RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (485) < ... 451 452 453 454 455 [456] 457 458 459 460 461 ... >   
  Topic: Uncommonly Dense Thread 5, Return To Teh Dingbat Buffet< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
fnxtr



Posts: 3392
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 10 2020,11:28   

Ugh

--------------
"[A] book said there were 5 trillion witnesses. Who am I supposed to believe, 5 trillion witnesses or you? That shit's, like, ironclad. " -- stevestory

"Wow, you must be retarded. I said that CO2 does not trap heat. If it did then it would not cool down at night."  Joe G

  
stevestory



Posts: 12849
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 10 2020,12:03   

BTW if you haven’t seen a pic of BatShit77, go look him up on FB. He looks like the leader of a cult located out in the desert, and his name is father Josephus.  :p  :)  :D

   
Henry J



Posts: 5590
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 10 2020,14:38   

Quote (stevestory @ Feb. 09 2020,21:10)
Jawa is just trying to act like, hey, people are just losing interest in the debate right now. No bitch searches for evolution are the same as they were 15 years ago. Searches for intelligent design were never remotely as high, and have fallen 99%. Most of the intelligent design websites listed at the Discovery Institute are no longer. The intelligent design college clubs failed a decade ago. Most of the commenters at UD have left.

I understand he doesn’t want to see the writing on the wall, but it’s in big bold neon letters.  :p  :p  :p

So far as I can tell, there never was an actual debate.

  
Cubist



Posts: 545
Joined: Oct. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 10 2020,18:12   

Quote (Henry J @ Feb. 10 2020,14:38)
Quote (stevestory @ Feb. 09 2020,21:10)
Jawa is just trying to act like, hey, people are just losing interest in the debate right now. No bitch searches for evolution are the same as they were 15 years ago. Searches for intelligent design were never remotely as high, and have fallen 99%. Most of the intelligent design websites listed at the Discovery Institute are no longer. The intelligent design college clubs failed a decade ago. Most of the commenters at UD have left.

I understand he doesn’t want to see the writing on the wall, but it’s in big bold neon letters.  :p  :p  :p

So far as I can tell, there never was an actual debate.

As far as the Intelligent Design movement is concerned, true. Never was a real debate, just zealots bringing their warmed-over PRATT talking points. As far as the greater Creationist movement is concerned, I think you could argue that there was a genuine debate, for the first couple decades after when Darwin published?

  
Acartia_Bogart



Posts: 2774
Joined: Sep. 2014

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 10 2020,23:57   

And now Batshitcrazy77 is questioning the fact that the earth isn’t the centre of the universe.
Quote
Apparently both Ed George and AaronS1978 think that it is proven beyond all doubt that the earth is NOT the centre of the universe.

I have two questions for them, Number one, just what is your empirical proof that the earth is NOT the centre of the universe? And number two, if the earth is NOT he centre of the universe then just where is the centre of the universe?

Crazytalk

  
stevestory



Posts: 12849
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 11 2020,06:56   

Quote (Acartia_Bogart @ Feb. 11 2020,00:57)
And now Batshitcrazy77 is questioning the fact that the earth isn’t the centre of the universe.
Quote
Apparently both Ed George and AaronS1978 think that it is proven beyond all doubt that the earth is NOT the centre of the universe.

I have two questions for them, Number one, just what is your empirical proof that the earth is NOT the centre of the universe? And number two, if the earth is NOT he centre of the universe then just where is the centre of the universe?

Crazytalk

Quote


34
Ed George
February 10, 2020 at 11:54 pm
BA77

Quote


I have two questions for them, Number one, just what is your empirical proof that the earth is NOT the centre of the universe?



Any Astrodynamics 101 text book will explain why.

Quote


And number two, if the earth is NOT he centre of the universe then just where is the centre of the universe?



Don’t know


   
KevinB



Posts: 504
Joined: April 2013

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 11 2020,07:18   

Quote (Acartia_Bogart @ Feb. 10 2020,23:57)
And now Batshitcrazy77 is questioning the fact that the earth isn’t the centre of the universe.
Quote
Apparently both Ed George and AaronS1978 think that it is proven beyond all doubt that the earth is NOT the centre of the universe.

