Posted on 07/16/2007 4:13:26 AM PDT by Kaslin
Years ago I had a series of debates with the literary scholar Stanley Fish. Our topic was political correctness. I portrayed Fish as the grand deconstructor of Western civilization, and he fired back in There’s No Such Thing As Free Speech, several chapters of which are an answer to my arguments. As I got to know Fish, however, I recognized that although he defended some of the practices being promoted in the name of multiculturalism and diversity, he was not himself a politically correct thinker. We became friends, and in 1992 he and his wife attended my wedding.
Fish has of late been demonstrating his political incorrectness by writing critically of separation of church and state, and also by challenging leading atheists like Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and Christoher Hitchens. Indeed Fish uses his detailed knowledge of Milton as well as his famous skills of literary deconstruction to show the emptiness of the atheist arguments.
In his New York Times blog, Fish takes up the argument advanced by Dawkins and company that belief in God is a kind of evasion. According to this argument, we avoid the responsibilities of this life by putting our hopes in another life. Religion makes us do crazy things.
Fish takes as an example of the Harris-Hitchens-Dawkins critique the behavior of Christian in Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress. Christian becomes aware that he is carrying a huge burden on his back (Original Sin) and he wants to get rid of it. Another fellow named Evangelist tells him to "flee the wrath to come." Evangelist points Christian in the direction of a shining light. But Christian can't clearly see the light. Still, he begins to run in that direction. Bunyan describes his wife and children who "began to cry after him to return, but the man put his fingers in his ears and ran on, crying Life! Life! Eternal Life!"
For Harris, Hitchens and Dawkins, this is precisely the kind of crazy behavior that religion produces. Here is a man abandoning his duties and chasing after something he isn't even sure about. Fish writes, "I have imagined this criticism coming from outside the narrative, but in fact it is right there on the inside." Bunyan not only has Christian's wife and children imploring him to return, he also has Christian's friends struggling to make sense of his actions.
Fish comments, "What this shows is that the objections Harris, Dawkins and Hitchens make to religious thinking are themselves part of religious thinking. Rather than being swept under the rug of a seamless discourse, they are the very motor of that discourse." Citing the atheists' portrait of religion as unquestioning obedienece, Fish writes, "I know of no religious framework that offers such a complacement picture of the life of faith, a life that is always presented as a minefield of difficulties, obstacles and temptations that must be negotiated by a limited creature in the effort to become aligned with the Infinite."
Fish observes that while religious people over the centuries have dug deeply into the questions of life, along come our shallow atheists who present arguments as if they first thought of them, arguments that Christians have long examined with a seriousness and care that is missing in contemporary atheist discourse.
In a follow-up article, Fish deepens his inquiry by looking at the kind of evidence that atheists like Hawkins and Harris present for their “scientific” outlook. Harris, for example, writes that “there will probably come a time when we will achieve a detailed understanding of human happiness and of ethical judgments themselves at the level of the brain.” Fish asks, what is this confidence based on? Not, he notes, on a record of progress. Science today can no more explain ethics or human happiness than it could a thousand years ago.
Still, Harris says that scientific research hasn’t panned out because the research is in the early stage and few of the facts are in. Fish comments, “Of course one conclusion that could be drawn is that the research will not pan out because moral intuitions are not reducible to phyhsical processes. That may be why so few of the facts are in.”
Fish draws on examples from John Milton to make the point is that unbelief, no less than belief, is based on a perspective. If you assume that material reality is all there is, then you are only going to look for material explanations, and any explanations that are not material will be rejected out of hand. Fish’s objection is not so much that this is dogmatism but that it is dogmatism that refuses to recognize itself as such. At least religious people like Milton have long recognized that their core beliefs are derived from faith.
Fish concludes that “the arguments Dawkins, Harris and Hitchens mostly rely on are just not good arguments.” We can expect our unbelieving trio to react with their trademark scorn, but Fish has scored some telling points.
YOU ARE DELIBERATELY TWISTING MY WORDS. YOU THINK I DON’T KNOW WHAT CAUSED THE VAST MAJORITY OF CRATERS ON THE MOON YOU BRAINLESS DOLT. YOU HAVE DELIBERATELY CUT AND PASTED THAT PARAGRAPH OUT OF CONTEXT. YET ANOTHER METHOD OF OBFUSCATION USED BY RELIGIONISTS WHEN THEY HAVE NO COUNTER-ARGUMENT TO REASON - SMEAR THE MESSENGER. HERE’S ANOTHER PARAGRAPH DIRECTLY FROM IT:
“In addition, other volcanic features also occur within the lunar mare. The most important are sinuous rilles , dark mantling deposits ,and small volcanic domes and cones”
I’M NOT LETTING YOU SPIN ME UP ANY MORE. ISN’T IT A SIN TO DELIBERATELY DECEIVE PEOPLE? AREN’T YOU AFRAID OF GOING TO HELL FOR THIS? OH, YEAH, I FORGOT. YOU GET TO COMMIT ANY CRIME, INCLUDING GENOCIDE, THEN JUST ASK FOR FORGIVENESS AND YOU AUTOMATICALLY GO TO HEAVEN. HOW CONVENIENT FOR YOU.
