[PERMANENTLY CLOSED] A problem at the bottom of reason

[Chriliman]

How do you check yourself, to help insure, you are staying away from confirmation bias and are being objective?

By continuing to ask honest questions and admiting when I'm wrong. It's just there comes a point when you realize it's not others you've wronged or even yourself that you've wronged, it's God that you've wronged and of course a real God would be capable of forgiving my wrongs if I admit I was wrong to God and ask for forgiveness. Then and only then does truth become undeniable. I say this from experience, you can choose to believe me or not, up to you.

 

[bhsmte]

By continuing to ask honest questions and admiting when I'm wrong. It's just there comes a point when you realize it's not others you've wronged or even yourself that you've wronged, it's God that you've wrong and of course a real God would be capable of forgiving my wrongs if I admit I was wrong to God and ask for forgiveness. Then and only then does truth become undeniable. I say this from experience, you can choose to believe me or not, up to you.

How do you know you are asking questions that truly challenge your position, to see if it will hold up?

 

[Chriliman]

How do you know you are asking questions that truly challenge your position, to see if it will hold up?

I try to look at things from other points of view to determine if the other point of view is worth taking. After doing this a lot and being honest I've begun to realize contradictions in other points of view that prevent me from taking that point of view. This questioning as lead me to making this thread about a problem at the bottom of reason. And it has confirmed my belief that there is a problem. This confirmation only strengthens what I believe to be true.

 

[quatona]

Okay. Define finite, and define infinite. Their definitions ARE the demonstration you have asked for.

Why would I? They are a distinction you brought into the discussion. So it´s up to you to tell me what you mean.

You know of the finite world...and we have been telling you there is more, that there is a greater infinite reality.

But, as I said, you aren´t able to demonstrate that there is.

 

[ScottA]

But, as I said, you aren´t able to demonstrate that there is.

How would you propose I show you something that is beyond your horizon, or tell you something in a language you do not recognize, or demonstrate a foreign place in a domestic setting? Your ability to understand is extremely limited.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

How would you propose I show you something that is beyond your horizon, or tell you something in a language you do not recognize, or demonstrate a foreign place in a domestic setting? Your ability to understand is extremely limited.

And your understanding is expansive, or so you would have us believe. Yet you are unable to demonstrate that understanding any better than the innumerable other individuals who also claim to possess such understanding, but whose understanding differs, often substantially, from yours.

 

[quatona]

How would you propose I show you something that is beyond your horizon, or tell you something in a language you do not recognize, or demonstrate a foreign place in a domestic setting?

I don´t expect you to do it. I do understand that you would like me to take your word for it.

Your ability to understand is extremely limited.

That´s certainly accurate. I have no reason to assume, though, that yours is not.

 

[Freodin]

How would you propose I show you something that is beyond your horizon, or tell you something in a language you do not recognize, or demonstrate a foreign place in a domestic setting? Your ability to understand is extremely limited.

You claim that you have knowledge of something beyond my horizon.

I say that, if you have such an impressive, alien, uncomprehensible, undemonstrable knowledge... you should also have some superiour knowledge within my horizon. But this you deny.

You are like a self-proclaimed scientist who claims to have found the unified field theory... which you cannot explain, because it is beyond my horizon... but you are also unable to explain to me how multiplication works.

Your ability to understand seems to be extremely limited also. Curiously, it seems to be limited in regard to all the things that it shouldn't be limited in.

 

[ScottA]

And your understanding is expansive, or so you would have us believe. Yet you are unable to demonstrate that understanding any better than the innumerable other individuals who also claim to possess such understanding, but whose understanding differs, often substantially, from yours.

Without going into the false claims...the best explanation for not being able to adequately demonstrate that which is beyond the physical, worldly horizon...is that, even we who hold the actual truth, are limited much like an adult is limited in explaining complex matters to children. Which, to say so, is not condescending, as some would see it...any more than a loving parent is condescending to their own child. We have tried, and have attempted to be kind. But the task is limited, not by the information...but by those to whom it is given. For the same reason, even Jesus, told his disciples, "I have many more things to tell you, but you cannot bear them now." So...life goes on...while we wait for a more mature audience. Still, we try.

 

[madera23]

And your understanding is expansive, or so you would have us believe. Yet you are unable to demonstrate that understanding any better than the innumerable other individuals who also claim to possess such understanding, but whose understanding differs, often substantially, from yours.

Unlike religion God does not create robots, each of His children is an individual.

 

[Davian]

Without going into the false claims...the best explanation for not being able to adequately demonstrate that which is beyond the physical, worldly horizon...is that, even we

Who is this "we" that you speak for?

who hold the actual truth

I do not accept your religious opinion as truth.

, are limited much like an adult is limited in explaining complex matters to children.

Another veiled insult. Is that a Christian thing? Or just something that that "we" of yours does?

Which, to say so, is not condescending, as some would see it

Or arrogant. Patronizing. Supercilious.

...any more than a loving parent is condescending to their own child.

I would not know. I do not have that kind of relationship with my parents, or my children.

We have tried, and have attempted to be kind.

That's mighty Christian of you.

But the task is limited, not by the information...but by those to whom it is given.

A popular postion to take for those that are unable to demonstrate the veracity of their claims. It's always someone else's fault.

For the same reason, even Jesus, told his disciples,

...allegedly...

"I have many more things to tell you, but you cannot bear them now." So...life goes on...while we wait for a more mature audience.

Another veiled insult. Is that a Christian thing? Or do you think it lends weight to your assertions?

Still, we try.

lol. I think you should do a walk around of your truck to see why you are not getting traction here.

Stuck

• Davian
• Mar 9, 2012

 

[ScottA]

I would not know. I do not have that kind of relationship with my parents, or my children.

You have never told or taught your children anything they did not know before your told them? The only way that would be possible is if you were both equally ignorant in the way that children are until they learn. Is that really what you meant to say? That would explain a lot of your other comments.

 

[GrimKingGrim]

How would you propose I show you something that is beyond your horizon,

By illustrating the means you yourself came across it. Surely the experience can be replicated.

or tell you something in a language you do not recognize,

Explain in laymans terms

or demonstrate a foreign place in a domestic setting?

Show me

Your ability to understand is extremely limited.

What elevates your understanding above my own?

 

[Davian]

You have never told or taught your children anything they did not know before your told them?

Sure.

The only way that would be possible is if you were both equally ignorant in the way that children are until they learn.

I can't even parse that sentence. And, I do not accept what you think of as possible to be definitive. Can you rephrase?

Is that really what you meant to say?

Not at all. I was referring to the condescending and patronizing tone I perceive in your posts, and how that is not present in my family relationships.

That would explain a lot of your other comments.

It would seem you are projecting, in error.

 

[Davian]

...



What elevates your understanding above my own?

From what I gather, that would all become clear once you accept that his religious opinion is the truth.

 

[GrimKingGrim]

From what I gather, that would all become clear once you accept that his religious opinion is the truth.

And that's pretty far from happening. That's like offering me insurance and only telling me the benefits and pricing only after I agree to sign on.

 

[ScottA]

By illustrating the means you yourself came across it. Surely the experience can be replicated.

The means I myself came across the bigger picture of life (than that of this physical world) has been illustrated for tens of thousands of years. It is not more illustrations that you need...but a willingness to receive the witness of millions. Granted, there are now also millions of counterfeit witnesses. That means you will have to be careful, but time is awaisting, and only gets worse as time goes on. The trail is getting cold. Better hurry.

Explain in laymans terms

How about shepherd's terms, or fisherman's terms, or carpenter's terms, or tent maker's terms?

Show me

When you step out of this physical world...I will indeed show you. Meanwhile, you will need to be more cooperative.

What elevates your understanding above my own?

I have seen beyond the horizon of this world, and been gifted with knowledge that exceeds that of physical human understanding. But I am NOT unique...this is true of everyone who has been born again of the spirit of God.

 

[ScottA]

Sure.

I can't even parse that sentence. And, I do not accept what you think of as possible to be definitive. Can you rephrase?

Not at all. I was referring to the condescending and patronizing tone I perceive in your posts, and how that is not present in my family relationships.

It would seem you are projecting, in error.

I gave the example of you yourself telling or teaching children something, to demonstrate that just because you knew more than them, is no reason to consider you condescending to them...as you continue to do to me, even though I have something to tell and teach you. A child who reacts the way you are doing is known as a smart alec.

If you don't believe me - stop following me - you are not my child anyway!

 

[Freodin]

I gave the example of you yourself telling or teaching children something, to demonstrate that just because you knew more than them, is no reason to consider you condescending to them...as you continue to do to me, even though I have something to tell and teach you. A child who reacts the way you are doing is known as a smart alec.

If you don't believe me - stop following me - you are not my child anyway!

As someone who has experience as a teacher, I can tell you that you are absolutely and completely wrong in your approach. I already tried to teach and demonstrate that to you... and you simply ignored it as irrelevant.

So now here I am, having something to tell and teach you. And you don't listen. You rant about your "knowledge"... and how you cannot tell, teach or demonstrate anything of it (which is our fault, of course.)

Are you a smart alec?

 

[KCfromNC]

Without going into the false claims...the best explanation for not being able to adequately demonstrate that which is beyond the physical, worldly horizon...is that, even we who hold the actual truth, are limited much like an adult is limited in explaining complex matters to children.

That's just one of several options. How is it any more likely than the simpler conclusion that you're just making things up?