I have two questions for them, Number one, just what is your empirical proof that the earth is NOT the centre of the universe? And number two, if the earth is NOT he centre of the universe then just where is the centre of the universe?

Crazytalk

The fact that BA77 doubts ought to count as sufficient proof...

Anyway, I was under the impression that several of the UD commentors held to the Extra Strong Anthropic Principle, wherein they each think that they are the centre of the Universe.

  
stevestory



Posts: 12849
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 11 2020,07:31   

Quote (KevinB @ Feb. 11 2020,08:18)
Anyway, I was under the impression that several of the UD commentors held to the Extra Strong Anthropic Principle, wherein they each think that they are the centre of the Universe.

You are the center of your observable universe, your lightcone. So am I. And neither one is privileged.

   
CeilingCat



Posts: 2358
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 11 2020,17:50   

Quote (Acartia_Bogart @ Feb. 10 2020,23:57)
And now Batshitcrazy77 is questioning the fact that the earth isn’t the centre of the universe.
 
Quote
Apparently both Ed George and AaronS1978 think that it is proven beyond all doubt that the earth is NOT the centre of the universe.

I have two questions for them, Number one, just what is your empirical proof that the earth is NOT the centre of the universe? And number two, if the earth is NOT he centre of the universe then just where is the centre of the universe?

Crazytalk

This is one of Batshit's oldest tropes.  You see, according to physics and the Big Bang theory, every place in the universe, including the earth, sees all the other galaxies running away.  Batshit has just applied a little IDLogic to this and decided that since the earth sees all the galaxies running away from us, therefore the earth must be the center of the universe.  (The IDLogic involves ignoring, disparaging, explaining away or insulting everything that doesn't fit your pre-ordained answer.)

Personally, I think drugs are involved in BA's thinking, or maybe religion.  Either one can fuck your mind up.

  
Occam's Aftershave



Posts: 5275
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 11 2020,21:59   

Joke Gallien the dumbfuck never misses a chance to demonstrate his ignorance.  Doesn't matter what the subject.  Today it's geology.

Ed George points out a good analogy concerning microevolution and macroevolution

 
Quote
EG:  The Rockies, Himalayas, Andes, etc. Are not the result of volcanos. The current theory, which nobody here is questioning, is that they are formed by subduction and uplifting caused by plate tectonics. We have measured small scale uplifting (analogous to what you call micro evolution) but nobody has observed a mountain being formed by this process (analogous to what you call macro evolution). Yet, nobody here is questioning mountain formation by this process, but they question evolution. That is requiring a different burden of proof for a process that doesn’t violate your biased worldview, than one that does.

Incremental mountain building, which is responsible for most mountain ranges, is analogous to the micro to macro evolution proposition.


Dumbfuck Joke immediately pipes up

 
Quote
Joke:  That is complete nonsense and proves that you don’t know anything about biology. You have to be either a complete fool or a desperate and insipid troll to make such a nonsensical claim.

Next up, a pile of rocks that gets bigger because the cliffs above are eroding is like developmental biology

The speed at which it [mountain building] happened has been questioned.

But that is moot as only a desperate and insipid troll would try to compare geology to biology


Since Joke is a YEC it figures he'd deny the effects of plate tectonics over millions of years.   :D

--------------
"CO2 can't re-emit any trapped heat unless all the molecules point the right way"
"All the evidence supports Creation baraminology"
"If it required a mind, planning and design, it isn't materialistic."
"Jews and Christians are Muslims."

- Joke "Sharon" Gallien, world's dumbest YEC.

  
fnxtr



Posts: 3392
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 11 2020,22:52   

Quote (Occam's Aftershave @ Feb. 11 2020,19:59)
Joke Gallien the dumbfuck never misses a chance to demonstrate his ignorance.  Doesn't matter what the subject.  Today it's geology.

Ed George points out a good analogy concerning microevolution and macroevolution

   
Quote
EG:  The Rockies, Himalayas, Andes, etc. Are not the result of volcanos. The current theory, which nobody here is questioning, is that they are formed by subduction and uplifting caused by plate tectonics. We have measured small scale uplifting (analogous to what you call micro evolution) but nobody has observed a mountain being formed by this process (analogous to what you call macro evolution). Yet, nobody here is questioning mountain formation by this process, but they question evolution. That is requiring a different burden of proof for a process that doesn’t violate your biased worldview, than one that does.