I’m not trying to upset you. Just the reverse. I like you, and was like you in the past; I’m not trying to twist anything at all. Just pointing out that science is a shifting sand to place your ultimate faith in. Theories are just theories; partial explanations for reality, limited in scope, and improperly extended beyond their boundaries when you try to make them your theology or your explanation for everything. Many of the great scientists that created the theories that have stood the test of time (thus far) were Christian and knew there was an ultimate truth far beyond their limited knowledge and ability, that truth being God. God loves you, specifically and personally, and wants a relationship with you.
In some senses it can be empirical in the larger sense of the word. People can do the same experiments, religious practices, and compare their results.
However, the larger point to realize is how we know reality. Epistemology in short. And to keep this short, we must remember that science purposefully limits knowledge, scientific knowledge I'm speaking of, to a subset of what can be known.
This subset is things that can be known in the manner you've describe, and these things have size, location, can be detected by the senses or their extensions.
This is the firmest knowledge we can have, it is intended to be so from the start. And building upon it results in incredible abilities - flight, engineering and so on.
The fundamental error though is to forget that by limiting our tools, we have not limited reality - if we use only a hammer, it does not follow that only nails exist and can be known.
This fallacy: "Only that which can be known by science alone exists." has been called Scientism. It was a prevalent philosophy a few hundred years ago. However it fell quickly, blown apart by its own petard.
"Only that which can be known by science alone exists." fails because the statement, if true, cannot be known by science alone.
The quantum effect of seperated particles also appears instantaneous regardless of distance, faster than light. Since up/down is binary this would provide information in the same way we code computers.
Am I correct?
The quantum effect of seperated particles also appears instantaneous regardless of distance, faster than light. Since up/down is binary this would provide information in the same way we code computers.
Am I correct?
Do you really not understand why I won't even to attempt to refute anything you've posted? I will be glad to respond to any proposition you have when you can get a handle on the significance of why "words mean things." Right now it's all just foddering B.S. because you can't seem to focus on a salient point which your attitude won't allow you to comprehend.
You're not stupid, but you're surely communicating foolishly while being so burrowed in the self-importance of trying to make your point. I will suggest you should stay with your argument, but step back and take a look at the perspective of your approach. Try to grasp the unrelenting narrowminded view which you take by not allowing any other views to be remotely examined. For an Athiest, you sure are a heck of alot more unwise and zealously extreme than many religious people I know.
I hope it's in your nature cut me a break on my erroneous typo's like everybody else does around here? (Words mean(s) things)
Based on what? And what standard are you going by? Maybe your definition of your "exemplary life" would be somebody else's defintion of evil. Where do you go to find out if your "exemplary life" is really exemplary?
it is your putative “God” - who has stood by and watched billions of innocent human beings die and not lifted a finger (does God have fingers?) to stop it.
No, my "putative God" created a world that had no sin and no evil in it and it was man who chose to bring sin into the world and make the world the way it is. You cannot give God qualities based on your ignorance of Who He really is and then condemn Him because He, in your mind, has failed the standard. Man brought sin into this world, and as a result this world is fallen, and sick, and cursed and there are horrible consequences for sin, man's sin. God, the real God, my God, does not step in and rescue man from the consequences of sin. This world will be the way it is until Christ comes back and yes that will mean people will die in this world but before you get enraged at God, always remember it was man who made this world the way it is and man continues to this day to rebel and sin against God and shake his fist in the face of God and reject Him. So before you blame God for anything, get your facts straight. God has given man a way of rescue, not out of this world, which will eventually end, but out of eternal death.
It was only through His mercy and love that He did give man an escape from eternal punishment. He didn't have do to anything to help us after what we do to Him, every single day.
If I did stand before him, I would demand first an accounting from HIM for my dead family, then an accounting for all the other innocents that have had to suffer and die throughout the ages.
First of all, there are no "innocents":
Romans 3:23:
For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.
Man is born into this world guilty, in the eyes of God. And everyone who has ever lived in this world, or who will ever live in this world, is subject to the effects of man's sin on this world. And I'm very sorry that people in your family died. People in my family have died, and alot of people in alot of families have died. But, again, it was the sin of mankind that brought death into the world. God did not create this world the way it is today.
And, by the way, when you do stand before Him, you won't be uttering a sound.
Just because you declaim yourself to be a deity, as Jesus did, does not make it so.
Post my statement declaring myself to be deity. Thanks.
After my family died - my atheism was shaken and I begged for God’s help and guidance. Know what I got? Nothing. Things became far worse, not better.
But you had rejected Him all your life before your tragedy. There had never been a time in your life when you went to God, and confessed your sin, and asked for forgiveness, and asked Jesus Christ into your life. If God did not help you, it was because you never wanted anything to do with Him! We are all born into this world with a debt of sin that has to be dealt with before God can act in our lives, and work in our lives. God is not some Santa Claus that hands out blessings upon request. God is a Person Who created us to have a personal relationship with us, but sin separates us from God. God has given may a way to be cleansed of his sin, and to have a relationship with Him, but until our sin debt is wiped away through our trust in God's Son and our accepting of Him as Savior, God cannot be a part of our lives.
And you need to read the account of Job again. Job was a man who loved God and trusted Him and who God allowed to be tested by Satan, and never one time did Job ever curse God for what he went through. And after Job went through the testing, which, by the way, he did not have any idea how long it would last, God blessed Job's faithfulness and obedience.
I read your response to me, and I see a bitter, enraged individual who, while you try to tell me I have blinders on, have never given God a chance an so therefore cannot possibly know what it is like to be in a state of forgiveness and in a state of a personal relationship with God. You are trapped in pain and bitterness and anger against God- the same God Who would help you if you would let Him. Your heart is closed to God and therefore God can do nothing for you. He does not force Himself on anyone; if somebody does not think He exists, and refuses to come to Him for forgiveness and salvation, He will leave that person alone.
God gave His Son for you. It's up to you to accept that offer of salvation and eternal life or reject it. But don't get mad at God for your own choices.
I’ll leap into the breach with Noah. I think the fundamentalists will say that only families or genus or some such was needed on the ark, not all species. Then they speciated from a base, making the ark possible.
Even if fact somehow ends up disproving this as a possibility, the most you will get in terms of proof is a turn from a literalist interpretation to an allegorical interpretation. Fundamentalists fight that fight because they believe it is literal. I think the butresses, the supporters of the fundamentalists from the outside, so to speak, fight the fight because they see the word games and falsehoods that are promulgated when you cease to take inspired scripture as the word of God and begin to pick and choose what should guide you.
If the up-down relationship is proven at a distance with entanglement, why isn’t just one of the two bits sufficient to give the information needed? In other words if the state of A is up, then you know the state of B. It is faster than light communication, if you know the original state. Picture carrying A a light year away, with the information regarding B’s original state. Wouldn’t changes occur faster than light?
I have led an exemplary life Based on what? And what standard are you going by? (BASED ON THE VERY BEST OF YOUR CHRISTIAN STANDARDS)
Maybe your definition of your “exemplary life” would be somebody else’s defintion of evil. (NO. SEE PREVIOUS COMMENT.)Where do you go to find out if your “exemplary life” is really exemplary? (MY OWN EXTREMELY KEEN CONSCIENCE, THE OPINION OF OTHERS AND YOUR OWN BIBLE - BUT NOT BECAUSE I BELIEVE IT WAS DIVINELY-INSPIRED IN ANY WAY. I’M NOT STUPID ENOUGH TO BELIEVE ANYTHING SO LUDICROUS. DO YOU ASSUME THAT THERE WEREN’T ANY DECENT PEOPLE IN ANTIQUITY WHO COULD WRITE SUCH COMMON-SENSE THINGS?)
it is your putative “God” - who has stood by and watched billions of innocent human beings die and not lifted a finger (does God have fingers?) to stop it.
