX


    I love winding up religious Zealots ....


  • Options
    #359
    coffee_cake
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Politics Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 81,309 CMod ✭✭✭✭coffee_cake


    DuPLeX wrote: »
    I love winding up religious Zealots ....

    yes, calling people names is very clever, well done


  • Options
    #360
    shizz
    Registered Users Posts: 1,506 ✭✭✭shizz


    DuPLeX wrote: »
    I love winding up religious Zealots ....

    You're not really winding anyone up. More so making a show of yourself tbh.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #361
    DuPLeX
    Users Awaiting Email Confirmation Posts: 250 ✭✭DuPLeX


    VinLieger wrote: »
    I believe in science because im reading what you just wrote on a screen in front of me that is wired up to a computer that has a wireless connection to the internet that you are also connected to and could possibly be writing these comments from the other side of the world on a similar setup. I dont have "faith" in any of that, it is happening in front of my eyes and therefore it is a fact that it works.
    Yes the scientists may have told me something worked but then they also gave me said device and guess what? it works just as they said it would
    Science gave me this thing and it works ..... WOW
    Is there any Hope for Humanity?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement