Explain the Meta-scientific Method

[Wiccan_Child]

*grabs popcorn*

 

[AV1611VET]

AV and Greg, in your opinion, is blind faith in the Quran just as justified and worthy as blind faith in the bible? If not, why not?

Yes

Look at it this way:

If you put your faith in the Bible, you'll get the Bible's reward.

If you put your faith in the Quran, you'll get the Quran's reward.

Since one of the two statements above is incorrect, let the true God of the universe decide.

p.s. Ask yourself this: Which one gave you advanced warning over the other?

 

[Delphiki]

Actually, Greg, we know magnetic fields exist because they are completely testable. We can see the effects they have on physical objects and measure the strength of the field.

With anything metaphysical, there's nothing to see, and no effects that aren't already explained by actual materialistic reasoning.

This metaphysical "intelligence", however, doesn't seem to have any properties. That is, everything you seem to claim is evidence for it has a perfectly sound, reasonable, scientific explanation. So how is this "intelligence" detected? Is it a force? Is it an aura? If it consists of matter or energy or any of the fundamental forces, then what makes it metaphysical and what makes it exist as anything beyond an impressionable imagination?

If you can only test for physical properties using physical means, then how does one employ a metaphysical means of testing something metaphysical?

 

[Ar Cosc]

Yes

Look at it this way:

If you put your faith in the Bible, you'll get the Bible's reward.

If you put your faith in the Quran, you'll get the Quran's reward.

Since one of the two statements above is incorrect, let the true God of the universe decide.

p.s. Ask yourself this: Which one gave you advanced warning over the other?

So you think that blind faith, in anything, is better than acting rationally and looking for evidence?

 

[Delphiki]

p.s. Ask yourself this: Which one gave you advanced warning over the other?

Of course the following is it tu quoque, but I could care less as it might make you think:

Deut: 4:2 Whatever I command you, you shall be careful to do; you shall not add to nor take away from it.

You know.. like the entire New Testament? Or what King James actually did to the Torah to make it the Old Testament. Let he who is without guilt....

But thanks for veering off topic.

 

[AV1611VET]

So you think that blind faith, in anything, is better than acting rationally and looking for evidence?

Faith requires an object.

In our case, that Object is the Lord Jesus Christ.

 

[Ar Cosc]

Faith requires an object.

In our case, that Object is the Lord Jesus Christ.

And if the object were the words of the prophet Mohammed? Or the deranged rantings of L. Ron Hubbard?

 

[AV1611VET]

But thanks for veering off topic.

It's not my fault you can't come up with an interesting thread.

Science is boring.

 

[Delphiki]

Faith requires an object.

You can't have faith in happiness or the future?

In our case, that Object is the Lord Jesus Christ.

So, as long as I have faith in any sort of object, it becomes real?

 

[AV1611VET]

And if the object were the words of the prophet Mohammed? Or the deranged rantings of L. Ron Hubbard?

What about it?

The Bible says, "Faith without works is dead."

Why do you think Shoko Asahara poisoned all those people in the Tokyo subways?

He didn't like the Hindu trinity being worshiped flippantly and wanted to get back to worshiping the god of destruction in 'supreme truth'.

Why do you think the worshipers of Molech burned their children in the fire?

They wanted to keep their faith alive.

Again -- faith without works is dead.

Faith can be a dangerous thing, depending on what the object of that faith is -- be it Molech, or be it Thalidomide, or whatever.

 

[AV1611VET]

You can't have faith in happiness or the future?

Those are objects, are they not?

So, as long as I have faith in any sort of object, it becomes real?

No.

The faith is real, but the object isn't necessarily real; as Elijah demonstrated to the prophets of Baal.

1 Kings 18:27 And it came to pass at noon, that Elijah mocked them, and said, Cry aloud: for he is a god; either he is talking, or he is pursuing, or he is in a journey, or peradventure he sleepeth, and must be awaked.

 

[Delphiki]

Faith can be a dangerous thing, depending on what the object of that faith is

You seem to think that there's never been an act of terrorism int he name of Christianity. I've got news for you...

The faith is real, but the object isn't necessarily real

Just so we're clear on the path of this conversation: That's the faith in Jesus Christ and the object being Jesus Christ, who you would now be saying isn't necessarily real.

 

[Greg1234]

Actually, Greg, we know magnetic fields exist because they are completely testable. We can see the effects they have on physical objects and measure the strength of the field.

Because their properties are completely testable. You can test the property of intelligence with relative ease among any other property.

With anything metaphysical, there's nothing to see, and no effects that aren't already explained by actual materialistic reasoning.

Analogically mapped, with magnetic fields we don't say materialistic reasoning. That would be both visible and non-visible. We say visible reasoning.