No, my “putative God” created a world that had no sin and no evil in it and it was man who chose to bring sin into the world and make the world the way it is. (YOUR PUTATIVE GOD IS PRETTY INCOMPETENT, THEN.)You cannot give God qualities based on your ignorance of Who He really is and then condemn Him because He, in your mind, has failed the standard. (WRONG – ACCORDING TO YOU HE DESIGNED MY MIND - I AM USING THE CRITICAL THINKING AND ANALYTICAL SKILLS HE SUPPOSEDLY GAVE ME TO ANALYZE THE WORLD WE LIVE IN BY LOGICAL MEANS) Man brought sin into this world, (NO, GOD DID BY CREATING A FLAWED CREATION - SO HE MUST’VE DELIBERATELY WANTED TO CREATE SIN) and as a result this world is fallen, and sick, and cursed and there are horrible consequences for sin, man’s sin. (NO, IT’S THE RESULT OF YOUR OMNIBENEVOLENT GOD’S MISTAKE IN CREATING A FLAWED CREATION) God, the real God, my God, does not step in and rescue man from the consequences of sin. (OR FROM THE DEPREDATIONS OF HIS OTHER FLAWED CREATIONS WHEN THEY DECIDE TO COMMIT VIOLENCE UPON THE INNOCENT. WHAT WOULD HAPPEN TO ME IF I RAISED VICIOUS PIT BULLS, THEN DELIBERATELY RELEASED THEM INTO THE COMMUNITY ON A REGULAR BASIS TO ATTACK EVERYBODY. WOULD THIS BE A CRIME? ) This world will be the way it is until Christ comes back and yes that will mean people will die in this world but before you get enraged at God, always remember it was man who made this world the way it is and man continues to this day to rebel and sin against God and shake his fist in the face of God and reject Him. (CAN’T BLAME MAN, AS MAN IS A DELIBERATELY-FLAWED CREATION) So before you blame God for anything, get your facts straight. (MY FACTS ARE AS STRAIGHT AS LASER BEAM IN A GRAVITY-FREE ENIRONMENT. YOUR “FACTS” ARE BASED ON IGNORANT, PRIMITIVE SUPERSTITIOUS DOGMA) God has given man a way of rescue, not out of this world, which will eventually end, but out of eternal death. (YAH, IT’S CALLED SCIENCE. NANOTECHNOLOGY WILL SOMEDAY GIVE US NOT ONLY ETERNAL YOUTH BUT THE ABILITY TO BE REBUILT EVEN IF WE ARE BLOWN TO BITS. I ONLY WISH WE ALREADY HAD THAT TECHNOLOGY)
It was only through His mercy and love that He did give man an escape from eternal punishment. (THE SAME MERCY AND LOVE THAT CREATED EVIL? AND HELL?) He didn’t have do to anything to help us after what we do to Him, every single day. (AND HE DOESN’T, DEMONSTRABLY. COULD IT BE BECAUSE HE DOESN’T EXIST?)
If I did stand before him, I would demand first an accounting from HIM for my dead family, then an accounting for all the other innocents that have had to suffer and die throughout the ages.
First of all, there are no “innocents”:
Romans 3:23:
For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.
(INCLUDING BABIES THAT ARE STRANGLED BY THEIR UMBILICAL CORDS AT BIRTH? HOW IS THIS GOD’S MERCY? WOULD YOU REALLY SHUT WHATEVER LIMITED ABILITY TO REASON YOU POSSESS OFF AND WORSHIP SUCH AN EVIL GOD? NOT FOR ME, THANKS!)
Man is born into this world guilty, in the eyes of God. (I THOUGHT THAT THE SINS OF THE FATHER WERE NOT VISITED UPON THE CHILDREN? DEPENDS ON WHICH VERSION OF THE BIBLE YOU READ, AND WHICH PART YOU DECIDE TO BELIEVE, I GUESS http://www.infidels.org/library/magazines/tsr/1996/6/6sins96.html ). And everyone who has ever lived in this world, or who will ever live in this world, is subject to the effects of man’s sin on this world. And I’m very sorry that people in your family died. (REALLY? WHY? SINCE YOUR GOD DOES NOT SEE FIT TO TOUCH ME WITH HIS GRACE, WHY WOULD ANOTHER MERE HUMAN BEING HAVE COMPASSION FOR ME? AREN’T YOU AFRAID GOD WILL BE DISPLEASED WITH YOU FOR OFFERING COMFORT TO A BLASPHEMER? WHY BOTHER WITH ME IF GOD DOESN’T EVEN WANT TO HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH ME BECAUSE I AM SO WORTHLESS AND EVIL?) People in my family have died, and a lot of people in alot of families have died. But, again, it was the sin of mankind that brought death into the world. God did not create this world the way it is today.(YES, HE DID. BEING OMNISCIENT, HE KNEW EXACTLY WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IN THE WORLD FOR ALL ITS FUTURE HISTORY. HE WENT RIGHT AHEAD AND CREATED IT ANYWAY WITH MALICE AFORETHOUGHT THAT IT WOULD FAIL. HOW MERCIFUL IS THIS? SAME APPLIES TO LUCIFER; GOD CREATED SATAN ALSO, WITH THE FULL KNOWLEDGE THAT HE WOULD REBEL, AND ALL THE FUTURE PROBLEMS THAT THIS WOULD CAUSE IN HEAVEN AND EARTH, AND GOD JUST LET IT HAPPEN ANYWAY. DOESN’T SAY A LOT FOR HIM, DOES IT? ALSO, I’M GLAD YOU HAVE SUCH A PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE OF GOD’S CONSCIENCE. DOES HE TALK TO YOU DIRECTLY OR DO YOU HAVE VISIONS?)
