The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > On resisting mythological consciousness > Comments

On resisting mythological consciousness : Comments

By Peter Sellick, published 25/6/2015

The function of these narratives is not to diffuse the alienation between humanity and nature, but to carry theological weight.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 7
  7. 8
  8. 9
  9. Page 10
  10. 11
  11. 12
  12. All
Craig Minns,

I definitely think that you're committing the Shifting of the Burden of Proof fallacy now. As david f pointed out, ConservativeHippie is the one who made the positive claim.

I haven't failed to understand anything. You are simply tacking on more assumptions to my scepticism than is necessary for me to justify it. My acknowledgment of the fact that such occurrences are likely to happen, with so many pathways crossing in a world as populated as ours, was simply the icing on my sceptical cake. Would you actually refute that that was the case?

All that is needed to justify a scepticism of ConservativeHippie’s brand of mysticism is the fact that he hasn't yet provided sufficient justification for that belief (proportionate to the extra-ordinariness of the claim). An acknowledgement that everything that has ever been thought to have had mystical origins was eventually shown to have rational/naturalistic origins, and that nothing that was thought to have had rational/naturalistic origins has been found to have mystical origins, only serves to further justify my scepticism. Your introduction of the stochastic is just a red herring.

It is for the reasons stated above that your suggestion, that there is a 50/50 chance of ConservativeHippie’s explanation being right, is simply nonsense. Your assumption that my position necessitates a positive belief in the stochastic is just another way of saying, “Well, haha, you can’t prove I’m wrong.” Which treads dangerously close to the Argument from Ignorance fallacy.

One of the defining attributes of the mystical and the supernatural is that they are mysterious and beyond the understanding of the laws of nature, so how could the probability of "CH's explanation [be] just as plausible as [mine], mathematically speaking"? Two unknowns do not necessarily become equally probable - even if the likelihood of a rational explanation were entirely unknown.
Posted by AJ Philips, Wednesday, 1 July 2015 10:05:39 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
.

Dear Craig,

.

You ask:

« If a proof of a relatively simply piece of mathematics can take centuries to be devised, and if mathematics (as Godel showed with his incompleteness theorem) cannot provide certainty, then don't you think it's asking an awful lot of religion to do so? »
.

I do not “ask” (expect) religion to provide “certainty”. I know it can’t even provide circumstantial evidence in favour of its basic tenets.

I try to limit my beliefs to a strict minimum. They tend to cloud my vision. However, to believe (have faith) in anything, I do not demand such a high standard of proof as in criminal proceedings, i.e., “beyond a reasonable doubt” (which some have described as being 95% sure).

I am happy to accord my belief (faith) on the basis of the standard of proof applicable in civil proceedings, i.e., on a “balance of probabilities”, which essentially means “more likely than not” (or more than 50% sure).

What this means, of course, is that I prefer to place my faith in human reason rather than in human belief.

Perhaps you may recall my definition of faith :

[ "Faith" is belief where there is no material evidence, only circumstantial evidence or a credible eye witness (or both).
"Blind faith" is belief where there is no material evidence, no circumstantial evidence and no credible eye witness. ]

As previously indicated, in my view, most religious belief is blind faith
.

You indicate :

« Evariste Galois, … wrote only 4 papers, all in a few months …. One was his work on Group theory, which was rejected … That paper has since been shown to be absolutely correct … but it is by no means an easy thing to understand, especially since it was entirely new ! »
.

Hannah Arendt wrote in “The Human Condition”, 1958 :

« The new always happens against the overwhelming odds of statistical laws and their probability, which for all practical, everyday purposes amounts to certainty; the new therefore always appears in the guise of a miracle. »

.
Posted by Banjo Paterson, Wednesday, 1 July 2015 10:43:40 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I hadn't thought of the incident with the pothole and the child for years. At the time it happened I was very upset by it and put it from my mind. Synchronicity is a complicated explanation. When one becomes an experienced driver one notes road conditions and other matters and compensates for them without consciously thinking about the matter. Probably I noticed an unusual movement in the leaves and stopped the car.

I have a bias in favour of simple, prosaic and rational explanations as against complicated, extraordinary and miraculous ones. Those inclined to do so will opt for the latter.
Posted by david f, Thursday, 2 July 2015 8:32:34 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I had a comment prepared for this, but I've decided that I won't bother putting them up.

I won't be commenting on OLO in future. Thanks to all of you who have been so interesting to chat with. I've enjoyed it.
Posted by Craig Minns, Thursday, 2 July 2015 10:22:48 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
AJ - where in my comments did you see me claim to have had a 'mystical experience' or that I think these special kind of coincidences are mystical? I have not used that word. For all I know synchronicity may be written into the DNA of individuals who meet unexpectedly at a predetermined perfect moment. There is certainly scope within the study of genetics to suggest its possible.

I'm wondering AJ, do you feel Carl Jung wasted much of his life exploring this phenomena? Are you better qualified and more informed that Carl Jung on this topic?
______________________________

Craig, sorry to see you have chosen to depart the Forum. I am fascinated with your decision because lately I've been considering doing the same.
Posted by ConservativeHippie, Thursday, 2 July 2015 12:15:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Sells wrote: “There is no doubt that Israel stood out among the nations in their attitude to the dead, and the natural nature of the physical world. All of this eventually culminated in the rise of natural science.”

Dear Sells,

Exactly how did Israel stand out from the nations in their attitude toward the dead?

From what we have learned of other ancient Middle Eastern cultures the attitude of Israel toward the dead was pretty much the same as were other ancient cultures in the area toward the dead. Three chapters of Kramer’s book that I mentioned in an earlier post give examples
.
Chapter 19 Paradise: The First Biblical Parallels
Chapter 21 Hades: The First Tale of Resurrection
Chapter 37 Three Funeral Chants: The First Elegies

Frazer’s “Golden Bow” yields other examples. Very little of the ancient literature of Israel deals accurately with the nature of the physical world. However, much in other cultures did and contributed to the rise of science. Some examples:

Taxonomy Aristotle’s classification of species in his area
Logic: Aristotle
Mathematics: Euclid’s axioms and logical development of theorems from those axioms
Experimental Science: Eratosthenes’ measurement of the circumference of the earth to 99% accuracy.
Trigonometry: development by Egyptians to re-establish boundaries after the receding of the Nile floods.

Ancient Israel made contributions to agriculture, literature, political theory and codification of morality and law.

What contributions did ancient Israel make to the development of natural science?
Posted by david f, Thursday, 2 July 2015 3:39:49 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 7
  7. 8
  8. 9
  9. Page 10
  10. 11
  11. 12
  12. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy