>They asks a metaphysical question. >Expects a naturalistic

>positivism still exists in 2017
>even among educated people

Embarrassing

>>2309114

This applies to pretty much everything.

Politically, for example, if you're outside the Overton windows (leftwards, rightwards, doesn't matter), you'll find it incredibly hard to argue with people about politics even though the same people are able to discuss other issues while being cognizant of their biases and presupposition.

Behaviors you're going to encounter

- Show me that your position is accurate! (by this set of criteria that you don't share)

- The set of criteria I'm arguing for are just obivously the most rational! (probably weren't even shared by a majority of people a few decades earlier)

- Your position is just based on *ideological accusation/psychological accusation* (doesn't realize his position is vulnerable to analogous accusations)

- I came to my conclusion through REASON and EVIDENCE (doesn't realize the mind-boggling coincidence of coming purely through reason and evidence to the conclusion that his society finds acceptable)

- Your position has problems, therefore it's worse than mine (nevermind that his has problems too, unless yours is perfect, it's never going to be enough)

>>2309114
I feel ya. Ask a question about the bible, give a bible verse that answers it, get told they don't care what the bible says. It's anti-intellectualism at this point.

>>2309140
Also if the goals of your political philosophy don't coincide with theirs, they demand you show that your political philosophy, if 'implemented' would produce better results, by the standards of their own ideology.

>>2309114
That's why I don't bother discussing esoteric themes or truths. Especially to atheist.

>enter internets
>sirs, I believe
>autismo starts posting images left and right
>none load
>you dont even know what the idiocy was but get offended on reflex

>my Sokal is valid
>debate me!
unironically /his/

>>2309114

Whatever.

I'll just leave this here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eob371ZgGoY

Let me know when "making shit up" can create nuclear power stations, modern medicine, aircraft. the computers you're shitposting on etc etc etc.

In b4...

>not being superstitious has something to do with wearing a funny hat because I believed a Tumblr internet meme
>I hate Richard Dawkins because he is big, fat smelly poo poo and I really, really hate him

>>2309502
Aside from an incredible exercise in missing the point, this is an argument that fails on it's own terms.

Political Power is way better at creating and acquiring these things. In fact, literally "making shit up" is way better at creating all of these things.

>be me
>be edgy atheist (roughly age 10-19)
>all religion is bullshit and your fucking stupid believing it!
>start seeing snippets from various religious text around
>hmm these are pretty interesting
>started reading various religious text
>buy more and more and more
>lots of overlaping themes stories and figures in most texts
>be me now 23
>coupled with redpills and various 'conspiracy theorys' i now believe in some form of creator/god/gods but dont know what
this is pretty hard to discuss with the average normie due to the immense amount of material ive consumed, anyone else have a similar journey?

Oh do go into specifics OP, who blasted your booty?

>>2309525
No, but do keep going. You're on the right track.

>>2309525
Not really. I thought religion was bullshit as a teenager, warmed up to it in my my early 20s a bit (still didn't think it was true) and then hanging out on /his/ in my late 20s made me realize just how fucking stupid it is. I don't discount the idea of God, but I don't think any religion got it right.

>>2309523
>Political Power is way better at creating and acquiring these things. In fact, literally "making shit up" is way better at creating all of these things.

You'll have to expand on what you actually mean by this.

If you are suggesting that "Political Power" (sic) could have developed nuclear power stations without using the scientific method then, frankly, you are delusional.

>>2309502
If we are going that eay, most of those things only exist today and science is important in the development in our society because of capitalism.

However capitalism only succeded in it's initial phase due to the "capitalistic spirit" the protestant had due to their core philosophy, read Weber.

So yeah, you owe tchonological advancements and enhanced science to capitalism, and you owe capitalism to protestantism (specially calvinism).

>>2309535
i dont think any religion has it right either, but all the texts are like a fucked up memory or a Chinese whisper of something that happened a long time ago, but i dont think an omnipotent being is the correct thing, more thank likely, get the tinfoil ready, an advance race not from earth and thats where i lose 99% of people

>>2309542
Also you are basing of the premise that science and religion are opposing forces, which is factually not true if you have a minimal grasp on history of science and epistemological concepts, those entities are much more harmonic than you think.

>>2309540
I'm simply comparing facts:

Juche Ideology
>25-30 MW light water reactor
>Numerous Hospitals and Medical Research Centers, access to the best modern medicine in the world
>900 aircraft airforce
>Computers to hack Sony with.

New Atheist movement
>No Nuclear Power
>No modern medicine. You can ask Sam Harris to try if you have a neurological problem. Otherwise you got to use someone else's hospital, so at least on equal footing to Juche in terms of access.
>Zero Aircraft
>Some computers

Seems pretty clear. Juche just fucking works. If you compared it to Shia Islam, the results are even more assblasting. Call me when your little philosophy movement can create nuclear power stations, modern medicine, aircraft and computers.

>>2309542

You are aware that it is a completely fallacious argument to make a subjective argument about the "origins" of something, right?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_fallacy

>>2309114
>They ask a metaphysical question
>Expect an equally unverifiable metaphysical answer so that we can discuss about subjective nothings
>Mocks you because you gave them a naturalistic answer.
>You point out that they are nullifying the point of the conversation by establishing rules that make debate impossible just because they HAVE to be correct and they know it
>Mock you again, because lol you couldn't disprove their unfalsifiable hypothesis, therefore they are right.

You know actually who I'm talking about.

>>2309558

I have no idea what you're even talking about.

I posted that particular Richard Dawkins video because it made a particular point, which you have completely failed to address, succinctly.

Randomly rabbiting on about different "ideologies" in incoherent greentext or "new atheism" is irrelevant and completely fails to address anything.

>>2309563
Yeah, but you started the genetic fallacy first

>When did reLIEgion made nuclear plants? It doesnt make nuclear plant bcuz science! BAZINGA
>Therefore I am big science dude and you are dumb sheeple

You wouldn't have nuclear plants if you didn't have a civilization and the capital to build one for, which you only have because religion is a important vector to our western civilization.

>>2309547
Bible is a written tradition, not an oral tradition.

>>2309576
>I have no idea what you're even talking about.
An admission of ignorance is a good start, but it's not something to be proud of in itself.

>I posted that particular Richard Dawkins video because it made a particular point, which you have completely failed to address, succinctly.
Richard Dawkins claims his vision of truth is correct because of the ability to produce Nuclear Power Plants, Modern Medicine, and Aircraft.

He has no power plants, no medicine, and no aircraft.

Kim Jong Un says his vision of truth is correct, because he's able to produce nuclear power plants, modern medicine, and aircraft. He has a working nuclear program, multiple hospitals, and hundreds of aircrafts.

By your own point, and Dawkins, we have no grounds to question Kim Jong Un's claims that Kim Il Sung possessed perfect human wisdom and his appearance was fortold by the heavens.

After all, it just works.

>>2309578
>Yeah, but you started the genetic fallacy first
>You wouldn't have nuclear plants if you didn't have a civilization and the capital to build one for

Wrong.

You specifically need to use to scientific method in order to develop and use nuclear power. Fact.

You were reverting to subjective arguments about x might have lead to y, which lead to c and that was the result of d etc etc.

Not the same thing at all.

>>2309596

If you are seriously suggesting that Kim Jong Un could create nuclear power stations by "the power of Gommunism!!!!!!" rather than using the scientific method then you are incredibly delusional.

>follows a religion that tells you to be humble, kind and empathetic
>acts like an arrogant asshole on an anonymous imageboard

And now you know how I feel

>>2309615
He's got the power plant, and you don't, so he get's to dictate what's delusional. Until you can produce a nuclear power plant, you're just wrong.

>>2309617

When you say "x is true", people call you arrogant.

True arrogance is pretending to know what everyone else can know, or cannot know.

>>2309606
You need scientific method to know how to make one, but to actually BUILD one, and to WHY you need one and how useful it may be it depends on other social, economical and cultural values.

No one builds a nuclear power plant just because he is le smart fedora science person and is doing it because science told him so, as much as science is in important to building a power plant, other aspects of human interactions are also important as to why you need a power plant and how are you going to build one.

Do you think that super collider that created dark matter came from nowhere, that a bunch of scientists just decided "we are enlightned dudes, lets make some dark matter", someone saw profit in there and invested in it, if that person didn't exist to finance the program, the super collider wouldn't exist. Without capitalism and the need of technological advancements, science wouldn't progress as much as it did, and it only progressed because of the calvinists.

You owe modern capitalism to calvinists, that is undiscussible, trying to argue against it is arguing against one of the most important sociologists ever.

>>2309547
I think they're most just an early attempt to get at the formless perfect something that philosophers have been trying to perfect since forever. Plato's form of the god, Aristotle's unmoved mover, Spinoza's God or Nature.

The other half of this equation I feel is the greater principle that guides this something, something akin to the Tao, which fits well with Spinoza's idea that God follows a determined course.

>>2309114
Naturalism is the only thing that matters because the natural world is the only thing we can know to exist with any degree of certainty, furthermore modern philosophy is mostly a fucking joke.

>>2309624

No, when you judge others on things you're probably doing wrong as well, you come across as an arrogant prick.

Also, your autistic monitoring of this thread, mocking tone and namecalling tells me you're horribly insecure about your convictions. Please don't project your own insecurities onto others, it doesn't make you look smart or authoritative, which you make painfully obviously clear through your behavior you're desperately looking for. Again, all it does is make you look like a really desperate, arrogant prick

>>2309542
>>calvinism invented people trading for goods
lol

>>you can't have science or scientific advancements without a capitalist economy
The Soviet Union says fuck you.

>>2309621

Me not owning a nuclear power plant is irrelevant and beyond silly as a point to bring up.

Secondly the point was that Kin Jong Un could not create a nuclear power plant by getting people to sing in unison in the square or whatever, he would need to use scientific method.

And thirdly, largely irrelevant to the point in hand, but just a factual note, North Korea doesn't have any working nuclear power plants.

>>2309629
>weber
Only important as a historical relic.
Stop talking bullshit as if you know WTF you are talking about.
Nothingh worse than an idiot acting as if he is an expert.

>>2309660

What is the scientific method?

>>2309647
>And anybody who doesn't agree with me is an idiot.

Go back to the 17th century where you belong, kid.

>>2309664
>Nothingh worse than an idiot acting as if he is an expert

>wheredoyouthinkyouare.jpeg

>>2309650

>>2309157
>>2309532
>>2309582
>>2309624

Here's a thought.

How 'bout you learn to samefag before you start insulting people? The above posts are mine.

>>2309660
>Me not owning a nuclear power plant is irrelevant and beyond silly as a point to bring up.
You're the one who brought the point up.

>Secondly the point was that Kin Jong Un could not create a nuclear power plant by getting people to sing in unison in the square or whatever, he would need to use scientific method.
But he didn't. He used Kim Il Sung Methods.

>And thirdly, largely irrelevant to the point in hand, but just a factual note, North Korea doesn't have any working nuclear power plants.
They actually have working reactors, they just use them for fuel creation. Still doesn't change the fact that they have more computers, medicine and aircraft.

>>2309114
>Makes metaphysical claim
>uses physical example to demonstrate it
>given physical response why that example is wrong
>Claim that doesn't matter because the claim is metaphysical

>>2309669
Someone who actually studied sociology.
Stop spreading bullshit.

>>2309647
>the natural world is the only thing we can know to exist with any degree of certainty,
Giverherthedick.jpeg

>>2309682

BIG MAN.

>>2309316

Yeah that one too.

>>2309674

How about you learn to realize that desperately seeking other people's respect shouldn't be done on an anonymous imageboard, angrily typing out 'clever' quips you read the cool kids on /pol/ spout, mixed with some entry level theology

>>2309683

>OMG i put le jpeg behind it im sure all the cool kids on /his/ will consider me some epik intellectual

You're pathetic. Get a life

>>2309691
I'll accept that as an admission of error.

Get help for your autism though; when you falsely accuse other people of things they are not, you are really only using a weapon that's fashioned against you.

>>2309703

I love how you're supposed to be the moral highground superintellectual theologian, yet fill your desperate, angry posts with namecalling. Because that definitely doesn't show how much you wish people held you in high regard.

Which we don't, by the way

>>2309680
>You're the one who brought the point up.

The person I was replying to.

>But he didn't. He used Kim Il Sung Methods.

He doesn't have one.

>They actually have working reactors, they just use them for fuel creation. Still doesn't change the fact that they have more computers, medicine and aircraft.

This is quite possibly the most retarded thing I have ever read.

>>2309700
Ok. Since you seem unaccustomed to 4chan culture, a position of intellectual skepticism and focusing what is immediately knowable has already been thoroughly explored by René Descartes (1596-1650), one of the most important figures in modern philosophy.