And, by the way, when you do stand before Him, you won’t be uttering a sound. (I SEE, IT’S A KANGAROO COURT. HOW INFINITELY JUST!)
Just because you declaim yourself to be a deity, as Jesus did, does not make it so.
Post my statement declaring myself to be deity. Thanks.
(IWAS SPEAKING OF JESUS’S CLAIM “I AM THE WAY” - NOT YOU, YOU INTELLECTUALLY-LIMITED CREATURE. I WAS ALSO SPEAKING OF CHARLES MANSON, JIM JONES, AND ALL THE OTHER CRACKPOTS WHO HAVE MADE THE SAME STATEMENT THROUGHOUT HISTORY, AND LED PEOPLE INTO HORRIBLE FATES, INCLUDING MURDER, SUICIDE AND GENOCIDE. YOUR MISTAKE IN NOT RECOGNIZING THIS REVEALS THAT YOU ARE USED TO JUST TAKING THE LITERAL MEANING OF THE WORDS YOU READ, AND NOT LOOK FOR OTHER POSSIBLE MEANINGS. HOW INTELLECTUALLY LIMITED OF YOU)
After my family died - my atheism was shaken and I begged for God’s help and guidance. Know what I got? Nothing. Things became far worse, not better.
But you had rejected Him all your life before your tragedy. (YOU NEED TO FIND ANY EXCUSE HERE BECAUSE MY TRUE STATEMENT REVEALS THAT WHAT I HAVE BEEN SAYING ALL ALONG IS TRUE. WHAT BETTER TIME FOR GOD TO SHOW ME HIS MERCY THAN AT SUCH A HORRIBLE MOMENT. IF ONLY THAT WAS THE WORST IN MY LIFE - IT BECAME FAR WORSE AFTER THAT – THROUGH NO FAULT OF MY OWN, I MIGHT ADD!) there had never been a time in your life when you went to God, and confessed your sin, and asked for forgiveness, and asked Jesus Christ into your life. (OH YES THERE WAS!! I WAS RAISED A CATHOLIC. ALSO - YOU ARE MAKING EXCUSES BECAUSE YOU “KNOW” THAT YOU HAVE BEEN SAVED - AND IF YOU ARE SAVED IT MUST WORK FOR EVERYBODY. IF IT DOESN’T WORK FOR EVERYBODY, THEN IT MUST BE FALSE. THIS IS WHY YOU SO DESPERATELY ARE TRYING TO IMAGINE THAT I AM NOT AN EXEMPLARY PERSON (I AM) BECAUSE IF HE DOESN’T HELP ME, THEN 2 POSSIBILITIES PRESENT THEMSELVES 1) HE DOESN’T EXIST, OR CARE ABOUT US IF HE DOES, 2) I AM NOT WORTHY OF SAVING.) If God did not help you, it was because you never wanted anything to do with Him! We are all born into this world with a debt of sin that has to be dealt with before God can act in our lives, and work in our lives. (NONSENSE! THIS IS JUST MORE BEHAVIOR-MODIFICATION FEARMONGERING THAT THE EARLY CHURCH(ES) FOISTED UPON THE IGNORANT TO FRIGHTEN THEM INTO BELIEVING IN ORDER TO GIVE THEM SWAY OVER THE POPULUS AND THE ABILITY TO COLLECT TITHES TO INCREASE THE POWER OF THE CHURCH) God is not some Santa Claus that hands out blessings upon request. God is a Person (A PERSON? I THOUGHT HE WAS *GOD*??) Who created us to have a personal relationship with us, but sin separates us from God. God has given may a way to be cleansed of his sin, and to have a relationship with Him, but until our sin debt is wiped away through our trust in God’s Son and our accepting of Him as Savior, God cannot be a part of our lives. (PRIMITIVE, IGNORANT, SUPERSTITIOUS RHETORIC)
And you need to read the account of Job again. Job was a man who loved God and trusted Him and who God allowed to be tested by Satan, and never one time did Job ever curse God for what he went through. And after Job went through the testing, which, by the way, he did not have any idea how long it would last, God blessed Job’s faithfulness and obedience. (AND WHY WOULD AN INFINITELY-MERCIFUL GOD ALLOW ONE OF HIS MOST PIOUS DEVOTEES TO SUFFER SO, WHEN IN HIS OMNIPOTENCE HE KNEW THAT JOB WOULD PASS THE TEST ANYWAY? ISN’T THIS NOTHING SHORT OF SADISTIC?)
