God does exist. Itelligent design in the Universe is prof of God.

[Blues Man]

Right and wrong are value judgements and you are conflating a discussion regarding morals with the state of the physical world.

That is an absolute statement too. Which shows you believe in an absolute truth.

Wrong again.

Human thoughts and behaviors have nothing to do with the state of the physical world.

 

[ding]

The only reality that matters is the one we can perceive. There very well may be other universes but we don't know that.

That's another absolute statement. Reality does not mean universe. Reality means the world or the state of things as they actually exist, as opposed to an idealistic or notional idea of them. Yes, there very well may be other universes. That uncertainty is reality.

And you are still conflating the concept of morals and human behavior with the physical state of things..

I'm not. I am showing you reality. Your perception of reality is that you do not believe in an absolute truth or absolute morals. The reality is that you argue like you do believe in absolute truth because you keep making absolute statements that you expect others to accept as the truth.

The 2 are not related.

Absolute truth and absolute morals are related because they are independent of what man wants them to be. You want there to be no absolute truth. You want there to be no absolute morality. But truth is reality and morals are absolute because they are based upon logic which is absolute.

And you need to prove that I said everyone should believe as I do. Find the quote and post it here. If you can't find a quote then you are simply making shit up.

I am not arguing that you are telling everyone to do as you do. I am arguing that you are making absolute statements with the expectation that everyone should accept them as the absolute truth. Thus proving that you do not behave as if you believe in relative truth.

You tell me I'm wrong and yet I don't claim you are telling me what I should think.

That doesn't make any sense I think you are getting frustrated because I am not accepting what you are arguing as the absolute truth. What I am telling you is that you are making absolute statements with the expectation that everyone should accept them as the absolute truth. Thus proving that you do not behave as if you believe in relative truth.

Everything I post are my opinions and mine alone I refer to my choices and mine alone. I don't know how many times I have to tell you thaat I do not give a single **** if you agree with me or not before it penetrates your thick skull

If that were true you would have stopped arguing about this long ago.

 

[Blues Man]

The only reality that matters is the one we can perceive. There very well may be other universes but we don't know that.

That's another absolute statement. Reality does not mean universe. Reality means the world or the state of things as they actually exist, as opposed to an idealistic or notional idea of them. Yes, there very well may be other universes. That uncertainty is reality.

And you are still conflating the concept of morals and human behavior with the physical state of things..

I'm not. I am showing you reality. Your perception of reality is that you do not believe in an absolute truth or absolute morals. The reality is that you argue like you do believe in absolute truth because you keep making absolute statements that you expect others to accept as the truth.

The 2 are not related.

Absolute truth and absolute morals are related because they are independent of what man wants them to be. You want there to be no absolute truth. You want there to be no absolute morality. But truth is reality and morals are absolute because they are based upon logic which is absolute.

And you need to prove that I said everyone should believe as I do. Find the quote and post it here. If you can't find a quote then you are simply making shit up.

I am not arguing that you are telling everyone to do as you do. I am arguing that you are making absolute statements with the expectation that everyone should accept them as the absolute truth. Thus proving that you do not behave as if you believe in relative truth.

You tell me I'm wrong and yet I don't claim you are telling me what I should think.

That doesn't make any sense I think you are getting frustrated because I am not accepting what you are arguing as the absolute truth. What I am telling you is that you are making absolute statements with the expectation that everyone should accept them as the absolute truth. Thus proving that you do not behave as if you believe in relative truth.

Everything I post are my opinions and mine alone I refer to my choices and mine alone. I don't know how many times I have to tell you thaat I do not give a single **** if you agree with me or not before it penetrates your thick skull

If that were true you would have stopped arguing about this long ago.

I have no expectations of other people period. I've told you this before as well.

And if I were to use your convoluted thinking then I could say that you are trying to tell me what I should believe because you disagree with me.

But I'm not so immature to assume that.

 

[ding]

Right and wrong are value judgements and you are conflating a discussion regarding morals with the state of the physical world.

That is an absolute statement too. Which shows you believe in an absolute truth.

Wrong again.

Human thoughts and behaviors have nothing to do with the state of the physical world.

That too is an absolute statement. It seems you can't avoid believing in absolute truths even if your absolute truths are perceptions of truth.

The state of the physical world - whatever that means - has nothing to do with moral standards. Moral standards exist for logical reasons.

 

[ding]

The only reality that matters is the one we can perceive. There very well may be other universes but we don't know that.

That's another absolute statement. Reality does not mean universe. Reality means the world or the state of things as they actually exist, as opposed to an idealistic or notional idea of them. Yes, there very well may be other universes. That uncertainty is reality.

And you are still conflating the concept of morals and human behavior with the physical state of things..

I'm not. I am showing you reality. Your perception of reality is that you do not believe in an absolute truth or absolute morals. The reality is that you argue like you do believe in absolute truth because you keep making absolute statements that you expect others to accept as the truth.

The 2 are not related.

Absolute truth and absolute morals are related because they are independent of what man wants them to be. You want there to be no absolute truth. You want there to be no absolute morality. But truth is reality and morals are absolute because they are based upon logic which is absolute.

And you need to prove that I said everyone should believe as I do. Find the quote and post it here. If you can't find a quote then you are simply making shit up.

I am not arguing that you are telling everyone to do as you do. I am arguing that you are making absolute statements with the expectation that everyone should accept them as the absolute truth. Thus proving that you do not behave as if you believe in relative truth.

You tell me I'm wrong and yet I don't claim you are telling me what I should think.

That doesn't make any sense I think you are getting frustrated because I am not accepting what you are arguing as the absolute truth. What I am telling you is that you are making absolute statements with the expectation that everyone should accept them as the absolute truth. Thus proving that you do not behave as if you believe in relative truth.

Everything I post are my opinions and mine alone I refer to my choices and mine alone. I don't know how many times I have to tell you thaat I do not give a single **** if you agree with me or not before it penetrates your thick skull

If that were true you would have stopped arguing about this long ago.

I have no expectations of other people period. I've told you this before as well.

And if I were to use your convoluted thinking then I could say that you are trying to tell me what I should believe because you disagree with me.

But I'm not so immature to assume that.

That too is an absolute statement. Your perception of reality is that you are not trying to convince me. But if you truly had no expectation for me to believe as you do, you would have stopped trying to convince me long ago. So the reality is that you are trying to convince me. You don't even realize you have that expectation. Just like you don't realize that your making absolute statements belies your perception of reality that you don't believe in absolutes.

 

[Blues Man]

Right and wrong are value judgements and you are conflating a discussion regarding morals with the state of the physical world.

That is an absolute statement too. Which shows you believe in an absolute truth.

Wrong again.

Human thoughts and behaviors have nothing to do with the state of the physical world.

That too is an absolute statement. It seems you can't avoid believing in absolute truths even if your absolute truths are perceptions of truth.

The state of the physical world - whatever that means - has nothing to do with moral standards. Moral standards exist for logical reasons.

And I have demonstrated to you multiple times that there are no moral standards because we have different standards for many behaviors.

Do we have to go over the fact that we as a society do not think killing another human being is always unacceptable? If killing another human is acceptable sometimes there can be no moral standard.

 

[Blues Man]

The only reality that matters is the one we can perceive. There very well may be other universes but we don't know that.

That's another absolute statement. Reality does not mean universe. Reality means the world or the state of things as they actually exist, as opposed to an idealistic or notional idea of them. Yes, there very well may be other universes. That uncertainty is reality.

And you are still conflating the concept of morals and human behavior with the physical state of things..

I'm not. I am showing you reality. Your perception of reality is that you do not believe in an absolute truth or absolute morals. The reality is that you argue like you do believe in absolute truth because you keep making absolute statements that you expect others to accept as the truth.

The 2 are not related.

Absolute truth and absolute morals are related because they are independent of what man wants them to be. You want there to be no absolute truth. You want there to be no absolute morality. But truth is reality and morals are absolute because they are based upon logic which is absolute.

And you need to prove that I said everyone should believe as I do. Find the quote and post it here. If you can't find a quote then you are simply making shit up.

I am not arguing that you are telling everyone to do as you do. I am arguing that you are making absolute statements with the expectation that everyone should accept them as the absolute truth. Thus proving that you do not behave as if you believe in relative truth.

You tell me I'm wrong and yet I don't claim you are telling me what I should think.

That doesn't make any sense I think you are getting frustrated because I am not accepting what you are arguing as the absolute truth. What I am telling you is that you are making absolute statements with the expectation that everyone should accept them as the absolute truth. Thus proving that you do not behave as if you believe in relative truth.

Everything I post are my opinions and mine alone I refer to my choices and mine alone. I don't know how many times I have to tell you thaat I do not give a single **** if you agree with me or not before it penetrates your thick skull

If that were true you would have stopped arguing about this long ago.

I have no expectations of other people period. I've told you this before as well.

And if I were to use your convoluted thinking then I could say that you are trying to tell me what I should believe because you disagree with me.

But I'm not so immature to assume that.

That too is an absolute statement. Your perception of reality is that you are not trying to convince me. But if you truly had no expectation for me to believe as you do, you would have stopped trying to convince me long ago. So the reality is that you are trying to convince me. You don't even realize you have that expectation. Just like you don't realize that your making absolute statements belies your perception of reality that you don't believe in absolutes.

I'm not trying to convince you. I am disagreeing with you. I don not care if you agree with what I am saying or not.

And no i do not believe in the absolute moral code you say exists. That has nothing to do the fact that there are absolutes in the physical world like the speed of light for example

 

[ding]

The only reality that matters is the one we can perceive. There very well may be other universes but we don't know that.

That's another absolute statement. Reality does not mean universe. Reality means the world or the state of things as they actually exist, as opposed to an idealistic or notional idea of them. Yes, there very well may be other universes. That uncertainty is reality.

And you are still conflating the concept of morals and human behavior with the physical state of things..

I'm not. I am showing you reality. Your perception of reality is that you do not believe in an absolute truth or absolute morals. The reality is that you argue like you do believe in absolute truth because you keep making absolute statements that you expect others to accept as the truth.

The 2 are not related.

Absolute truth and absolute morals are related because they are independent of what man wants them to be. You want there to be no absolute truth. You want there to be no absolute morality. But truth is reality and morals are absolute because they are based upon logic which is absolute.

And you need to prove that I said everyone should believe as I do. Find the quote and post it here. If you can't find a quote then you are simply making shit up.

I am not arguing that you are telling everyone to do as you do. I am arguing that you are making absolute statements with the expectation that everyone should accept them as the absolute truth. Thus proving that you do not behave as if you believe in relative truth.

You tell me I'm wrong and yet I don't claim you are telling me what I should think.

That doesn't make any sense I think you are getting frustrated because I am not accepting what you are arguing as the absolute truth. What I am telling you is that you are making absolute statements with the expectation that everyone should accept them as the absolute truth. Thus proving that you do not behave as if you believe in relative truth.

Everything I post are my opinions and mine alone I refer to my choices and mine alone. I don't know how many times I have to tell you thaat I do not give a single **** if you agree with me or not before it penetrates your thick skull

If that were true you would have stopped arguing about this long ago.

I have no expectations of other people period. I've told you this before as well.

And if I were to use your convoluted thinking then I could say that you are trying to tell me what I should believe because you disagree with me.

But I'm not so immature to assume that.

That too is an absolute statement. Your perception of reality is that you are not trying to convince me. But if you truly had no expectation for me to believe as you do, you would have stopped trying to convince me long ago. So the reality is that you are trying to convince me. You don't even realize you have that expectation. Just like you don't realize that your making absolute statements belies your perception of reality that you don't believe in absolutes.

I'm not trying to convince you. I am disagreeing with you. I don not care if you agree with what I am saying or not.

