On 23 Jan, 11:39, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
> Some of my best friends are animals Lee! Especially when well duped
> on a Friday night.
>
I'd have thought ALL of your friends, best or not, are animals.
Although I have spoken to a few plants in my time, I never struck up a
friendship. I suppose, not wanting to be seen to be 'vegist', that it
wasn't that the plant was unfriendly, but that I, obviously, wasn't
able to properly sense all the plant hormones that they use to
communicate. ;-)
> On 23 Jan, 11:06, Lee <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Heh I'm not dupeist! Some of my best freinds are dupes! Now why does
> > that sound familier?
>
> > On 21 Jan, 12:53, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > Not at all! In fact, some of my my best friends are dupes... ;-)
>
> > > [ Attached Message ]From:Kierkecraig <[email protected]>To:"\"Minds
> > > Eye\"" <[email protected]>Date:Tue, 20 Jan 2009 18:05:08 -0800
> > > (PST)Local:Wed 21 Jan 2009 02:05Subject:[Mind's Eye] Re: proof of god
>
> > > Even if theists are dupes, does that preclude atheists from being
> > > dupes?
>
> > > On Jan 20, 1:43 pm, "Chris Jenkins" <[email protected]>
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > By measuring the selfish as individuals, and by measuring the relative
> > > > selfish as "Quality of Life" as members of a society.
> > > > This is why you are a Law guy and not a sociologist. ;)
>
> > > > However, that's entirely a different question from whether or not
> > > > theists
> > > > are dupes. That's a question for the philosophers.
>
> > > > On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 2:56 PM, Kierkecraig
> > > > <[email protected]>wrote:
>
> > > > > On Jan 20, 12:41 am, manfraco FranktheElder <[email protected]>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > Hi Neil
>
> > > > > > Yes, you can say that it is a matter of morality; but it is also of
> > > > > > guidance, because religion guides most of the unfortunate people who
> > > > > > have not been educated and some of them are not able to think
> > > > > > clearly
> > > > > > for themselves, so religion gives them some ideas how to live.
>
> > > > > And exactly what standard to atheists use in knowing how to live?
> > > > > What experience have they received from the external world that would
> > > > > tell them how to live? Are theists they only dupes on the block?
>
> > > > > > What I have said in my last post may seem perhaps exaggerated today,
> > > > > > and perhaps, I have gone forward too far and too fast in saying
> > > > > > what I
> > > > > > have said, so, it might seem to you a bit out of touch with
> > > > > > realities;
> > > > > > but this theory of mine is how it very well might happen in the
> > > > > > future.
> > > > > > I don't know really what to think when this entire staff comes from
> > > > > > you educated people of this world who have so much knowledge and you
> > > > > > are able to express yourself so well as fast as lightning and I
> > > > > > salute
> > > > > > you for that.
>
> > > > > > But may I say this; please don't continue to put too much pressure
> > > > > > on
> > > > > > the believers of God about their beliefs, and above all about
> > > > > > providing proof of the existence of God, since this proof is very
> > > > > > hard
> > > > > > to find for anybody, and even harder for them because a large number
> > > > > > of them are not as lucky and educated as you are.
>
> > > > > I presume your being a bit sarcastic here, but still, I will respond
> > > > > as if not. I only point out that you are assuming that religion is
> > > > > teaching something to the dupes that would be good. Can you really
> > > > > speak in such generalities? Wouldn't we have to judge each religion
> > > > > on its own merits?
>
> > > > > > So, may I suggest that you save some of your energy in asking for
> > > > > > proof of the existence of God and search for the existence of God by
> > > > > > yourself, as you are in a better position to understand the
> > > > > > complexity
> > > > > > of these things?
> > > > > > You may start with believing in God yourself, as this is the only
> > > > > > way
> > > > > > to find him.
> > > > > > You see it is like when you want to login or sign in for the
> > > > > > Internet
> > > > > > and you don't know the username and password therefore you will
> > > > > > never
> > > > > > be able to find what you want. So, in a parallel way you will never
> > > > > > be
> > > > > > able to find God and the proof of its existence unless you believe
> > > > > > in
> > > > > > God first.
>
> > > > > > Regards
>
> > > > > > Manfraco.
>
> > > > > > On Jan 19, 1:16 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > One can have cake and not eat it Manfraco. I think we may have
> > > > > > > problems with proof rather than God/s. Most of us don't travel
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > universe much, but tend to believe the magicians who tell us their
> > > > > > > theories indicate a very big one, or several - perhaps because
> > > > > > > they
> > > > > > > give us trinkets like radios and televisions as colonists once
> > > > > > > traded
> > > > > > > beads and hair grips for women and gold. I deeply suspect
> > > > > > > "science"
> > > > > > > is part of the same kind of power relation as many understand it.
> > > > > > > These arguments are bedevilled with thoughts on one side that one
> > > > > > > cannot be moral without a religion and people like me who wonder
> > > > > > > how
> > > > > > > you can have a morality based on daft stories. We could all eat
> > > > > > > rice
> > > > > > > from the same bowl peacefully if we worked out the morality.