I read your response to me, and I see a bitter, enraged individual who, while you try to tell me I have blinders on, have never given God a chance (WHAT DID YOU MISS BEFORE WHEN I STATED THAT AFTER MY FAMILY DIED MY ATHEISM WAS IN DOUBT AND I BEGGED FOR HELP? NONE CAME. INSTEAD, THINGS BECAME MUCH, MUCH WORSE, THROUGH NO FAULT OF MY OWN. YOU WROTE THIS ABOVE, YOURSELF, DID YOU FORGET? WOULD THERE HAVE BEEN A BETTER TIME FOR GOD TO LET HIMSELF BE KNOWN TO ME?) an so therefore cannot possibly know what it is like to be in a state of forgiveness and in a state of a personal relationship with God. (YOU CAN’T HAVE A PERSONAL REALTIONSHIP WITH SOMETHING THAT DOESN’T EXIST) You are trapped in pain and bitterness and anger against God- the same God Who would help you if you would let Him. (I ASKED, HE GAVE NO ANSWER BUT FURTHER TRAGEDY AND UNTOLD SUFFERING ON MY PART. I MEAN, ASSUMING HE EXISTS, WHICH HE DOESN’T)Your heart is closed to God and therefore God can do nothing for you. (BEING OMNIPOTENT, WHY DOESN’T HE OPEN IT?) He does not force Himself on anyone; (OH I SEE – WHERE WAS HE WHEN I BEGGED FOR HELP?)if somebody does not think He exists, and refuses to come to Him for forgiveness and salvation, He will leave that person alone. (I DID, WITH THE GREATEST HUMILITY AND SINCERITY OF MY LIFE, ASK. NOTHING HAPPENED. UNLESS YOU WANT TO COUNT THE FLOODGATES OF HELL POURING DOWN UPON ME AFTERWARDS. I SEE THIS AS MORE OF HAPPENING TO BE A VERY STATISTICALLY-UNLUCKY PERSON MORE THAN ANYTHING ELSE. I AM NOT BITTER OR ANGRY ABOUT GOD’S NON-EXISTENCE. I’M MERELY TRYING TO POINT OUT TO A BUNCH OF DELUDED. HIGHLY-JUDGMENTAL FOOLS THAT THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NOT ONE SHRED OF EVIDENCE FOR THEIR BELIEFS. I CAN SEE NOW THAT YOUR DELUSIONS ARE SO INGRAINED THAT I HAVE BEEN WASTING MY BREATH, AS NONE OF YOU ARE CAPABLE OF CRITICAL THOUGHT.)
God gave His Son for you. It’s up to you to accept that offer of salvation and eternal life or reject it. But don’t get mad at God for your own choices. (IT WASN’T MY CHOICE FOR MY FATHER, A TOTALLY COMMITED CHRISTIAN, AND WWII VETERAN OF 3.5 YEARS OF NIGHTMARISH JUNGLE WARFARE IN THE PACIFIC, AND, LATER, VALEDICTORIAN OF HIS CLASS IN MEDICAL SCHOOL, TO DIE HORRIFICALLY OF CANCER WHEN I WAS A TEENAGER. IT WASN’T MY CHOICE FOR MY MOTHER TO BE PSYCHOTIC AND THROW ME, (AN HONOR STUDENT WHO DIDN’T DRINK, SMOKE OR DO DRUGS OR ANYTHING ELSE WRONG) OUT IN THE STREET, AFTER ALMOST 2 DECADES OF HORRIFIC EMOTIONAL AND PHYSICAL ABUSE AT HER HANDS. IT WASN’T MY CHOICE THAT SHE SOLD THE HOUSE I GREW UP IN FOR 1/3 OF ITS APPRAISED VALUE, AND TO SEND THE REST OF THE MONEY TO MY COKE-ADDICT OLDER BROTHER TO PUT UP HIS NOSE. IT WASN’T MY CHOICE THAT A DRUNK DRIVER RAN A STOP SIGN AND SPLATTERED ME ALL OVER THE ROAD ON MY MOTORCYCLE 3 MONTHS AFTER MY FATHER DIED. IT WASN’T MY CHOICE THAT I WOKE UP 2 WEEKS LATER IN THE HOSPITAL WITH A SHATTERED RIGHT LEG, AND NO INSURANCE BECAUSE THE MOMSTER CANCELED IT BEFORE MY FATHER WAS COLD. IT WASN’T MY CHOICE TO HAVE TO REPAY $23,000.00 IN MEDICAL BILLS (THE COST OF 3 BRAND-NEW CARS AT