• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Is a skeptic missing the compassionate part of their being, while only focusing on logic?

Ken-1122

Newbie
Jan 30, 2011
13,574
1,792
✟233,210.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
I said "regarding such manners." I didn't say you were, I don't know anything about your views personally,
But when you paint all skeptic views with the same broad brush, you offend all skeptics, him included. Imagine if he painted all Christian views with the same broad brush perhaps in a way that you disagree? Wouldn’t you be offended?
I am talking of the world views of skeptics in general.
But you don’t know the world views of skeptics in general.
Abortion is ok for them. And that is a morally depraved standpoint.
Untrue. As I said before, my brother is an evangelical Christian who disagrees with abortion, yet he is a skeptic. Again; you shouldn’t paint all skeptic views with the same broad brush
I just showed how evolution, and abortion are not following the golden rule.
The Golden Rule is a moral position and evolution is an explanation of how things work; one has nothing to do with the other. you might as well claim math or art is not following the Golden Rule. To accepts the moral position of the Golden Rule has nothing to do with their views on evolution (or math and art)
 
Upvote 0

Ken-1122

Newbie
Jan 30, 2011
13,574
1,792
✟233,210.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Just because a person is an atheist does not mean he agrees with the basic tenants of darwinism (whatever that means)
 
Upvote 0

Ken-1122

Newbie
Jan 30, 2011
13,574
1,792
✟233,210.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
In your above quote from Darwin, he doesn't even mention "survival of the fittest", so your argument fails. As you can see from the below link, the term was coined by Philosopher Herbert Spencer after reading Darwin's book.

Survival of the Fittest: Who Coined It, and When?
 
Upvote 0

VirOptimus

A nihilist who cares.
Aug 24, 2005
6,814
4,422
54
✟258,187.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married

Holy biased nonsense.

Learn to critique your sources.
 
Upvote 0

VirOptimus

A nihilist who cares.
Aug 24, 2005
6,814
4,422
54
✟258,187.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married

Darwinism isnt even a real term.

The ToE is incredibly well supported science. You want to argue against it, write an article for peer-review. If you cant your "view" dont matter at all.
 
Upvote 0

createdtoworship

In the grip of grace
Mar 13, 2004
18,941
1,758
West Coast USA
✟48,173.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
pratt is points refuted a thousand times, and excuse you me, your the one trying to insinuate that acceptance of evolution leads to racism, whose being rude and offensive now?
sorry sir, again you have to prove all assertions. And 'proving points a thousand times" can go both ways.
 
Upvote 0

createdtoworship

In the grip of grace
Mar 13, 2004
18,941
1,758
West Coast USA
✟48,173.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
photographs please, I don't rely on evidence of transitional forms unless I literally see the photographs. That should not be too hard is it? I mean how easy is it for a scientist to say something is a transitional form, but not actually have evidence? This is far too common. So evidence please, real evidence. Or peer review, I accept those too.
 
Upvote 0

VirOptimus

A nihilist who cares.
Aug 24, 2005
6,814
4,422
54
✟258,187.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married

No you dont.

If you did, then this "debate" wouldnt be had.
 
Upvote 0

createdtoworship

In the grip of grace
Mar 13, 2004
18,941
1,758
West Coast USA
✟48,173.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
A ad hominem is where you use a insult or a attack in the place of a argument. Your implying evolution is false because racists have used it, thats a fallacy.
where did I say this? I believe what I said was that darwin was a racist, and his darwinian ideas of "survival of the fittest" was used by racists in history to annihilate inferior races. I didn't say evolution was false because it was racist, I said darwinism was.
An attack on christianity of the same way would be to imply that Christianity was false because martin luther was a racist, or that hitler believed he was doing gods work.
Christianity is actually based on Christ. Not the adherents of martin luther. Evolution is based in part by it's founder, Darwin. So my point stands.
Again racism or not doesn't disprove evolution,
I am glad you admit darwin was racist, that is a start.
it's just ad hominem with a touch of poisoning the well and possibly a red herring fallacy, I will no longer respond to them as they have no berring on evolution being truth or not.
sir I believe at this point you should see the comment that started this discussion and reply to it:Is a skeptic missing the compassionate part of their being, while only focusing on logic?
 
Upvote 0

VirOptimus

A nihilist who cares.
Aug 24, 2005
6,814
4,422
54
✟258,187.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married

There is a science subfora if you want to discus the ToE.

The ToE has nothing to do with morals.
 
Upvote 0

createdtoworship

In the grip of grace
Mar 13, 2004
18,941
1,758
West Coast USA
✟48,173.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
No you dont.

If you did, then this "debate" wouldnt be had.

There is a science subfora if you want to discus the ToE.

The ToE has nothing to do with morals.

sir I have debated this topic since 2004. I have heard it all. No conclusive transitional links have been solidly proven. If you have one, lets hear it. If you don't have one, then don't say it's proven when it's not.
 
Upvote 0

VirOptimus

A nihilist who cares.
Aug 24, 2005
6,814
4,422
54
✟258,187.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
sir I have debated this topic since 2004. I have heard it all. No conclusive transitional links have been solidly proven. If you have one, lets hear it. If you don't have one, then don't say it's proven when it's not.

Science doesnt "prove" things. Thats for axiomatic systems like math.

Science is all about data and what can be supported by evidence.

This is off topic for this subfora, you want to debate the science visit that sub-fora.

And I'm not repsonsible for your education so I suggest a biology 101 if you want to cure your ignorance.
 