Struggling to discover what could be known with any degree of certainty, Descartes effectively demonstrated that we could never know the external world because it would always, fundamentally rely on unreliable input from our senses, and that the only thing that we COULD know to exist with any degree of certainty is our own thoughts.

I'm sure since you're a genuine intellectual, unlike me though, you already knew all this and your post about how the only thing we can know with any degree of certainty being the natural world was some sort of horrible typo.

>>2309715
They have one. It's at the Yongbyon Nuclear Site, they have it by treaty and the testimony of UN inspectors.

Here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yongbyon_Nuclear_Scientific_Research_Center
>The major installations include all aspects of a Magnox nuclear reactor fuel cycle, based on the use of natural uranium fuel:

>a fuel fabrication plant,
>a 5 MWe experimental reactor producing power and district heating,
I am glad we're making progress that you accept that Dawkins argument means that the existence of the Nuclear Reactor establishes the Truth Value of Kim Il Sung Thought, but the fact is, they have Nuclear Power.

>>2309653
It did not invented, but made it work in the USA and gave it a headstart in comparison to catholics.

>The soviet union

Oh yeah Prypiat is so fucking happy

>>2309723

>Since you seem unaccustomed to 4chan culture
>4chan culture

Again, the cringe. The absolute cringe. Do you seriously thing that anyone, other than some desperate, lonely dumbass like you gives a rat's asshole about the cultural assumptions on an anonymous imageboard that has parts of it dedicated to girls with dicks?

All you've shown here is how desperate you are for other people's attention and approval. You desperately try to fit in, you desperately made an internet "culture" your own, desperately seeking out all the specifics and rules that go along with this "culture" (which, to let you in on a little secret, just about nobody cares about, apart from you) and now you're here, desperately discussing sophomoric philosophy and theology, with people who don't even know you, won't care about or remember anythibg you angrily type on here and only keep responding to for a laugh, to see how annoyed you can get before you leave, having impressed exactly no one.

I don't know how to tell you this, but please, leave 4chan. Turn off your PC. Go outside, go meet new people, get a job or a new job if you're sick of your current job, go do volunteer work, get a hobby or a sport, socialize, and whatever you do, don't ever try to impress random strangers that you're the new C.S. Lewis, because in reality, nobody knows who you are or cares about even a single word you type on here.

I'm leaving now, you can tell yourself that it's some epic victory and that you scored 100 4chan points, but I'd rather have you realize how pathetic you are, because outside of you, nobody else cares about this thread

File: IMG_6431.jpg (34KB, 333x441px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 333x441px

>>2309752

>>2309752
Wow you sure typed a lot of words on 4chan for a guy who doesn't care about 4chan.

>>2309664
Nobody is acting like an expert here you pretentious asshat.
Also you disn't rebutt anything I said, just greentexted "Weber" and dismissed the source (the same genetic fallacy you accused me of using in the start of the conversation).
So yeah, try arguing that christianity wasn't the reason for the capitalistic progress in the 18th century big boy if you are so fucking expert in the subject

>>2309733
This is a ridiculous argument but I'll humor you anyways.

Assuming that the NK government remains the same but loses all of its scientific knowledge there's no way for them to build another generator. Assuming however that their government changes but retains the scientic knowledge they'd be able to build another generator if they wanted. The only determining factor is the scientic and engineering know-how and not the government in charge.

What you're doing is mincing words about Dawkins' statement that "science is responsible for modern conveniences therefore it has more credibility than other systems" and attacking a strawman that you yourself are aware of.

>>2309714

I wonder what will happen when you realize I'm not here for your approval, nor do my posts have any namecalling in them.

Just advice.

For instance, if I told you to lose some weight, fatty, sight unseen, you could infer that I am indeed fat.

It's just logic.

>>2309752

I think--and I could be wrong here, but I really do think that u

r

mad.

>>2309752

tl;dr

>>2309774

You still haven't answered my question about what the scientific method is.

Is it the same everywhere?

>>2309798
>>2309733
>>2309558

>>>/x/18590122/

>>2309752
>projecting this hard

>>2309752
I'm hoping for your sake that this is just an obscure copy pasta

File: 220px-Arthur_Schopenhauer_Portrait_by_Ludwig_Sigismund_Ruhl_1815.jpg (19KB, 220x281px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 220x281px

>>2309114
Pro-tip: never talk about metaphysics to anyone.

File: E3yHA0l.png (40KB, 825x635px)

40KB, 825x635px

>>2309140
So true. It's a big reason why politics in the west is fucked. Both left and right think each other are literally destroying their countries with malicious intent and are completely unwilling to accept any arguments by the other side otherwise

>>2309952

Cry Havoc! and let slip the dogs of war.

Talkin' time is over.

File: Really.jpg (20KB, 306x306px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 306x306px

>>2309114
>Atheist asks metaphysical question about the nature of God
>Give him answer based on a thousand years of theology, tradition and the Bible verses that support it
>"Well that's not how I imagine it so you're wrong haha, I was never going to accept your answer because I deny the validity of your sources despite those being the sources that assert the existence of God in the first place, owned man"

>>2309928
If it wasn't, it is now >:)

File: image.jpg (67KB, 519x406px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 519x406px

>>2309114
>Everything from God is not confusing
>Trinity is confusing
Ok

>>2309535
You're in your late 20s and you get your views from a site where the average user is 18-20?

>>2310039
>I'm confused, therefore something is confusing and not from God.

>>2310045

Not him, but I got socks older than that.

>>2310045

4chan is 13 years old, and it still retains a great deal of its original user base.

You might be ~18, but there are plenty of 20-30-somethings kicking around.

>>2310059
The majority of the old users got lives, they don't come here anymore. 4chan is mostly browsed by edgy teenagers

If God can affect the physical world, you can ask physics-based questions about him. If he can't, or has never chosen to, then almost all non-deist conceptions can be discounted out of hand.

>>2310052
>(1 Corinthians 14:33) For God is not the author of confusion...
>the doctorine has sparked more arguments than any other doctorine, even among Christians

>>2310069
You can, but can you ask the right physics-based questions about him?

>>2310085
Asking the wrong ones enough times in a consistent, systematic way will eventually guide you to the right one, assuming the thing you are asking questions about is actually there.

>>2310069
You're assuming he interacts with the world via a recognized phenomenon

>>2310092

No, that's just the lie of empiricism.

Start with wondering what "unapproachable light" means.

>>2310096
Not at all. The mechanism can be completely unknown, as long as the effects can be measured. If they can't be measured, you either have a temporary setback in how you design your tools and they need to be improved, or the effect doesn't actually exist.

>>2310133
Let's see you explain the following "physics" elements as you search for tools by which to measure God.

What is light?

What is gravity?

What is magnetism?

What is a field?

Protip? You have no answer for any of them.

>>2310155
With provisional, simplified answers: light is a pulse of energy in the form of a wave, specifically electromagnetic energy.
Gravity, as far as we can tell right now, seems to be mass-induced deformations in the shape of space.
Magnetism is the force applied by a magnetic field, resulting from the interactions of charges.
What exactly a field is depends on what scale you're looking at, but broadly it'a a mathematical construct used to approximate the strengths and directions of phenomena at various distances.

A few of those are likely inaccurate since it's been a while since I've studied those in particular, so please feel free to correct the mistakes I've made.

>>2309744
>>It did not invented, but made it work in the USA and gave it a headstart in comparison to catholics.
lol bullshit what actually happened was that the US had a pretty decent chunk of a continent all to itself since most of the natives died of disease before the major waves of settlement began in the 19th century. We had practically no real competition and therefore we became a powerful industrial nation by default, religion had jack and shit to do with that.

>>Oh yeah Prypiat is so fucking happy
Everybody screws things up sometimes, especially when you're a communist, but even market economies have faults.

>>2309667
>>the 17th century
Nah, I'm nice and comfy right here in the modern world where all the places that matter largely don't give two shits about religion one way or another.

>>2310291
Yeah man, industrialism came from nowhere, Weber was wrong. Random 4chan poster is right.

Ps: the same could be said about Brazil but that didn't happen, but you will probably say it was niggers or some shit.

>>2310155
oh look, the define-every-single-word troll is back

>>2310311
Not him, but if you want to imply that "x" lead to "y". Then you should define what "x" is.

>>2310322
this is more important if you are writing an actual scholarly article. plus all the words he asked to be defined are scientific terms that are well-known and clearly defined. If he doesn't know what they mean he should google it.

I've seen someone derail a thread a few days ago by asking someone to define about every word he used, and then to define the words he used to define those words.

>>2310333
It doesn't mean that the guy that is asking doesn't know, he is trying to taunt and provoke his opposition to see if he actually knows what he is talking about.

Maybe the guy went overboard with it, but you can make good provokations with that sort of stuff, like asking what "life", "freedom", and "rights" mean.

>>2309525

Go back and read it again. You're at the stage where you think that just because you've read a bunch of religious works, you're better than the people you haven't. The first step is knowing that you know nothing of the divine and humbling yourself before mystery.

>>2309525
You can keep on reading religious stuff, but you eventually will realise humans don't know shit about metaphysics nor do they own the devices to reach true knowledge of the so called "divine" yet.

>>2310298
>>Yeah man, industrialism came from nowhere, Weber was wrong. Random 4chan poster is right.
Well I am right and weber is a faggot so...

>>Ps: the same could be said about Brazil but that didn't happen, but you will probably say it was niggers or some shit.
Try niggers and lots and lots of shitty land for agriculture, and less natural resources available to exploit compared to the continental USA.

File: rage_001.jpg (35KB, 214x213px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 214x213px

We need a religion board. I know religion is intertwined with other humanities, but I'm so fucking sick of this subject clogging up 40-60% of the threads on the frontpage at any time. Give it its own specialty board.

Nothing in my life has fueled my hatred for religion more than this flood of religion threads and their walls of copypasted text passages drowning out other types of threads.

>>2309114
Christianity is anthropocentric garbage, developed in a time where we thought that humans and/or Earth were the central focus of the universe, devoid of perspective which will be replaced with or converted into another religion with people spouting it as truth in a few thousand years. Religion isn't concerned with giving the truth, but rather with coddling incorrect primal human instincts and more broadly helping one have hope and meaning (albeit effectively) in an uncaring indifferent existence; it's psychological, no different to a Flat Earther needing the rush that comes with feeling like they're uncovering a vast conspiracy.

>>2310387
>Shitty land for agriculture
Volcanic land is the best land for agriculture and you don't know shit since nigger came way later in Brazil's colonization

>>2310395

we've needed /rel/ since 2012 desu

>>2310406
>we thought that humans and/or Earth were the central focus of the universe
Are you implying we're not?

>>2310423
Yes.

>>2310417
Ever since /lit/

God I am nostalgic for the time when /lit/ and /his/ were one. All kinds of literature being discussed.

>>2310426
Silly. The only matter in the universe that has obtained consciousness, the universe does revolve around us no matter how you cut it

>>2310434
Light is the only substance that can go that speed, and it retains that speed no matter who is observing it and how, therefore, light is the central focus of the universe. <== Just as ridiculous.

>>2310395
Get triggered by religious threads? Don't read them. Want less religious threads on the catalogue? Don't bump them with replies. Not finding threads you like? Make your own. Not getting enough replies? Try harder. 4chan allows the free market of ideas to prosper.

>>2310437
Humans are the only things in the universe who can recognize and create meaning. By definition we are the only meaningful things in the universe on the only planet that has a purpose. The universe does revolve around us from the only perspective in the universe that matters, ours.

>>2310451
When I said
>we thought that humans and/or Earth were the central focus of the universe
I meant even beyond humans' perspective, as in the universe was always and is always going to be for us, inherently.

>>2310456
There is no perspective beyond human perspective because Humans are the only beings with a perspective that can identify meaning. You're anthropomorphising unthinking, uncaring inert matter. It doesn't care about anything, it doesn't have a perspective. Only you do.

>>2310444
No, we need ID's to put a stop to the religious same fags that have taken up home here.

>>2310460
Look at the original post. I'm not the one doing it.

>>2310444
>Get triggered by religious threads? Don't read them.
I do hide them. Takes me about 5 minutes a day. That's 1825 minutes a year, which is 30 hours - or one day a year wasted just filtering out threads I don't like.
I don't think that the intersection of people both very interested in religion and in history and humanities besides theology is very big. Because of that, the majority of people browsing here would be given a favour if religion got its own board. In fact, the people only coming here to discuss religion would also be given a favour by not having to sift through non-religion threads.

>>2310477
The problem is if there was a dedicated religion board the people who really need to hear the arguments wouldn't bother going there (i.e the completely detached fedora tippers who actually believe in a purely naturalistic universe)

Creating a big circlejerk board isn't the solution, you need to read the arguments too.

>>2310497
That's not a problem. People want to troll each other, they will seek out the other side even on a circlejerk board.