Incremental mountain building, which is responsible for most mountain ranges, is analogous to the micro to macro evolution proposition.


Dumbfuck Joke immediately pipes up

   
Quote
Joke:  That is complete nonsense and proves that you don’t know anything about biology. You have to be either a complete fool or a desperate and insipid troll to make such a nonsensical claim.

Next up, a pile of rocks that gets bigger because the cliffs above are eroding is like developmental biology

The speed at which it [mountain building] happened has been questioned.

But that is moot as only a desperate and insipid troll would try to compare geology to biology


Since Joke is a YEC it figures he'd deny the effects of plate tectonics over millions of years.   :D

There's a guy we all know who is very patient about explaining how accelerated tectonics would basically incinerate everything.

--------------
"[A] book said there were 5 trillion witnesses. Who am I supposed to believe, 5 trillion witnesses or you? That shit's, like, ironclad. " -- stevestory

"Wow, you must be retarded. I said that CO2 does not trap heat. If it did then it would not cool down at night."  Joe G

  
Bob O'H



Posts: 2473
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 12 2020,02:38   

Quote
There's a guy we all know who is very patient about explaining how accelerated tectonics would basically incinerate everything.
I think that film went straight to DVD.

--------------
It is fun to dip into the various threads to watch cluelessness at work in the hands of the confident exponent. - Soapy Sam (so say we all)

   
CeilingCat



Posts: 2358
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 12 2020,15:50   

A new author has burst upon the UD scene.  "Communications of the Blyth Institute" (Vol 2:1) has an article by a Gordon Mullins explaining something or other.  I can't tell you exactly what, although it involves Eugene Wigner, Physics and Math.  If you want more details, it will cost you $14.95 to purchase the magazine.

Little is known about new author Mullins, although he has been referred to as "The Wizard of the Carribean".  (Not "The Wizard of Minneapolis", which was already taken.)

Personally, I welcome Mr. Mullins to the debate and I am saving my pennies to read his words of wisdom.  Unfortunately, at the rate of a penny a year, it will take a while.  If you have $14.95 to spare, the trail to intellectual Nirvanna starts with a News article at Uncommon Descent

  
CeilingCat



Posts: 2358
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 12 2020,16:00   

"Desperate and insipid troll" would be a good name for Joke.

  
stevestory



Posts: 12849
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 12 2020,16:15   

Quote (CeilingCat @ Feb. 12 2020,16:50)
"Communications of the Blyth Institute"

The Bylthe Institute, a.k.a. Jonathan Bartlett, a.k.a. JohnnyB, is a fellow at the Walter Bradley Center for Natural and Artificial Intelligence, home of powerful scientific luminaries such as Eric Holloway and Dense O’Leary.  :)  :p  :D

   
Texas Teach



Posts: 2030
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 12 2020,20:31   

Quote (stevestory @ Feb. 12 2020,16:15)
Quote (CeilingCat @ Feb. 12 2020,16:50)
"Communications of the Blyth Institute"

The Bylthe Institute, a.k.a. Jonathan Bartlett, a.k.a. JohnnyB, is a fellow at the Walter Bradley Center for Natural and Artificial Intelligence, home of powerful scientific luminaries such as Eric Holloway and Dense O’Leary.  :)  :p  :D

Clowns to the left of me.  Jokers to the right.

--------------
"Creationists think everything Genesis says is true. I don't even think Phil Collins is a good drummer." --J. Carr

"I suspect that the English grammar books where you live are outdated" --G. Gaulin

  
stevestory



Posts: 12849
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 13 2020,05:50   

Quote
Further on Sev (and EG) vs the Christian Faith in community

Some of our frequent commenters have recently made fairly explicit claims against/challenges to the Christian Faith, especially as it intersects community. For one, in responding to my earlier headlining of a response to his claims, Sev has now gone on record: Sev, 2: >> where some Christians imply that the faith as a whole hasRead More…

Posted onFebruary 13, 2020 Authorkairosfocus Comment(1)
Remember->ID is Not creationism. How could you dummies think otherwise.