This metaphysical "intelligence", however, doesn't seem to have any properties. That is, everything you seem to claim is evidence for it has a perfectly sound, reasonable, scientific explanation. So how is this "intelligence" detected? Is it a force? Is it an aura? If it consists of matter or energy or any of the fundamental forces, then what makes it metaphysical and what makes it exist as anything beyond an impressionable imagination?

Today must be your lucky day. The property of intelligence inherent in the metaphysical aspect overlaps into the physical field and can be tested and referenced in relation to the design of man at your convenience.

If you can only test for physical properties using physical means, then how does one employ a metaphysical means of testing something metaphysical?

Any metaphysical means used to test for something metaphysical is already metaphysical in nature which already makes it subject to promissory materialism before it can even be used for anything. It doesn't make sense. What you need to change is your attitude. That's the actual difference between a theist and a materialist.

 

[Delphiki]

Because their properties are completely testable. You can test the property of intelligence with relative ease among any other property.

How? And please don't say that the appearance of an object is the property that indicates intelligent design. Give me an actual test here.

Analogically mapped, with magnetic fields we don't say materialistic reasoning. That would be both visible and non-visible. We say visible reasoning.

You do realize that whether something is visible or not doesn't determine whether or not it's a real material object. Magnetic fields are quite real, and detectible using various means. Just like wind or gravity. They are real because we can see their direct effects. Pinwheels moving and things falling.

Today must be your lucky day. The property of intelligence inherent in the metaphysical aspect overlaps into the physical field and can be tested and referenced in relation to the design of man at your convenience.

How do you test this? I mean, you keep saying it's testable, but how?

Any metaphysical means used to test for something metaphysical is already metaphysical in nature which already makes it subject to promissory materialism before it can even be used for anything. It doesn't make sense. What you need to change is your attitude. That's the actual difference between a theist and a materialist.

So, if I can't use physical means to est for something metaphysical, and I can't use metaphysical means to test for something metaphysical, how do I test for something metaphysical?

Change my attitude? Is the existence or testability of the metaphysical dependent upon my personality?

 

[AV1611VET]

You seem to think that there's never been an act of terrorism int he name of Christianity. I've got news for you...

No, you don't have news for me.

The Crusades and the Salem witch trials and the Scope's monkey trial were done in the name of Christianity -- but the first two didn't take all of Christianity into account; just one side of it.

The Crusaders, for example, made the same mistake you guys make: they didn't take dispensationalism into account, and they attempted to liberate Jerusalem of the gentiles, not realizing that the 'times of the gentiles' ends when Jesus returns and liberates it Himself.

The Salem witch trials didn't take into account that Jesus said the tares and wheat will grow together until the Lord comes back and separates the two Himself.

 

[AV1611VET]

But thanks for veering off topic.

Oh ... and ... as they say in Euchre: If you can't play with the big dogs, stay on the porch --

 

[Greg1234]

How? And please don't say that the appearance of an object is the property that indicates intelligent design. Give me an actual test here.

Intelligent design (which is the effect being alluded to in the design of Man) is an effect of the property of intelligence. Also the property of intelligence, its nature and capabilities can be studied with relative ease.

You do realize that whether something is visible or not doesn't determine whether or not it's a real material object. Magnetic fields are quite real, and detectible using various means. Just like wind or gravity. They are real because we can see their direct effects. Pinwheels moving and things falling.

In visible science they are not. This will catch up with you.

How do you test this? I mean, you keep saying it's testable, but how?

The property of intelligence and the effect, intelligent design, are already available. The integrated complexity of man is evidence for intelligent design. This can easily be tested through study of the property of intelligence which outlines its capabilities and effects. Of course you can claim that it is not an effect of intelligent design. But do so without acknowledging the fact that intelligence is the only property capable of creating machinery with specifically complex integrated parts, where coded information governs a substantial amount of activity. And without alluding to a future purely naturalistic unintelligent process.

So, if I can't use physical means to est for something metaphysical, and I can't use metaphysical means to test for something metaphysical, how do I test for something metaphysical?

When materialism is relegated.

Change my attitude? Is the existence or testability of the metaphysical dependent upon my personality?

The evidence is already present.

 

[Ar Cosc]

Greg, is this:

Intelligently designed or not?

 

[Delphiki]

The property of intelligence and the effect, intelligent design, are already available.

Ok, then. What are the properties of something that's intelligently designed versus the properties of something that occurs in nature?

 

[Greg1234]

Greg, is this:

Intelligently designed or not?

Too close to naturalistic processes. Other factors would have to be considered. Stone tools discovered are looked at by archeologists as being the product of intelligence through consideration of cuts in animal bones, other traces of habitation, texts, probability etc. But when you have overkill like this

YouTube - Extremely short runway 747 takeoff

I will tell you that it was definitely designed without even knowing who designed it. As in the case of man, you not only have this type of overkill (which on its own confirms design) but other metaphysical aspects along with textual evidence.