This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Masuda & Yoshida confirm our suspicions about the starter final evos

#121GolurkcanflyPosted 9/21/2013 2:49:22 PM(edited)
GaiamageX posted...
Guerrero_Son, I just finished watching the whole video. I actually agree with a lot of how Dawkins and Krauss think. We simply disagree on our philosophies. I don't agree with Krauss when he says he doesn't believe in anything. He believes or he places his trust in only things that can be measured. I understand why he does that because they simply work. Anything outside of that is a waste of time and could actually be bad. He is man who can only make sense of anything through the lens of science and consequently things that are observable.

I also see through the lens of science so I also acknowledge the things that are observable, but I also acknowledge that at our best efforts we can only say our observations are our perceptions, a shadow of the truth if not the actual reality. How do you know we're not variables inside a computer simulation for instance? It's possible, but I don't entertain the thought because no one's given me a reason to. On the other hand, thousands of years ago, the Judeo-Christian movement started and those people have made their claims of what they've seen and heard from this entity God who they think has appeared from the bigger, unknown picture into our line of perception. Now I must choose to believe them or not and to consider my reasons. An agnostic would not believe because He doesn't know for sure if these people are telling the truth. I believe because what these people are telling me about the world, the people, and what is beyond my perception makes sense to me and is desirable to me. I think I have personally encountered this God that they described. I also think these people have good intent and are trustworthy.

I give religion the same treatment I do everything else, a notion that Krauss and Dawkins support. I ask tough questions like they do. I also talk about it like I do my favorite movies and tv shows. Does that mean I'm proselytizing all three? And yet, people get so frustrated and go into attack mode over the first. Then there's believing what other people say. If I write a novel and I let you read it and you say you like it or you don't, would you ever hear anyone say, "I don't believe you because I can't prove it." No, that's ludicrous. You either trust that person or you don't. And people do have faith in people without full proof but with some evidence of trustworthiness. We do it all the time. And yet, against what Krauss and Dawkins would think, religion gets completely different treatment. Opponents would say if there's not proof for these people's cases about religion then it can't be trusted, even though they do the opposite all the time with other things. I'm not saying they have to be trusted, but that the possibility for trust without fully knowing is there.


Sums up my view. You sir, are the greatest debater I've ever met. Are you a psychologist or a lawyer?
---
Official Amnesiac Darkrai of the Pokemon X Board
#122smallface_gray(Topic Creator)Posted 9/22/2013 10:16:12 AM
ttt
#123Emerald_MeliosPosted 9/23/2013 8:08:34 PM
RPGgamer777 posted...
Medieval way?


Warrior / Mage / Thief archetypes