   
Bob O'H



Posts: 2473
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 13 2020,08:41   

Quote (CeilingCat @ Feb. 12 2020,15:50)
A new author has burst upon the UD scene.  "Communications of the Blyth Institute" (Vol 2:1) has an article by a Gordon Mullins explaining something or other.  I can't tell you exactly what, although it involves Eugene Wigner, Physics and Math.  If you want more details, it will cost you $14.95 to purchase the magazine.

Little is known about new author Mullins, although he has been referred to as "The Wizard of the Carribean".  (Not "The Wizard of Minneapolis", which was already taken.)

Personally, I welcome Mr. Mullins to the debate and I am saving my pennies to read his words of wisdom.  Unfortunately, at the rate of a penny a year, it will take a while.  If you have $14.95 to spare, the trail to intellectual Nirvanna starts with a News article at Uncommon Descent

I could get access online (for good or ill). It's not too bad, never getting worse than this:
Quote
For instance, a contingent being B that depends on C might
exist in a world W and not in a closely neighbouring one W′ if C is present in
W but not W′; C thus being an enabling, necessary causal factor for B. By contrast, a necessary being F will exist in all possible worlds, showing itself to be a framework element for such a world.

Unfortunately he never gets as far as proving the existence of rice pudding or income tax.

--------------
It is fun to dip into the various threads to watch cluelessness at work in the hands of the confident exponent. - Soapy Sam (so say we all)

   
fnxtr



Posts: 3392
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 13 2020,08:57   

Quote (Bob O'H @ Feb. 13 2020,06:41)
Quote (CeilingCat @ Feb. 12 2020,15:50)
A new author has burst upon the UD scene.  "Communications of the Blyth Institute" (Vol 2:1) has an article by a Gordon Mullins explaining something or other.  I can't tell you exactly what, although it involves Eugene Wigner, Physics and Math.  If you want more details, it will cost you $14.95 to purchase the magazine.

Little is known about new author Mullins, although he has been referred to as "The Wizard of the Carribean".  (Not "The Wizard of Minneapolis", which was already taken.)

Personally, I welcome Mr. Mullins to the debate and I am saving my pennies to read his words of wisdom.  Unfortunately, at the rate of a penny a year, it will take a while.  If you have $14.95 to spare, the trail to intellectual Nirvanna starts with a News article at Uncommon Descent

I could get access online (for good or ill). It's not too bad, never getting worse than this:
 
Quote
For instance, a contingent being B that depends on C might
exist in a world W and not in a closely neighbouring one W′ if C is present in
W but not W′; C thus being an enabling, necessary causal factor for B. By contrast, a necessary being F will exist in all possible worlds, showing itself to be a framework element for such a world.

Unfortunately he never gets as far as proving the existence of rice pudding or income tax.

Or how long it takes to fill the bath.

--------------
"[A] book said there were 5 trillion witnesses. Who am I supposed to believe, 5 trillion witnesses or you? That shit's, like, ironclad. " -- stevestory

"Wow, you must be retarded. I said that CO2 does not trap heat. If it did then it would not cool down at night."  Joe G

  
Bob O'H



Posts: 2473
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 13 2020,10:38   

Oh, and if you try to read "Do Mutation Rates Match the Kelly Criterion?" by Mr. Jonathan Bartlett, it costs you $3. On the other hand, if you happen upon Mr. Gordon E Mullings' epistle "On the Logic of Being and Wigner's Astonishment Regarding the Applicability of Mathematics", you find the first page also contains the complete text of Mr. Bartlett's work. I think Mr. Bartlett needs to complain to the publishers of this gentleman's periodical.

--------------
It is fun to dip into the various threads to watch cluelessness at work in the hands of the confident exponent. - Soapy Sam (so say we all)

   
Lethean



Posts: 290
Joined: Jan. 2014

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 13 2020,13:23   

Quote (Bob O'H @ Feb. 13 2020,10:38)
Oh, and if you try to read "Do Mutation Rates Match the Kelly Criterion?" by Mr. Jonathan Bartlett, it costs you $3. On the other hand, if you happen upon Mr. Gordon E Mullings' epistle "On the Logic of Being and Wigner's Astonishment Regarding the Applicability of Mathematics", you find the first page also contains the complete text of Mr. Bartlett's work. I think Mr. Bartlett needs to complain to the publishers of this gentleman's periodical.




Hank: Alright, some of you already know my brother-in-law. He's a good man. The doctors are saying this operation has a real chance of helping him. Of course they're also saying they want to be paid in private islands, so dig deep. Biggest donation gets a six-pack of my very own Schraderbrau. Home brewed to silky perfection.

Gomez: Smallest donation gets two six-packs.

--------------
"So I'm a pretty unusual guy and it's not stupidity that has gotten me where I am. It's brilliance."

"My brain is one of the very few independent thinking brains that you've ever met. And that's a thing of wonder to you and since you don't understand it you criticize it."


~Dave Hawkins~

  
CeilingCat



Posts: 2358
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 13 2020,14:44   

Quote (Bob O'H @ Feb. 13 2020,10:38)
Oh, and if you try to read "Do Mutation Rates Match the Kelly Criterion?" by Mr. Jonathan Bartlett, it costs you $3. On the other hand, if you happen upon Mr. Gordon E Mullings' epistle "On the Logic of Being and Wigner's Astonishment Regarding the Applicability of Mathematics", you find the first page also contains the complete text of Mr. Bartlett's work. I think Mr. Bartlett needs to complain to the publishers of this gentleman's periodical.

I'd rather spend my $3.00 on the cover story, "How Big is Your Axiom?", which is on page 25.  I'm pretty sure my axiom is bigger than Barry's, but I'm still a little unclear on exactly how they're measured.  I'd really appreciate it if someone with online access to this august journal could tell us the details.  (Hint hint.)

This suggests a great way to Make Barry Rich Through the Power of ID:  Since every article in "Communications..." is basicly an Uncommon Descent article, all UD has to do is start charging to post.  Hell, if they charge by the word, Kairiosfocus and Bornabore77 alone could buy Barry that private island staffed with dancing girls his Republican heart yearns for.

  
Bob O'H



Posts: 2473
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 14 2020,02:53   

Quote (CeilingCat @ Feb. 13 2020,14:44)
Quote (Bob O'H @ Feb. 13 2020,10:38)
Oh, and if you try to read "Do Mutation Rates Match the Kelly Criterion?" by Mr. Jonathan Bartlett, it costs you $3. On the other hand, if you happen upon Mr. Gordon E Mullings' epistle "On the Logic of Being and Wigner's Astonishment Regarding the Applicability of Mathematics", you find the first page also contains the complete text of Mr. Bartlett's work. I think Mr. Bartlett needs to complain to the publishers of this gentleman's periodical.

I'd rather spend my $3.00 on the cover story, "How Big is Your Axiom?", which is on page 25.  I'm pretty sure my axiom is bigger than Barry's, but I'm still a little unclear on exactly how they're measured.  I'd really appreciate it if someone with online access to this august journal could tell us the details.  (Hint hint.)

This suggests a great way to Make Barry Rich Through the Power of ID:  Since every article in "Communications..." is basicly an Uncommon Descent article, all UD has to do is start charging to post.  Hell, if they charge by the word, Kairiosfocus and Bornabore77 alone could buy Barry that private island staffed with dancing girls his Republican heart yearns for.

You can get it using the side entrance. Warning, though: it's clear that the unit of axiom size should be the Gödel (or possibly the Turing).

--------------
It is fun to dip into the various threads to watch cluelessness at work in the hands of the confident exponent. - Soapy Sam (so say we all)

   
Acartia_Bogart



Posts: 2774
Joined: Sep. 2014

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 14 2020,10:18   

Quote
28
Kairosfocus
February 14, 2020 at 4:20 am
EG,

you are a reasonably educated and cultured person, so you know what is and is not appropriate in a context that in film terms needs to be PG rated. That you resent such a reasonable requirement instead of implicitly recognising and respecting it speaks volumes. But then, this is an age where shocking, habituating, entangling perversity is a few clicks away on the Internet. (Though, per a brewing scandal linked above, that may well collapse over matters of child exploitation and recorded sexual assault of same. The last remaining barrier, in place for reasons that carry all sorts of implications.)

Next, the underlying tone and response to evidence, record and heroic sacrifice above goes far beyond mere questioning of the veracity or credibility.

On the latter, you have an obvious problem with selective hyperskepticism and refusal to address adequate warrant.

On the former, consider as just one case how you reacted to a context in which the minimal facts of a consensus of scholarship [across the spectrum of views] are on the table, as well as the principles behind such facts , also historical evidence and undeniable trends. Namely, you invented a hypothetical narrative that has no provenance and put in it the suggestion of utterly gross immorality on the part of a man who could — and did — publicly challenge those who hated him enough to try to entrap him in death penalty crimes, that they were not able to factually accuse him of wrongdoing. A man, whose closest acquaintances were willing to peacefully die in the face of judicial murder for what they regarded about his spotless character (in a culture trained from birth to be sensitive to personal wrong-doing). Likewise, he was one able to rescue women, including those who had notoriously been scarlet; I here particularly point to Mary of Magdala (who is likely to also be Mary of Bethany).

The rhetoric of a shocking smear to taint another by planting a notion of accusation is well known, and revealing. It is obvious that you are unwilling to acknowledge and respect the presence and manifest character of one of the all time great uplifting teachers of humanity; that reflects a fundamental incivility and want of understanding of the underpinnings of sound community. No wonder that we find ourselves in an age of manipulation by slander.

I have already pointed to the connexion between truth, responsible reason and moral government, something you have consistently dodged: that we are subject to first duties of reason that pervade our intellectual endeavours and ground that we are under a law of our nature. That law is built in and binding, setting the context for individual life, family, community, sound government and the upholding of the civil peace of justice. Such moral government raises the issue of the IS-OUGHT gap, thus the need for an adequate reality root. That source of the world needs to be independent in being [thus necessary and eternal], powerful and knowledgeable enough to frame and build worlds, AND to have the inherent goodness and utter wisdom to ground moral government.

The alternative, is that moral government is delusional. There is no real duty, we just have a socially advantageous delusion. As can be documented as a clear view out there. But given that our sense of duty to truth pervades our rational life, such a delusion would take down with it our whole intellectual credibility.

You and your circle have been present many times when we have put on the table as a real world case study that it is manifestly and self-evidently evil to ambush, kidnap, bind, sexually indecently assault and murder a child for one’s sick pleasure. That is a case of effectively certain and incorrigible moral knowledge. The attempted denial is patently absurd, leading to that certainty of self-evidence. This speaks straight to first duties of a rational being — start with, truth, prudence, right reason, fairness and justice — and leads to the challenge to bridge is and ought [only possible in the root of reality] thus the bill of requisites for a world root being.

None of this is specifically Judaeo-Christian, nor does it presume generic theism, it is a worldviews analysis exercise towards understanding the integrity, wider coherence and credibility of rationality. Something which we desperately need. Indeed, it echoes not only Plato but also Cicero (a pagan, Roman Stoic, lawyer and top level statesman, writing c 50 BC):

—Marcus [in de Legibus, introductory remarks,. C1 BC, being Cicero himself]: . . . the subject of our present discussion . . . comprehends the universal principles of equity and law. In such a discussion therefore on the great moral law of nature, the practice of the civil law can occupy but an insignificant and subordinate station. For according to our idea, we shall have to explain the true nature of moral justice, which is congenial and correspondent [36]with the true nature of man.

[–> Note, how justice and our built in nature as a morally governed class of creatures are highlighted; thus framing the natural law frame: recognising built-in law that we do not create nor can we repeal, which then frames a sound understanding of justice. Without such an anchor, law inevitably reduces to the sort of ruthless, nihilistic might- and- manipulation- make- “right,”- “truth,”- “knowledge,”- “law”- and- “justice”- etc power struggle and chaos Plato warned against in The Laws Bk X.]

We shall have to examine those principles of legislation by which all political states should be governed. And last of all, shall we have to speak of those laws and customs which are framed for the use and convenience of particular peoples, which regulate the civic and municipal affairs of the citizens, and which are known by the title of civil laws.

