Why do you believe that there is a god?

[|A-Man|]

Son asking about the other scientists around the world after enlarging the part that says the AAAS is the largest community of scientists on the planet as if there's another statistic that accounts for all scientists on the planet that was purposely ignored

Son don't even know how the sun operates. "rise and sets"

The sun is *#%@%** stationary. What question are you really asking? If the Earth stops rotating on it's axis and stops rotating around the sun? Google gravity man.

Couldn't help myself.

 

[blackxme]

You can't be expected to be taken seriously when you say things like that. And this isn't me being arrogant or thinking I'm right about everything but you seem to lack some basic knowledge
about science. You sound like Bill O'Reilly.

 

[pleasurephd]

Originally Posted by bboy1827


http://withalliamgod.word.../galileo-galilei-on-god/

http://www.icr.org/article/newton/

http://www.blupete.com/Li...s/Science/Copernicus.htm

Just a Quick Google Search. As far as Newton, I disagree with you on that note that Einstein is a continuation of Newton. There is no "objective" knowledge, that would be what "God" knows. I can't argue with you guys, because you guys are always "right" as opposed to actually learning and thinking about things. My whole point with science, which had nothing to do with proving/disproving God, A) History is littered with "failed" scientfic theories, World used to be flat, Evolution is still a theory, in fact every facet of science is a theory. B) Science, at it's beginning was seen at as seeking Proof for God, I've read a lot about this. Almost all Scientist were "Christians" People try to say "They said that because they didn't want to get prosecuted" But in some of their personal memoirs they always acknowledged God. I question, theorize and argue even the most certain absolutes, as did these great scientists/philosophers


You guys can be right, about the nature of Science. Honestly your "rightness" doesn't answer any questions I present. A) where did we come from, by we I mean every living thing in the Galaxy. B) Why does the sun have to raise and set everyday? Isn't it conceivable that one day the sun didn't "rise and set"?

As for the Ancients methodology and research methods, you do realize that that some of the theories that they believed we still hold true today, so I would def stop #@*!$!#@ on their "tech" and "methodology"

#KanyeShrugs

And just Caught this "I think therefore I am" is actually a Cartesian Idea, i.e Renee Descartes idea, not Kant. Cogito Ergo Sum.....Kant wrote in German Descartes wrote in Latin. PleasurePhd I think you need to calm down a little, specially being wrong.

I pray that some lurkers are checking my facts, because the dudes I argue with are clearly not

RESPOND to my other posts! Or do you realize you have no argument against what I have stated?

Again, those links show nothing. Religious scientists have been addressed multiple times in this thread.

How are we always right? We are not defending any of our work or information. We are just stating facts that disprove your arguments. We have even stated that scientist have been wrong.

HISTORY  is filled with failed theories (which are actually hypotheses) because they didn't test or their testing was limited to proving their hypotheses right.

WHAT ABSOLUTES ARE YOU SPEAKING OF; YOU STILL HAVE NOT ANSWERED THIS QUESTION.

OMG stop posting philosophical BS that you discuss in your PHIL 101 class. Freaking sun might not set one day, who's to say it doesn't? DUMB *** question. However we can tell you why it sets and rises though.

"As for the Ancients methodology and research methods, you do realize that that some of the theories that they believed we still hold true today, so I would def stop #@*!$!#@ on their "tech" and "methodology"

Who's *%@#%%+# on their "tech" and "methodologies"? I am merely stating the fact that it wasn't the same as ours. NOT that it was bad. Since it was different you can't equate the 2 when posting on philosophical opinions on them. Thank you for proving OUR point and stating that science theories do last though generations and therefore can be reliable.

My bad on the Kant thing. See I can admit I was wrong. Got too heated and wasn't thinking. You are 100% right is was Descartes. So what? That's one point that I confused, someone's name. DOESN'T INVALIDATE MY POINT ABOUT YOU THINKING YOU DROPPING KNOWLEDGE ON ELEMENTARY PHILOSOPHY IDEAS. Do you really think that my point was to bring up Kant and his writings VS. Descartes? Or that accidentally confusing the names of two modern philosophers invalidates any of the other information I have posted including the one that I made the mistake in?

 

[bboy1827]

Lol I'm here to question and direct.

http://www.sparknotes.com.../problems/section6.rhtml -ATGD7 etc.

http://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com/ - Black


These were two min. Google Searched, if you are really interested I could give you somethings to read....but people don't read so here is just a quick google search of the two.

The Absolutes I speak of are "The sun "rising" The fact that I am actually sitting on this computer typing. The fact that you are actually an other person and not a computer program meant to trick me. The fact that anyone beyond me actually exists. The "absolute truths.' A


 Honestly, Thought "absolutes" and "absolute truth" were terms that almost all "Philosophers" understood, as they are the basic ideas in the Mind V Body Debate

 

[blackxme]

Thank you for providing a link, I'll read it and come back with a response later. 

 

[pleasurephd]

And just Caught this "I think therefore I am" is actually a Cartesian Idea, i.e Renee Descartes idea, not Kant. Cogito Ergo Sum.....Kant wrote in German Descartes wrote in Latin. PleasurePhd I think you need to calm down a little, specially being wrong.

Name one thing that I have been wrong about, beside accidentally making the mistake of confusing two modern philosophers names.

Another question, with all your studies in, and ranting of philosophy, can you name me one thing that you have contributed to our society?

Or is it all pointless BS that people can talk about without knowledge in phil and a blunt in their hand?

 

[sircharles]

I know God exists because that is the only way to explain all the great things that have happened in my life.

 

[antonlavey]

Originally Posted by SirCharles

I know God exists because that is the only way to explain all the great things that have happened in my life.

What explains the bad things that happen in a lot of people's lives? The devil? What about people who pray to your God and may be better humans than you are? Lemme guess, God is testing them right?

 

[bboy1827]

Originally Posted by PleasurePhD

And just Caught this "I think therefore I am" is actually a Cartesian Idea, i.e Renee Descartes idea, not Kant. Cogito Ergo Sum.....Kant wrote in German Descartes wrote in Latin. PleasurePhd I think you need to calm down a little, specially being wrong.

Name one thing that I have been wrong about, beside accidentally making the mistake of confusing two modern philosophers names.

Another question, with all your studies in, and ranting of philosophy, can you name me one thing that you have contributed to our society?

Or is it all pointless BS that people can talk about without knowledge in phil and a blunt in their hand?



Well...because of my Philosophies on life anyone that has ever meet me can tell you that I am a very nice person that attempts to help everyone that ever comes into contact with me, and trust me I have helped a lot of people (Philosophy of Morality). I mean I volunteer, work with kids help them get through the hardships of growing up nowadays. Signed up to Join the Military (Social Political Philosophical ideals).  Umm other than that, I haven't really contributed anything to society, then again I'm 22

but one day.

Political Philosophy i.e Republican V Democrat, Idealist V Realist etc. is where Philosophy holds merit. And if you were asking about what Philosophy has contributed to society, Directly Thomas Jefferson was a Philosopher, so were Montesquieu and Rousseau, all three of whom designed America Jefferson directly Montesquieu and Rousseau through Jefferson.

 

[so nyuh shi dae]

Originally Posted by bboy1827

I can't argue with you guys, because you guys are always "right" as opposed to actually learning and thinking about things.

The problem is that you say things like this

Originally Posted by bboy1827

My whole point with science, which had nothing to do with proving/disproving God, A) History is littered with "failed" scientfic theories, World used to be flat, Evolution is still a theory, in fact every facet of science is a theory.

that make it very clear that you have no idea what you're talking about.

 

[pleasurephd]

Originally Posted by bboy1827

Lol I'm here to question and direct.

http://www.sparknotes.com.../problems/section6.rhtml -ATGD7 etc.

http://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com/ - Black


These were two min. Google Searched, if you are really interested I could give you somethings to read....but people don't read so here is just a quick google search of the two.