>
> > > > > > > On 18 Jan, 05:31, manfraco FranktheElder <[email protected]>
> > > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > Greetings to all those that follow Minds Eye group,
>
> > > > > > > > I would like to have my say in this post and state what I
> > > > > > > > believe
> > > > > > > > about God; my point of view about this post is that both sides
> > > > > > > > stick
> > > > > > > > to their existing views, perhaps this is done just for argument
> > > > > > > > sake,
> > > > > > > > so that they keep arguing and enjoy themselves in doing so.
>
> > > > > > > > But, have they ever thought that there might really be a God?
> > > > > > > > And if
> > > > > > > > there is a god what is this god like? Is this god like the
> > > > > > > > Abraham
> > > > > god
> > > > > > > > in the Bible? Or, could it be that there is a different god
> > > > > > > > altogether?
>
> > > > > > > > I have thought a lot about this matter and at the moment I have
> > > > > > > > come
> > > > > > > > to this conclusion; whish is that there is a god in the
> > > > > > > > universe and
> > > > > > > > one day I am going to write about my new found beliefs about
> > > > > > > > this
> > > > > god;
> > > > > > > > that is when my beliefs become more defined and it is easier
> > > > > > > > for me
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > > write them down.
> > > > > > > > But now I want just to describe this god in the shortest way
> > > > > > > > possible.
>
> > > > > > > > I believe that God is life and life is God itself
> > > > > > > > Therefore one can not exist without the other
> > > > > > > > And if there wasn't a God we would not exist or be dead.
>
> > > > > > > > Greeting to you all
>
> > > > > > > > Manfraco
>
> > > > > > > > On Jan 18, 12:21 pm, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > We are beginning to cross threads here and I would rather
> > > > > > > > > discuss
> > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > within the intended thread. So we can move on with it I
> > > > > > > > > say...........
>
> > > > > > > > > Why don't you just watch and listen for the 20 minutes?
> > > > > > > > > Perhaps it
> > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > like watching a bad movie but "Scanning" through only
> > > > > > > > > indicates
> > > > > > > > > "Predisposition".
>
> > > > > > > > > I don't have a problem with that, but simply stated, I would
> > > > > > > > > think
> > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > best that those who have no interest in participating should
> > > > > > > > > not
> > > > > > > > > participate and further not waste the time to state that they
> > > > > > > > > have
> > > > > no
> > > > > > > > > interest in participating. This of course is more the waste
> > > > > > > > > of
> > > > > time
> > > > > > > > > than actually watching the video.
>
> > > > > > > > > I can see now that it is in fact a very revealing thread in
> > > > > > > > > more
> > > > > ways
> > > > > > > > > than one.
>
> > > > > > > > > Jan 17, 7:35 pm, ornamentalmin <[email protected]>
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > "...but of course you couldn't possibly know that, could
> > > > > > > > > > you?
> > > > > lol" -
> > > > > > > > > > SD
>
> > > > > > > > > > Of course I could. In fact, even though I may not have said
> > > > > > > > > > so, I
> > > > > did
> > > > > > > > > > scan through most of it. I saw what the pictures were and
> > > > > listened to
> > > > > > > > > > about a second or so of the audio...all the way to the end.
> > > > > > > > > > I
> > > > > rest my
> > > > > > > > > > case.
>
> > > > > > > > > > On Jan 17, 3:55 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Biggles would have believed in God - but then he didn't
> > > > > > > > > > > exist
> > > > > either.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > On 17 Jan, 22:49, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > My comment was meant to be a bit facetious and just as
> > > > > > > > > > > > a rib!
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > However, fran has a point that you really could not
> > > > > > > > > > > > watch the
> > > > > first
> > > > > > > > > > > > few minutes of the video and deduce the entire content,
> > > > > > > > > > > > as
> > > > > one could
> > > > > > > > > > > > easily do with the Proofs site. The beginning of the
> > > > > > > > > > > > video,
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > middle and the end are different, but of course you
> > > > > > > > > > > > couldn't
> > > > > possibly
> > > > > > > > > > > > know that, could you? lol
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Jan 17, 4:32 pm, ornamentalmind
> > > > > > > > > > > > <[email protected]>
> > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > uhh, fran, what I meant to imply was that his entire
> > > > > comment (I didn't
> > > > > > > > > > > > > read the whole thing because after the first few,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > through
> > > > > deductive
> > > > > > > > > > > > > reasoning, I got the gist of the entire piece. lol )
> > > > > > > > > > > > > is
> > > > > what I could
> > > > > > > > > > > > > have used as justification for not watching his entire
> > > > > movie.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jan 17, 10:51 am, frantheman <
> > > > > [email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > er ... Orn ... "Slip's" video wasn't paticularly
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > strong
> > > > > on deductive
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > reasoning ... :-) In fact, I was reminded of it
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > while
> > > > > reading some of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > the so-called proofs for the existence of God!
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Francis
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 17 Jan., 19:24, ornamentalmind <
> > > > > [email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "... through deductive reasoning,..." - SD
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