Quintus [his real-life brother]. —You take a noble view of the subject, my brother, and go to the fountain–head of moral truth, in order to throw light on the whole science of jurisprudence: while those who confine their legal studies to the civil law too often grow less familiar with the arts of justice than with those of litigation.

Marcus. —Your observation, my Quintus, is not quite correct. It is not so much the science of law that produces litigation, as the ignorance of it, (potius ignoratio juris litigiosa est quam scientia) . . . . With respect to the true principle of justice, many learned men have maintained that it springs from Law. I hardly know if their opinion be not correct, at least, according to their own definition; for “Law (say they) is the highest reason, implanted in nature, which prescribes those things which ought to be done, and forbids the contrary.” This, they think, is apparent from the converse of the proposition; because this same reason, when it [37]is confirmed and established in men’s minds, is the law of all their actions.

They therefore conceive that the voice of conscience is a law, that moral prudence is a law, whose operation is to urge us to good actions, and restrain us from evil ones. They think, too, that the Greek name for law (NOMOS), which is derived from NEMO, to distribute, implies the very nature of the thing, that is, to give every man his due. [–> this implies a definition of justice as the due balance of rights, freedoms and responsibilities] For my part, I imagine that the moral essence of law is better expressed by its Latin name, (lex), which conveys the idea of selection or discrimination. According to the Greeks, therefore, the name of law implies an equitable distribution of goods: according to the Romans, an equitable discrimination between good and evil.

The true definition of law should, however, include both these characteristics. And this being granted as an almost self–evident proposition, the origin of justice is to be sought in the divine law of eternal and immutable morality. This indeed is the true energy of nature, the very soul and essence of wisdom, the test of virtue and vice.

This is the sort of general consensus thinking on the built in law of our morally governed nature that Paul of Tarsus wrote to Rome about 100 years later. And if there is no such built in law, if it is all a grand delusion, that taints our whole intellectual life. The positivism, relativism, selective hyperskepticism and scientism of our day are ill advised, self referentially absurd and nihilistic to the point of being misanthropy.

We would be well advised to reconsider and turn back.

Now, we face a bill of requisites for the world source, the root of reality. That bill of requisites is familiar sounding. And indeed, on those requisites tracing to our being morally governed creatures in a world fine tuned for such to exist, we can see the candidate to beat. Indeed, the only serious candidate after centuries of debate: the inherently good and utterly wise creator God; a necessary and maximally great being. One, worthy of our loyalty and of the responsible, reasonable service of doing the good that accords with our manifest morally governed nature.

If you doubt this balance, this is phil, simply provide another candidate reality root _ and show its seriousness on comparative difficulties ___ . (As this challenge has been put on the table many times without serious answer the balance on merits is obvious.)

So, we have reason to hold to generic ethical theism, indeed we can see that the likes of Plato or Cicero were groping their way in that direction. In that context, we can note how the Hebraic tradition from outset, thousands of years before an analysis of necessary and maximally great being was seriously taken up, captured its essence in the self-revelation of God: I AM THAT I AM. That’s impressive. Likewise, in that tradition we saw predictive prophecy, demonstrably centuries ahead, specifically — Isa 53 — involving resurrection of messiah. That is what was fulfilled, with 500 witnesses c 30 AD.

Those witnesses were the unbreakable core of the founding era of the Christian movement as Morison noted. They were unanswerable, not even by ruthless demonic force that did not shrink back from judicial murder. And that is what is reflected in the C1 eyewitness lifetime record that grounds the minimal facts consensus. As to the attempt to reduce to one source and to dismiss as hearsay, the pattern of unintended coincidences and superficial differences that fuse into a coherent pattern on closer examination shows the direct contrary. Independent, multiple sources, recorded in a window of time before the Judaean war of the 60’s and 70’s wiped out the places so casually and aptly referred to.

What emerges, then, is a pattern of selective hyperskepticism, motivated by a culture that is no longer post Christian but is in some quarters militantly hostile, anti-Christian. In the pursuit of such, there is a shipwreck being made of the law of our morally governed nature; which is fraught with implications of undermining sound government and the defence of the civil peace of justice. Such is anti-civilisational and misanthropic; suicidally ruinous should it succeed.

We would be well advised to reconsider.