And no i do not believe in the absolute moral code you say exists. That has nothing to do the fact that there are absolutes in the physical world like the speed of light for example

So you are disagreeing with me because you believe that there is an absolute truth? I win again.

 

[ding]

Right and wrong are value judgements and you are conflating a discussion regarding morals with the state of the physical world.

That is an absolute statement too. Which shows you believe in an absolute truth.

Wrong again.

Human thoughts and behaviors have nothing to do with the state of the physical world.

That too is an absolute statement. It seems you can't avoid believing in absolute truths even if your absolute truths are perceptions of truth.

The state of the physical world - whatever that means - has nothing to do with moral standards. Moral standards exist for logical reasons.

And I have demonstrated to you multiple times that there are no moral standards because we have different standards for many behaviors.

Do we have to go over the fact that we as a society do not think killing another human being is always unacceptable? If killing another human is acceptable sometimes there can be no moral standard.

And I have explained to you that even then there were people who disagreed. So unless you are willing to admit that it's OK to own human beings and dispose of them like property or to have sex with young children, I win again.

 

[Blues Man]

Right and wrong are value judgements and you are conflating a discussion regarding morals with the state of the physical world.

That is an absolute statement too. Which shows you believe in an absolute truth.

Wrong again.

Human thoughts and behaviors have nothing to do with the state of the physical world.

That too is an absolute statement. It seems you can't avoid believing in absolute truths even if your absolute truths are perceptions of truth.

The state of the physical world - whatever that means - has nothing to do with moral standards. Moral standards exist for logical reasons.

And I have demonstrated to you multiple times that there are no moral standards because we have different standards for many behaviors.

Do we have to go over the fact that we as a society do not think killing another human being is always unacceptable? If killing another human is acceptable sometimes there can be no moral standard.

And I have explained to you that even then there were people who disagreed. So unless you are willing to admit that it's OK to own human beings and dispose of them like property or to have sex with young children, I win again.

You have some need to feel like you win don't you? That's kind of sad that you think you have to claim victory on an anonymous message board.

And just because i think some behaviors are unacceptable doesn't mean everyone does.

I'm not arrogant enough to think my thoughts and opinions constitute some absolute law as you seem to.

So no i don't condone the abuse of children or slavery. But I am not the absolute authority on these matters and neither are you

 

[ding]

You have some need to feel like you win don't you? That's kind of sad that you think you have to claim victory on an anonymous message board.

Reality is defined as the world or the state of things as they actually exist, as opposed to an idealistic or notional idea of them. So seeing reality instead of perception of reality is indeed winning as there can only be one correct view which is known as reality.

And just because i think some behaviors are unacceptable doesn't mean everyone does.

Doesn't matter how many people believe it. It only matters what logic determines to be the objective truth. There is only one objective truth. Objective truth is the final state of fact. Once discovered it will be known that objective truth was always that way and will always be that way even if others don't believe it.

I'm not arrogant enough to think my thoughts and opinions constitute some absolute law as you seem to.

That's incorrect. It's not me that determines anything. It is logic which determines objective truth which is also known as reality. Standards exist for logical reasons so people can choose any standard they like but only the correct standard won't have negative consequences. I am not arguing that I know better. I am arguing that logic knows better.

So no i don't condone the abuse of children or slavery. But I am not the absolute authority on these matters and neither are you

Correct. Logic is. Logic determines the standard. Anything less will lead to predictable surprises because standards exist for logical reasons.

 

[ding]

You think you're right

I think I'm correct

I guess we're done

I guess you were wrong.

 

[Taz]

You have some need to feel like you win don't you? That's kind of sad that you think you have to claim victory on an anonymous message board.

Reality is defined as the world or the state of things as they actually exist, as opposed to an idealistic or notional idea of them. So seeing reality instead of perception of reality is indeed winning as there can only be one correct view which is known as reality.

And just because i think some behaviors are unacceptable doesn't mean everyone does.