The Absolutes I speak of are "The sun "rising" The fact that I am actually sitting on this computer typing. The fact that you are actually an other person and not a computer program meant to trick me. The fact that anyone beyond me actually exists. The "absolute truths.' A


 Honestly, Thought "absolutes" and "absolute truth" were terms that almost all "Philosophers" understood, as they are the basic ideas in the Mind V Body Debate

READ your own links before you post. That Darwin link is full of crap. Again, although he is the Father of evolution he lived in a time where his theories couldn't be tested, and therefore he made statements like those listed in your link.

Again, posting links to sites that have no credible sources. Darwin's notes do not count. He was limited in his capability to test his hypotheses.

We see thousands of DNA sequences, "organs", and proteins that have been evolutionarily passed on to humans from simpler species. Look up bioinformatics. Simplistic nervous systems found in C. Elegans for example.

Have you heard of speciation? If not look it up. Basically, the same species of animal can be split into 2 groups and one moved to another location with different climate, terrain, etc... and over time they evolve to become a totally different species. They are so different they can't even breed together anymore or when they do breed their offspring is infertile or genetically messed up.

It's funny that they bring up microbes because they are one of the easiest living organisms to manipulate with molecular biology and so being that, one of the easiest to prove evolution with. Their growth is logarithmic, and so you can grow many generations in a short amount of time, like pressing fast forward on one of the larger more complex Kingdoms, such as: Animalia or Plantae. So evolution can basically be witnessed before your eyes.

THESE ABSOLUTE TRUTHS ARE ONLY CALLED SO IN YOUR FIELD. NO SCIENTIST THINKS THAT ANYTHING IS ABSOLUTE. THAT'S WHY WE HAVE HYPOTHESES AND THEN THEORIES. And you are asking about things scientists never stated. So how is this relevant to when I asked about ABSOLUTES THAT SCIENTISTS HAVE CLAIMED?

YES, PHILOSOPHERS DISCUSS ABSOLUTES NOT SCIENTISTS. YOU PROVED YOUR OWN ARGUMENT AND POINT INVALID AGAIN.

 

[sillyputty]

Goddamn its hilarious that NONE of these arguments even remotely legitimate

This dude took super basic biology and knows EVERYTHING.

 

[jaysrcrak]

bboy1827, you already said it. There is no point arguing. You will be going around in circles forever with these dudes.
It doesnt matter how much knowledge or expertise you have it will never be acknowledged in this thread. So save your breath.
There is only one ultimate truth on this subject(Is there or isnt there a God), and the fact is that none of us knows, beyond a shadow of a doubt what that is.
Not scientists, not athiests, not believers, not you, not me, and not them.

 

[bboy1827]

I don't get it? My comment was with science in general and it's fallibility, specifically commenting on the idea that science is this end all be all of knowledge; I was not attempting to prove or disprove God. History is littered with "failed" theories i.e sun around the earth, Atoms being the smallest thing in the universe etc.

My point is that science is not the end all be all for knowledge, to take it further, it's not even reliable "knowledge." I'm a classical skeptic in the same manner as Hume and Descartes when it comes to Epistomology.

As far as God, I think Philosophers have come up with some pretty good arguments for the existence of God, better than those in any religious text that I have read.

As far as knowledge, the only one reliable piece of knowledge to me is "Cogito Ergo Sum" "I think therefore I am" and even Berkley has a reasonably convincing argument against that, so I'm not even 100% on that, will require further thought and analysis.

And as I said, didn't mean to derail this thread I made a passing comment about scientist reading philosophy, then I must defend why I don't believe science to be a reliable source of knowledge. No problems with defending it, it's just hard when everyone believes whole heartily in science.

First of all, I posted those to show that it is still just a "theory" not a proven fact, could care less what they say because I can post 1000 articles and all of them will say that evolution is still a theory. As I've said you'll only bring up more observations, which many many philosophers/scientist before me have acknowledged can be false. So the question to you is....Do you believe that I am a real person? Do you believe that the sun will "rise" tomorrow? These are the "absolutes" I speak of, the things that you don't doubt in life.Philosophers speak of them to question them whereas most people just believe that there are other people in this world, without ever actually questioning that. Epistemology, check it out I beg of thee.

 

[revthejedi]

SMH at anyone thinking real knowledge is being dropped in this thread. Its easy to disprove God, and practically impossible to prove God's existence. I have no interest in debating this topic because the guy throwing out facts will always be the victor in a forum based upon presenting "proof".


Praise the Lord.

 

[pleasurephd]

Originally Posted by bboy1827

Originally Posted by PleasurePhD

And just Caught this "I think therefore I am" is actually a Cartesian Idea, i.e Renee Descartes idea, not Kant. Cogito Ergo Sum.....Kant wrote in German Descartes wrote in Latin. PleasurePhd I think you need to calm down a little, specially being wrong.

Name one thing that I have been wrong about, beside accidentally making the mistake of confusing two modern philosophers names.

Another question, with all your studies in, and ranting of philosophy, can you name me one thing that you have contributed to our society?

Or is it all pointless BS that people can talk about without knowledge in phil and a blunt in their hand?

Well...because of my Philosophies on life anyone that has ever meet me can tell you that I am a very nice person that attempts to help everyone that ever comes into contact with me, and trust me I have helped a lot of people (Philosophy of Morality). I mean I volunteer, work with kids help them get through the hardships of growing up nowadays. Signed up to Join the Military (Social Political Philosophical ideals).  Umm other than that, I haven't really contributed anything to society, then again I'm 22

but one day.

Political Philosophy i.e Republican V Democrat, Idealist V Realist etc. is where Philosophy holds merit. And if you were asking about what Philosophy has contributed to society, Directly Thomas Jefferson was a Philosopher, so were Montesquieu and Rousseau, all three of whom designed America Jefferson directly Montesquieu and Rousseau through Jefferson.

Well that is good for you. I am being honest. Good for you if that is true, but my question was does pondering or ranting about metaphysics for you HONESTLY HELP IN YOUR CONTRIBUTIONS TO SOCIETY?

Because I know many others, including myself, that either it hasn't or it doesn't because they do it without the knowledge of philosophy.

Being 22 is not an excuse. If you really wanted to you would have made significant contributions by now. Many great innovators were very young. 22 is old enough for you to be contributing now (in your current career or passion) even if you consider it impossible while in undergrad, which it's not. I know you should be graduated by now with a BA or BS if you're only majoring in phil.  It's certainly not a difficult major. So you should be contributing now, no?

Anyways the point is I wasn't asking about philosophy contributing to society, I know it has. I was asking YOU, HAVE YOU CONTRIBUTED, AND DO YOU REALLY THINK PHIL HAS BEEN THE REASON WHY? So many people have given amazing contributions including the ones you do (volunteering, military, etc...)  without any knowledge of philosophy.

I am not trying to say you are not smart or that you are worthless, or even that philosophy is worthless, but I am asking you to think about your rantings on metaphysics and then your contributions to society. Does it really seem to help and is it necessary?

MY POINT IS, DON'T HOLD YOURSELF OR YOUR STUDIES (OF OTHER INDIVIDUALS' OPINIONS) TO SUCH A HIGH REGARD WHEN IT HAS NOT HELPED IN YOUR CONTRIBUTIONS TO SOCIETY AS OF YET. ESPECIALLY, OVER FIELDS THAT DO TRY, AND SUCCEED AT HELPING CONTRIBUTE SUCH AS: SCIENCE. 

EDIT: AGAIN, I want to stress the metaphysics, since that is what you are using to question the validity and reliability of science. NOT OTHER BRANCHES OF PHIL.