KF

I challenge anyone to make sense out of this.

  
stevestory



Posts: 12849
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 14 2020,10:39   

Quote (Acartia_Bogart @ Feb. 14 2020,11:18)
I challenge anyone to make sense out of this.

You’d have to pay me $20 to just read that.  :p

   
fnxtr



Posts: 3392
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 14 2020,10:55   

Quote (stevestory @ Feb. 14 2020,08:39)
Quote (Acartia_Bogart @ Feb. 14 2020,11:18)
I challenge anyone to make sense out of this.

You’d have to pay me $20 to just read that.  :p

My phone objects to the waste of photons required to even display that.

--------------
"[A] book said there were 5 trillion witnesses. Who am I supposed to believe, 5 trillion witnesses or you? That shit's, like, ironclad. " -- stevestory

"Wow, you must be retarded. I said that CO2 does not trap heat. If it did then it would not cool down at night."  Joe G

  
CeilingCat



Posts: 2358
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 14 2020,16:48   

Quote (Bob O'H @ Feb. 14 2020,02:53)
 
Quote (CeilingCat @ Feb. 13 2020,14:44)
   
Quote (Bob O'H @ Feb. 13 2020,10:38)
Oh, and if you try to read "Do Mutation Rates Match the Kelly Criterion?" by Mr. Jonathan Bartlett, it costs you $3. On the other hand, if you happen upon Mr. Gordon E Mullings' epistle "On the Logic of Being and Wigner's Astonishment Regarding the Applicability of Mathematics", you find the first page also contains the complete text of Mr. Bartlett's work. I think Mr. Bartlett needs to complain to the publishers of this gentleman's periodical.

I'd rather spend my $3.00 on the cover story, "How Big is Your Axiom?", which is on page 25.  I'm pretty sure my axiom is bigger than Barry's, but I'm still a little unclear on exactly how they're measured.  I'd really appreciate it if someone with online access to this august journal could tell us the details.  (Hint hint.)

This suggests a great way to Make Barry Rich Through the Power of ID:  Since every article in "Communications..." is basicly an Uncommon Descent article, all UD has to do is start charging to post.  Hell, if they charge by the word, Kairiosfocus and Bornabore77 alone could buy Barry that private island staffed with dancing girls his Republican heart yearns for.

You can get it using the side entrance. Warning, though: it's clear that the unit of axiom size should be the Gödel (or possibly the Turing).

Thanks.  I now believe in miracles.  Johnnyb kept Kairosfocus down to one page in length!

Sell your scrollwheel stock!

P.S.  My axiom is quite a bit bigger than Barry's.

  
stevestory



Posts: 12849
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 14 2020,19:19   

Quote
38
John_a_designer
February 14, 2020 at 2:20 pm
The P.C. garbage, which is presently being crammed down EVERYONES throat,



So often these anti-gay men imagine things being crammed down their throats...  :p  :p  :p

linky

   
fnxtr



Posts: 3392
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 14 2020,20:30   

Quote (stevestory @ Feb. 14 2020,17:19)
Quote
38
John_a_designer
February 14, 2020 at 2:20 pm
The P.C. garbage, which is presently being crammed down EVERYONES throat,



So often these anti-gay men imagine things being crammed down their throats...  :p  :p  :p

linky



--------------
"[A] book said there were 5 trillion witnesses. Who am I supposed to believe, 5 trillion witnesses or you? That shit's, like, ironclad. " -- stevestory

"Wow, you must be retarded. I said that CO2 does not trap heat. If it did then it would not cool down at night."  Joe G

  
stevestory



Posts: 12849
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 15 2020,09:25   

Quote
83
Ed George
February 15, 2020 at 9:08 am
KF keeps bringing up abortion as a sign of us heading over the cliff. This in spite of the fact that abortion rates continue to fall. What is interesting is that it has been shown that abortion rates actually decline when it is made easier to obtain. And it also happens that these declining rates are occurring in many countries that have normalized homosexuality, legalized SSM and are taking steps to legally protect transgendered.
“The sky is falling! The sky is falling.”
linky

   
  14535 replies since Dec. 29 2013,11:01 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (485) < ... 451 452 453 454 455 [456] 457 458 459 460 461 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]