Upvote 0

createdtoworship

In the grip of grace
Mar 13, 2004
18,941
1,758
West Coast USA
✟48,173.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Science doesnt "prove" things. Thats for axiomatic systems like math.
not even gravity?
Science is all about data and what can be supported by evidence.
speaking of which you have provided none
This is off topic for this subfora, you want to debate the science visit that sub-fora.
I don't debate in those threads, I refuse too, because skeptics are too rude. However if you wish to message me your evidence you can, I presume this is just an excuse not to find your "one evidence of macro evolution."
And I'm not repsonsible for your education so I suggest a biology 101 if you want to cure your ignorance.
YES, thank you for proving the OP. Being rude is what a skeptic does. Again when a skeptic debates they remove themselves from feeling. And this in turn makes what you said ok to them. Even though it's goading.
 
Upvote 0

VirOptimus

A nihilist who cares.
Aug 24, 2005
6,814
4,422
54
✟258,187.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married

The theory of gravity, while wellsupported, is not ”proven” or even as wellsupported as the ToE.

Gravity is to the theory of gravity as evolution is to the theory of evolution.

Your whining about rudeness, although hilarious, does not impress.
 
Upvote 0

Gene2memE

Newbie
Oct 22, 2013
4,623
7,156
✟339,591.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
not even gravity?

Nope.

There is the Theory of General Relativity, which describes gravity.
There is also Quantum Mechanics, which describes gravity.

Unfortunately, these two descriptions of gravity are incompatible with each other.

A unified theory, which did what both the above does PLUS describe gravity accurately, could therefore replace both.

speaking of which you have provided none

Could you provide criteria by which you would consider a species a transitional one?

I don't debate in those threads, I refuse too, because skeptics are too rude.

I have detected arbitrary skepticism, and rudeness, in this thread.

Being rude is what a skeptic does. Again when a skeptic debates they remove themselves from feeling. And this in turn makes what you said ok to them. Even though it's goading.

Nope, that's just your re-definition of what a skeptic is.

A skeptic is someone who expresses doubt about a claim and applies the tools of logic to assess its veracity against the evidence available. As a general rule, the more out of the ordinary the claim, the higher the degree of doubt and the higher the evidentiary bar needed to get over before a claim is accepted.

If someone claimed they had a $10 note in their pocket, that would be a totally mundane claim and could probably be accepted at face value.
If someone claimed they had a genuine 1804 silver dollar in their pocket, that would be an extraordinary claim that would require extremely high levels of evidentiary support;

As David Hume tells us: “A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence”. That, quintessentially, is what skepticism is.
 
Reactions: VirOptimus
Upvote 0

Yttrium

Mad Scientist
May 19, 2019
4,477
4,967
Pacific NW
✟306,116.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
Single
I said "regarding such manners." I didn't say you were, I don't know anything about your views personally, I am talking of the world views of skeptics in general.

Well, when you include all skeptics, that includes me. It's best not to generalize too much, I think.

Abortion is ok for them. And that is a morally depraved standpoint.

I understand your position on that, and I sympathize. It's a very heated topic, though, and one could get endlessly sidetracked on it. Let me just say that compassion also applies to women who may be in very difficult positions. If presented with a woman who is engaged in casual sex with a number of men, gets pregnant, and wants an abortion out of convenience, my use of the Golden Rule does not support her. If presented with a 13-year-old girl who was raped and is emotionally distraught, and can't bear to go through with the pregnancy, my compassion will favor her over a fetus that doesn't have a functioning brain yet.

My use of the Golden Rule forces me to consider the problems that the women are facing. Ignoring their situations can show a lack of compassion that bothers me greatly.

how does the golden rule apply to abortion, or hitler's use of the "survival of the fittest" to kill millions of jews.

The Golden Rule is directly opposed to Hitler's killing of the Jews. Obviously.

I just showed how evolution, and abortion are not following the golden rule.

Evolution is part of science. It has nothing to do with the Golden Rule. Hitler's moronic rationale on racism is not supported or excused by the science of evolution.

Or course, being a skeptic and all, I remain skeptical of the Theory of Evolution, although I do consider it to be a very sound theory.
 
Upvote 0

loveofourlord

Newbie
Feb 15, 2014
9,086
5,054
✟322,029.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private

thats not how science or anything works, your basicly destroying the entire concept of most of science, the bible and forensics.
 
Upvote 0

loveofourlord

Newbie
Feb 15, 2014
9,086
5,054
✟322,029.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private

Darwin by our standards was a racist, but he was very progressive for his time as most people back then were far worse, including many Christians. So your poining out racists has NOTHING TO DO WITH EVOLUTION, and darwanism, as close as there is to such a thing includes all of evolution, where is the racism in the idea that we all evolved from apes, ALL evolved, and while darwin started evolution we since have better understanding of it and how it all works. We don't rely on his beliefs in evolutin racist or not, modern evolution has little to do with what darwiwn thought was right or wrong.
 
Upvote 0

Ken-1122

Newbie
Jan 30, 2011
13,574
1,792
✟233,210.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Christianity is actually based on Christ. Not the adherents of martin luther. Evolution is based in part by it's founder, Darwin. So my point stands.
First of all, Darwin was not the founder of evolution, (people were observing it long before Darwin published it for peer review) he was just the one who wrote about it.

Second; just as Christianity is based on Christ not the adherents of Martin Luther, Evolution is based on observation not the adherents of Charles Darwin. So your argument fails.
 
Upvote 0