Doesn't matter how many people believe it. It only matters what logic determines to be the objective truth. There is only one objective truth. Objective truth is the final state of fact. Once discovered it will be known that objective truth was always that way and will always be that way even if others don't believe it.

I'm not arrogant enough to think my thoughts and opinions constitute some absolute law as you seem to.

That's incorrect. It's not me that determines anything. It is logic which determines objective truth which is also known as reality. Standards exist for logical reasons so people can choose any standard they like but only the correct standard won't have negative consequences. I am not arguing that I know better. I am arguing that logic knows better.

So no i don't condone the abuse of children or slavery. But I am not the absolute authority on these matters and neither are you

Correct. Logic is. Logic determines the standard. Anything less will lead to predictable surprises because standards exist for logical reasons.

The dude's right, you feel a need to feel like you've proven something to everyone and to lord it over them. You have proven something, but it's that you're a pompous jackass.

 

[ding]

You have some need to feel like you win don't you? That's kind of sad that you think you have to claim victory on an anonymous message board.

Reality is defined as the world or the state of things as they actually exist, as opposed to an idealistic or notional idea of them. So seeing reality instead of perception of reality is indeed winning as there can only be one correct view which is known as reality.

And just because i think some behaviors are unacceptable doesn't mean everyone does.

Doesn't matter how many people believe it. It only matters what logic determines to be the objective truth. There is only one objective truth. Objective truth is the final state of fact. Once discovered it will be known that objective truth was always that way and will always be that way even if others don't believe it.

I'm not arrogant enough to think my thoughts and opinions constitute some absolute law as you seem to.

That's incorrect. It's not me that determines anything. It is logic which determines objective truth which is also known as reality. Standards exist for logical reasons so people can choose any standard they like but only the correct standard won't have negative consequences. I am not arguing that I know better. I am arguing that logic knows better.

So no i don't condone the abuse of children or slavery. But I am not the absolute authority on these matters and neither are you

Correct. Logic is. Logic determines the standard. Anything less will lead to predictable surprises because standards exist for logical reasons.

The dude's right, you feel a need to feel like you've proven something to everyone and to lord it over them. You have proven something, but it's that you're a pompous jackass.

Sometimes I am. But it's hellaironic that you of all people would accuse anyone of that, Taz.

 

[Blues Man]

You have some need to feel like you win don't you? That's kind of sad that you think you have to claim victory on an anonymous message board.

Reality is defined as the world or the state of things as they actually exist, as opposed to an idealistic or notional idea of them. So seeing reality instead of perception of reality is indeed winning as there can only be one correct view which is known as reality.

And just because i think some behaviors are unacceptable doesn't mean everyone does.

Doesn't matter how many people believe it. It only matters what logic determines to be the objective truth. There is only one objective truth. Objective truth is the final state of fact. Once discovered it will be known that objective truth was always that way and will always be that way even if others don't believe it.

I'm not arrogant enough to think my thoughts and opinions constitute some absolute law as you seem to.

That's incorrect. It's not me that determines anything. It is logic which determines objective truth which is also known as reality. Standards exist for logical reasons so people can choose any standard they like but only the correct standard won't have negative consequences. I am not arguing that I know better. I am arguing that logic knows better.

So no i don't condone the abuse of children or slavery. But I am not the absolute authority on these matters and neither are you

Correct. Logic is. Logic determines the standard. Anything less will lead to predictable surprises because standards exist for logical reasons.

Your idea of universal code of morality is idealistic and divorced from reality.

If something is universal then it applies to all and like I said we have decided that there are times when a behavior is both acceptable and unacceptable relative to the situation.

That one fact alone disproves the idea of some universal code of morals

 

[Blues Man]

You have some need to feel like you win don't you? That's kind of sad that you think you have to claim victory on an anonymous message board.

Reality is defined as the world or the state of things as they actually exist, as opposed to an idealistic or notional idea of them. So seeing reality instead of perception of reality is indeed winning as there can only be one correct view which is known as reality.