 

[pleasurephd]

Originally Posted by JaysRcrak

bboy1827, you already said it. There is no point arguing. You will be going around in circles forever with these dudes.
It doesnt matter how much knowledge or expertise you have it will never be acknowledged in this thread. So save your breath.
There is only one ultimate truth on this subject(Is there or isnt there a God), and the fact is that none of us knows, beyond a shadow of a doubt what that is.
Not scientists, not athiests, not believers, not you, not me, and not them.

Knowledge and expertise?

You guys are the ones bringing us back into circles. You pose a comment or question. We state facts, evidence, proof, and theories about your argument that make it invalid, and you:

1. address none of them

then 2. state what you have already stated, bringing us back into a circle.

Your last statement that is enlarged is the only knowledgeable fact you have posted. So I agree. 

 

[bboy1827]

But Philosophy built society just as much as science has. I don't hold my studies in Philosophy in such high regard, I just think understanding philosophy is an important part of understanding the world around. If you reread the posts its mostly you bashing me and me providing support for my claims/ideas


Rantings in Philosophy and Metaphysics is the same as someone ranting that the earth revolved around the sun, It's about the free exchange of ideas

Philosophy has contributed to the ideals of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness, peoples political ideals, social ideals, morality, our prison system , the need for infrastructure the list goes on. You can't put Philosophy in the box of "metaphysics" or any other box for that matter. Philosophy means "the love of knowledge" as such, whenever someone seeks to answer a question, whenever someone contemplates some deep moral decision those all count as "philosophical ideals" such as The "West Coast Offense" Philosophy, popularized by Bill Walsh, or the Philosophy behind our Modern Media system, pioneered by The British Ministry of Information etc. You seem more angry that I question science, than I am that you question philosophy.

 

[sillyputty]

Originally Posted by bboy1827


http://withalliamgod.word.../galileo-galilei-on-god/

http://www.icr.org/article/newton/

http://www.blupete.com/Li...s/Science/Copernicus.htm

Just a Quick Google Search. As far as Newton, I disagree with you on that note that Einstein is a continuation of Newton. There is no "objective" knowledge, that would be what "God" knows. I can't argue with you guys, because you guys are always "right" as opposed to actually learning and thinking about things. My whole point with science, which had nothing to do with proving/disproving God, A) History is littered with "failed" scientfic theories, World used to be flat, Evolution is still a theory, in fact every facet of science is a theory. B) Science, at it's beginning was seen at as seeking Proof for God, I've read a lot about this. Almost all Scientist were "Christians" People try to say "They said that because they didn't want to get prosecuted" But in some of their personal memoirs they always acknowledged God. I question, theorize and argue even the most certain absolutes, as did these great scientists/philosophers


You guys can be right, about the nature of Science. Honestly your "rightness" doesn't answer any questions I present. A) where did we come from, by we I mean every living thing in the Galaxy. B) Why does the sun have to raise and set everyday? Isn't it conceivable that one day the sun didn't "rise and set"?

As for the Ancients methodology and research methods, you do realize that that some of the theories that they believed we still hold true today, so I would def stop #@*!$!#@ on their "tech" and "methodology"

#KanyeShrugs

And just Caught this "I think therefore I am" is actually a Cartesian Idea, i.e Renee Descartes idea, not Kant. Cogito Ergo Sum.....Kant wrote in German Descartes wrote in Latin. PleasurePhd I think you need to calm down a little, specially being wrong.

I pray that some lurkers are checking my facts, because the dudes I argue with are clearly not

DUDE HAVE YOU EVEN TAKEN PHYSICS IN COLLEGE?!



a quick google search?





Did dis dude do dis? 

What the hell are you TALKING about?!  

Have you even done a math problem involving relativity?




Calculating relativity at high speeds or on the atomic level using newton vs using einsteins formulas are off by VAST amounts ...intuition tells us to use newton...einstein corrects that. 