THE TIME). IT WASN’T MY CHOICE TO HAVE TO LIVE AT MY GIRLFRIENDS HOUSE WHILE I RECUPERATED FOR A YEAR AS MY MOTHER WOULDN’T ALLOW ME, AN INVALID, TO STAY AT HOME. IF I’D STAYED THERE, I GUESS IT WOULD’VE COST HER $20 A WEEK FOR FOOD, OR MAYBE SOMEHOW MAKE HER RESPONSIBLE FOR MY MEDICAL BILLS. WHEN I ASKED HER WHY SHE CANCELED MY HEALTH INSURANCE, AND WHAT TO DO ABOUT THE MEDICAL BILLS, SHE SAID SHE’D GIVE ME A RIDE TO THE WELFARE OFFICE. IT *WAS* MY CHOICE NOT TO DO THAT; I’D RATHER STARVE THAN TAKE CHARITY FROM THE STATE. AFTER I’D RECOVERED, I LIVED IN A TENT IN THE STATE FOREST FOR SEVERAL YEARS, THROUGH BITTER NEW ENGLAND WINTERS AND BLIZZARDS, EATING RABBITS, GROUSE AND THE OCCASIONAL SQUIRREL, (AND CANNED BEANS , TURKEY AND YAMS WERE ALWAYS A TREAT FOR THANKSGIVING OR CHRISTMAS!) STAYING ONE STEP AHEAD OF THE RANGERS, AND TAKING OUT STUDENT LOANS SO THAT I COULD AFFORD TO GO TO A CHEAP STATE COLLEGE. IT *WAS* MY CHOICE TO WORK 2 JOBS AND GO TO COLLEGE FULL-TIME. I WAS A BRINKS GUARD AND I WAS HIRED TO WORK IN THE COLLEGE COMPUTER LABORATORY, ANSWERING USER QUESTIONS AND TEACHING INTRODUCTORY CLASSES ON THE CYBER MAINFRAME. AT NO POINT DID I DROWN MY SORROWS IN ALCOHOL OR DRUGS, NOR STEAL, NO MATTER HOW HUNGRY I BECAME. THE PRECEDING IS ONLY A TINY PORTION OF THE UNPLEASANTRIES I HAVE FACED IN LIFE, NONE BEING MY CHOICE. IF ANYONE HAS A RIGHT TO BE MAD, IT’S ME. BUT I’M NOT. I REALIZE THAT THERE IS NO GOD, AND THEREFORE, NOBODY “HAS IT IN FOR ME”. IT WAS ALL JUST A MATTER OF STATISTICAL BAD LUCK, THAT’S ALL. BUT WHAT DOES ANGER ME, ARE PEOPLE LIKE YOURSELVES WHO IGNORE ALL THE EVIDENCE, NOT ONLY SCIENTIFIC, BUT COMMON-SENSE, WITH YOUR SUPERIOR KNOW-IT-ALL ATTITUDES AND SMUG JUDGMENTALISM OF OTHERS WHO DO NOT SHARE YOUR BELIEFS BECAUSE THEY ARE TOO INTELLIGENT TO BE TAKEN IN BY PRIMITIVE SUPERSTITION. YOU PEOPLE MAKE ME SICK WITH YOUR PIOUS PREACHING OF LIES BASED ON THE WRITINGS OF A BUNCH OF IGNORANT SAVAGES. I DID NOT BRING ANY OF THE AFOREMENTIONED UNPLEASANTRIES UPON MYSELF – THIS WAS DONE BY FORCES EXTERNAL TO ME. NEED I POINT OUT AGAIN THAT NOT ONE OF YOU HAS REFUTED ANY OF THE BIBLICAL CONTRADICTIONS THAT I HAVE POSTED. ALL YOU DO IS DENY THAT IT IS A CONTRADICTION (WITHOUT PRESENTING ANY EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY), STATE THAT THE REASON IT IS NOT CONTRADICTORY IS SO OBVIOUS THAT IT NEED NOT BE EXPLAINED (YAH, RIGHT), OR IGNORE IT, OR QUOTE SCRIPTURE AT ME AS IF THAT IS ANY PROOF OF ANYTHING. ENJOY YOUR COLLECTIVE DELUSION. I CHOOSE TO LIVE MY LIFE IN REALITY, NOT IN SOME FOOLISH FAIRY TALE.
As you probably already knew, arguing with - or even having simple conversations with - overly fervent religious people is very frustrating and often impossible. They’ve shut off their ability to use reason and have brainwashed themselves with self-referential, post-rationalized ‘thinking’. They’ve crossed a line, the same line the atheist crosses. Only an agnostic can be certain. Actually I look at scientists as agnostic in their stance towards the future - open to new discoveries through experimentation and observation.