And just because i think some behaviors are unacceptable doesn't mean everyone does.

Doesn't matter how many people believe it. It only matters what logic determines to be the objective truth. There is only one objective truth. Objective truth is the final state of fact. Once discovered it will be known that objective truth was always that way and will always be that way even if others don't believe it.

I'm not arrogant enough to think my thoughts and opinions constitute some absolute law as you seem to.

That's incorrect. It's not me that determines anything. It is logic which determines objective truth which is also known as reality. Standards exist for logical reasons so people can choose any standard they like but only the correct standard won't have negative consequences. I am not arguing that I know better. I am arguing that logic knows better.

So no i don't condone the abuse of children or slavery. But I am not the absolute authority on these matters and neither are you

Correct. Logic is. Logic determines the standard. Anything less will lead to predictable surprises because standards exist for logical reasons.

Since there are still people in bondage and children still are abused it seems that not all humans have the same access to your universal code of morals therefore it isn't universal

 

[ChemEngineer]

“In a new Newsweek poll, 78 percent of Americans believe Jesus rose from the dead; 75 percent say that he was sent to Earth to absolve mankind of its sins. Eighty-one percent say they are Christians... the world’s largest faith with 2 billion believers...” – Newsweek, March 28, 2005, Page 43


“For the religious, the lesson is that those closest to Jesus accepted little blindly, and, in the words of Origen of Alexandria, an early church father, ‘It is far better to accept teachings with reason and wisdom than with mere faith.’ For the secular, the reminder that Christianity is the product of two millennia of creative intellectual thought and innovation, a blend of history and considered theological debate, should slow the occasional rush to dismiss the faithful as superstitious or simple.” – Newsweek Magazine, March 28, 2005, page 44

 

[ChemEngineer]

Believers really are sincere in their superstitious beliefs.

Atheists like you are really sincere in your baseless, cynical beliefs that nothing made everything and it just turned out peachy. Magic.

A Matter of Gravity by Professor John Lennox

 

[Donald H]

Believers really are sincere in their superstitious beliefs.

Atheists like you are really sincere in your baseless, cynical beliefs that nothing made everything and it just turned out peachy. Magic.
A Matter of Gravity by Professor John Lennox

If you're actually a Chemical Engineer then your comments are of interest to me. You are of above average intelligence and you are a believer.

My explanation on how that can be is that childhood indoctrination into Christianity is so powerful a factor that it can't be escaped by many.

That's not intended as an insult, even though it must be insulting to you. It is out of necessity for carrying on a conversation on the topic.

I won't listen to an hour long lecture by the professor because I know it will all end in erroneous conclusions, but I am interested in your thumbnail analysis of his thesis.

 

[ding]

You have some need to feel like you win don't you? That's kind of sad that you think you have to claim victory on an anonymous message board.

Reality is defined as the world or the state of things as they actually exist, as opposed to an idealistic or notional idea of them. So seeing reality instead of perception of reality is indeed winning as there can only be one correct view which is known as reality.

And just because i think some behaviors are unacceptable doesn't mean everyone does.

Doesn't matter how many people believe it. It only matters what logic determines to be the objective truth. There is only one objective truth. Objective truth is the final state of fact. Once discovered it will be known that objective truth was always that way and will always be that way even if others don't believe it.

I'm not arrogant enough to think my thoughts and opinions constitute some absolute law as you seem to.

That's incorrect. It's not me that determines anything. It is logic which determines objective truth which is also known as reality. Standards exist for logical reasons so people can choose any standard they like but only the correct standard won't have negative consequences. I am not arguing that I know better. I am arguing that logic knows better.

So no i don't condone the abuse of children or slavery. But I am not the absolute authority on these matters and neither are you

Correct. Logic is. Logic determines the standard. Anything less will lead to predictable surprises because standards exist for logical reasons.

Since there are still people in bondage and children still are abused it seems that not all humans have the same access to your universal code of morals therefore it isn't universal

Again... that's because of subjectivity. Which I have already explained to you before.