I don't claim to be right. I have ONLY asserted that if you ASSERT SOMETHING YOU MUST PROVE IT OR PROVIDE EVIDENCE FOR IT. 




I've already admitted the limits of science as a whole yet here you go talking out of your ___. What the hell are you talking about?







Yeah no ____ they are failed theories! 

Things that are TRUE tend to be TRUE...evidence and science confirms the conclusion or it shows they aren't accurate.




Thats the point of the scientific method...to PROVE that things are RIGHT.




So science fails because it got something wrong? Is it supposed to get it right the first time? 




If we got everything right the first time...THERE WOULD BE NO SCIENCE 

Bruh...who cares what it USED to do.




Slavery USED to be cool.




TODAY the scientific method tests hypotheses. 




They assert claims and seek to prove them. If they can't prove them, they discredit the claim.




Why do you not understand this?




You sound more ignorant every time you speak on these topics. 




Everytime I think you GET IT...you just introduce an argument worse than the first one.




How did we get here? I don't know. No one really knows. We are TRYING TO FIGURE IT OUT.




We have theories that look at the evidence that we have in front of us right now and try to piece it together. 




Additionally, you asking if the sun didnt "rise and set" at one point or another doesn't make and goddamn sense.

Do you even know why we say it rises and sets? The earth rotates as it rotates around the sun... are you serious?  

  

yeah...no one is "**%*+%%*" on them if their theories held up...because they were TRUE....




Do you expect things that aren't true to still be around?!




So the only thing he did wrong was say the wrong person? 


It doesn't invalidate his argument. The statement still stands. 

 

[sillyputty]

Originally Posted by ATGD7154xBBxMZ

Son asking about the other scientists around the world after enlarging the part that says the AAAS is the largest community of scientists on the planet as if there's another statistic that accounts for all scientists on the planet that was purposely ignored

Son don't even know how the sun operates. "rise and sets"

The sun is *#%@%** stationary. What question are you really asking? If the Earth stops rotating on it's axis and stops rotating around the sun? Google gravity man.

Couldn't help myself.

Dude is regressing in his question asking.

He started off strong now his logical and intellect is just going backwards...

Ole Benjamin Button type questions

 

[whywesteppin]

Ego:

No human can be above me.

But there must be someone more powerful than me who started this all.
His name may be physics/science/logic. Whatever the case, he's better than me, so he's definitely better than you.

 

[sillyputty]

Originally Posted by bboy1827

Originally Posted by PleasurePhD

And just Caught this "I think therefore I am" is actually a Cartesian Idea, i.e Renee Descartes idea, not Kant. Cogito Ergo Sum.....Kant wrote in German Descartes wrote in Latin. PleasurePhd I think you need to calm down a little, specially being wrong.

Name one thing that I have been wrong about, beside accidentally making the mistake of confusing two modern philosophers names.

Another question, with all your studies in, and ranting of philosophy, can you name me one thing that you have contributed to our society?

Or is it all pointless BS that people can talk about without knowledge in phil and a blunt in their hand?

Well...because of my Philosophies on life anyone that has ever meet me can tell you that I am a very nice person that attempts to help everyone that ever comes into contact with me, and trust me I have helped a lot of people (Philosophy of Morality). I mean I volunteer, work with kids help them get through the hardships of growing up nowadays. Signed up to Join the Military (Social Political Philosophical ideals).  Umm other than that, I haven't really contributed anything to society, then again I'm 22

but one day.

Political Philosophy i.e Republican V Democrat, Idealist V Realist etc. is where Philosophy holds merit. And if you were asking about what Philosophy has contributed to society, Directly Thomas Jefferson was a Philosopher, so were Montesquieu and Rousseau, all three of whom designed America Jefferson directly Montesquieu and Rousseau through Jefferson.


So?...but i'm sure society thanks you.




So? ...but i'm sure society thanks you. 






No one is saying that "thinking" about things isn't useful...it is...



but as far as PROVING ASSERTIONS...if you can't provide evidence then your THOUGHTS are merely that. Simply and purely. Being able to think about a god doesn't bring you ANY closer to proving it. 