Thanks for the breath of fresh air, sword! Actually, I am more an agnostic existentialist with heavy atheist leanings. I touched on this in an earlier post. I just referred to myself as an atheist for simplicity’s sake. I got exactly the reaction I knew I would. I mean, I guess a God could exist, and not care about us at all, and hide his existence from us if he wanted to. (But why would he do this? - it’s crazy!) My point is that there is no evidence at all for his existence, unless you want to count the deluded opinions of people that can’t even acknowledge blatant logical contradictions in the very scripture they quote, never mind the scientific ones, which are legion, for they are many (grin). In order to be a true, full atheist, you would have to have proof that God does not exist, and I don’t see how this is possible. All you can say that, judging from all the available scientific and common-sense evidence - is that it looks like he just isn’t there. You are right about science, it’s a grand adventure of discovery leading us into the future – not the boat anchor of false dogma that would weight us down into the depths, if we let it, like some people do.
Nope, I’ll try again with a little more math this time.
First, the intermediary entangles two quantum states and sends them to A and B. Now, A has a 50% chance of measuring 1 and 50% chance of measuring 0. Same for B. However, whatever measurement A gets, B must get the same thing. In the frame of either of the two scientists, they’re still getting 50/50 output and can’t determine anything about the next one (unless told by the other scientist). But when they get together and compare notes, they find their data agrees perfectly. (It’s like they’re both flipping the same coin...)
When A performs her operation on her bit, she changes the phase of the entanglement (note that information is contained in the phase again - another signature of quantum mechanics). She can transform the pair to one of four orthogonal states of entanglement. They both still have a 50% chance of measuring 1 and 50% chance of measuring 0. Depending on the operation she made, she can make Bob’s bit match hers or not. However, since her measurement is still 50/50, B can’t tell what she did by measuring his bit (without knowing what her bit was).
If A measures hers and calls B to tell him about it, they can either match or not - so he gets one bit of information (this is pointless, it’s equivalent to the classical case). On the other hand, if she sends him her bit (before she measures it), then he posses the entire entangled state which can be in one of four states. By measuring the state of the entanglement (via the Bell basis), he can get 1 of 4 outcomes - or two bits of information - and that is superdense coding.
Note that above there is no superluminal communication. Also note the careful use of measurement: If either one of them measures their bit, the entanglement collapses and we’re back to classical. This is another signature of quantum mechanics - measurement affects the outcome. Bob either needs to know Alice’s bit (classical communication), or Alice needs to send him her bit (superdense coding).
Without a background in QM, it’s pretty difficult to grasp.
I grasp the difficulty. Basically, they can't change the quantum state only measure it, so no communication.
Oh, let's not get into this topic.
I see no evidence supporting your faith, you see none supporting my lack of such. Let's leave it there.
Well... we can certainly change the quantum state, but that change can only be detected by possessing the entire system (both bits). I think that’s the easiest way to think about it.
Ah, well rather than study it more I think I’ll read pookie’s toons instead!
Did you try asking your church for help when you were having financial difficulties? Catholics usually have pretty good social services. Protestants from what I’ve seen, since they don’t have huge diocese, make it a more personal thing, you have to go directly to the Deacons and ask, less anonymous.
No, I was able to do it on my own, so I did. I don’t believe in taking charity unless you really, really need it. They wouldn’t have believed me, anyway. They certainly would’ve called my mother - who would’ve acted outraged and lied about my situation, then blamed me for it, as usual. She would have convinced them that I was trying to scam them. (If my older brother did the same thing she would’ve spoken any lie to protect him - those 2 are peas in a pod) I doubt they would’ve been able to do much, anyway. My father was a prominent Dr. in the community and well-known to everyone, especially to the clergy. My mother had everyone fooled with her “nice in front of everybody - insane to the children in private act” - paranoid schizophrenia, actually. My extended family on my Dad’s side was full of wealthy people - but after my Dad died they didn’t want to know us anymore. (These were the same people I had Sunday dinner with almost every Sunday the 1st 18 years of my life) You see, they were all pure-blooded Italians, like my Dad. My Mom was French (and insane) - this made us half-breeds in their eyes - not worth the trouble. They were all “devout” Catholics. Why would such a smart, educated man as my father marry such a horrible person? Well, I’ve spoken about how even brilliant people have tragic flaws - my Dad’s was that he was a genuinely good person, and couldn’t comprehend how something so beautiful on the outside could be so evil on the inside. She acted differently with him than with us. If you’ve seen the movie “Mommie Dearest”, you will have an excellent idea of what she was like. Also, she came from the worst part of a small town in Rhode Island, the poorest part, from a bad family, and a history of abuse herself. She was a 4th grade dropout. Her father became an alcoholic and abandoned the family (all 9 kids) when she was 9, right after her mother died. You’d think she’d remember what that felt like and not want to subject her children to anything even remotely similar. Unfortunately, she had profoundly limited mental faculties and was quite seriously mentally ill. I think my father thought he was doing something good by getting her out of there. Too bad he was wrong, poor man.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.