 

[pleasurephd]

Originally Posted by PleasurePhD

Originally Posted by JaysRcrak

bboy1827, you already said it. There is no point arguing. You will be going around in circles forever with these dudes.
It doesnt matter how much knowledge or expertise you have it will never be acknowledged in this thread. So save your breath.
There is only one ultimate truth on this subject(Is there or isnt there a God), and the fact is that none of us knows, beyond a shadow of a doubt what that is.
Not scientists, not athiests, not believers, not you, not me, and not them.

Knowledge and expertise?

You guys are the ones bringing us back into circles. You pose a comment or question. We state facts, evidence, proof, and theories about your argument that make it invalid, and you:

1. address none of them

then 2. state what you have already stated, bringing us back into a circle.

Your last statement that is enlarged is the only knowledgeable fact you have posted. So I agree. 

 

[jaysrcrak]

If my position never changed, then how am I going in circles?

You have misinterpreted every single post that you have challenged

Example: I said this

JaysRcrak wrote:
Why do athiests always want you to PROVE there is a God, when you cant PROVE what you believe in?
The scientific explanation of creation has as many holes in it as the religious explanation.

The truth is it doesnt matter. This debate will never end.

But in the genius that is PleasurePhD's brain you interpreted that I said this:

PleasurePhD wrote:
First return post you made, every religious person claims to know God exists and can prove it.


How in the hell did you jump to that conclusion?

Example 2:
In response to Sillyputty's remark that "No one says anything without proof"
I talk about IgG subclass assays(referring to predictive value of subclass specific IgG for succesful immuno-therapy)
and your rebuttal is about IgEs.

This is why I stopped acknowledging you. Because you don't read with comprehension.
How can you post a rebuttal if you dont even understand what a person is saying?

 

[pleasurephd]

Originally Posted by bboy1827

1. But Philosophy built society just as much as science has. I don't hold my studies in Philosophy in such high regard, I just think understanding philosophy is an important part of understanding the world around. If you reread the posts its mostly you bashing me and me providing support for my claims/ideas


2. Rantings in Philosophy and Metaphysics is the same as someone ranting that the earth revolved around the sun, It's about the free exchange of ideas

3. Philosophy has contributed to the ideals of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness, peoples political ideals, social ideals, morality, our prison system , the need for infrastructure the list goes on. You can't put Philosophy in the box of "metaphysics" or any other box for that matter. Philosophy means "the love of knowledge" as such, whenever someone seeks to answer a question, whenever someone contemplates some deep moral decision those all count as "philosophical ideals" such as The "West Coast Offense" Philosophy, popularized by Bill Walsh, or the Philosophy behind our Modern Media system, pioneered by The British Ministry of Information etc. You seem more angry that I question science, than I am that you question philosophy.

1. I never said philosophy didn't. I even stated that it's not worthless, and agreed with some of your post about it being useful especially in the past. WHAT I said and am repeating for the three time is philosophical opinion on metaphysical ideas. This is what I feel like you are holding in high regard, when we are trying to discuss physical evidence of Gods existence.

2. No, it's not. You are free to say whatever you want, but scientists don't rant about the earth revolving around the sun. They hypothesized it, tested it, discovered that is does, and now share or spread the knowledge to everyone. They aren't just throwing out NONFACTUAL questions  or comments about metaphysical ideas, which can not be tested. Being skeptical about things that have already been rigorously tested, examined, and proven to be a true theory.

3. AGAIN, I'M NOT bashing or talking about all branches of philosophy. Only the METAPHYSICAL BS YOU brought to this discussion.

Yes, as I stated everyone with a brain who questions is a philosopher, it's nothing special.

YES, I AM ANGRY THAT YOU ARE CRITICIZING MY CAREER FIELD AND DOING SO USING YOUR PSEUDOSCIENCE METAPHYSICAL BS.