>>2310504
Religion is an absolutely massive part of history and the human experience though. Just because fedoras get triggered by the fact that many people are still religious isn't a reason to shunt it off to another board. Contain your autism.

>>2310521
/a/ is an absolutely massive part of /jp/.
/his/ is an absolutely massive part of /lit/.
/vg/ is an absolutely massive part of /v/
/w/ and /wg/ are absolutely massive parts of wallpapers.
/r/ and /wsr/ are absolutely massive parts of requests.
/news/ is an absolutely massive part of /pol/.
/sci/ is an absolutely massive part of /fit/.

We split off "absolutely massive parts" all the time.

/rel/ needs to split off from /his/, even if it's a massive part of it.

>>2310460
>You're anthropomorphising unthinking, uncaring inert matter
Which is a human perspective, and if humans are the ultimate arbiters of meaning in the universe, factoring in the vast amount of "unthinking, uncaring inert matter" becomes valid, because humans are doing it.

>>2310497
>>You need to hear the arguments too.
Ah yes, the quality arguments such as "Duh buybull says X and X is therefore hishtorrical factsch becuz duh buybull sez so!" or "Doood teh univarz is totally god maaaannn the guy I buy my weed from told me so!"

Besides, even if we had intelligent and erudite believers here, I would have have no more need to hear their arguments then I would anyone els's. This board is for fun mostly, serious debate happens in universities, where cletus the bible banger and has little influence. Too bad that jake the stoner does though, but you can't have everything.

>>2310133
Or the effect is non-recurring.

>>2309114
>Make thread where you complain about people who fail at basic reading comprehension and commit errors of reasoning
>Atheists show up to argue sincerely

>>2310414
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculture_in_Brazil
>>Brazilian grasslands are far less fertile than those of North America, and are generally suited only for grazing.
lol yeah totally impressive compared to the US, yep. Oh wait no.

>>2310615
It's nice that they decided to show up and give a first hand example of what OP was talking about though

>>2310621
I will just leave this here:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terra_rossa_(soil)
Most of the land that was used to produce coffenin 19th used this type of soil in the southeast

>>2309952
haha literally me

>>2310621
Another sauce:
https://global.britannica.com/place/Brazil/The-land#ref747834
>Brazil’s soils form a vast and intermixed pattern. A large band of nutrient-rich, deep reddish purple soil (terra roxa) lies in the Southeast and South between central Rio Grande do Sul and southern Minas Gerais, including large areas of Paraná and São Paulo states. That region contains Brazil’s most heavily farmed lands; however, terra roxa is not necessarily more productive than soils in other regions of the country. Soils in the Northeast also contain many nutrients, but agriculture is limited there because few fields are irrigated.

>>2310632
>>2310658
>>lol yeah totally impressive compared to the US, yep. Oh wait no.
I mean really now Hues, I get that you fuckers have an inferiority complex about your favela filled armpit of a nation, but you guys really need to stop pretending to be better then nations that actually matter.

>>2310677
More specifically,

>>Agriculture is a major industry in the United States, which is a net exporter of food.[1] As of the 2007 census of agriculture, there were 2.2 million farms, covering an area of 922 million acres (3,730,000 km2), an average of 418 acres (169 hectares) per farm.[2] Although agricultural activity occurs in all states, it is particularly concentrated in the Great Plains, a vast expanse of flat, arable land in the center of the United States and in the region around the Great Lakes known as the Corn Belt.[3]

>>The United States was a leader in seed improvement i.e. hybridization and in expanding uses for crops from the work of George Washington Carver to the development of bioplastics and biofuels. The mechanization of farming and intensive farming have been major themes in U.S. history, including John Deere's steel plow, Cyrus McCormick's mechanical reaper, Eli Whitney's cotton gin to the widespread success of the Fordson tractor and the combine harvesters first made from them. Modern agriculture in the U.S. ranges from the common hobby farms, small-scale producers to large commercial farming covering thousands of acres of cropland or rangeland.

>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculture_in_the_United_States
We have far better food production then you dumbshits simply because we have more land, and the guy I first brought this up with was claiming that protestantism is what fueled industrial development in the US, which is bunk. Lots of spare food and lots of natural resources to exploit is what fuels industrial development.

>>2309575
boo

>>2309754
The final argument has been made. The time for arguments is over.

>>2309114
Jesus is a fully god and fully man. According to:

Numbers 23:19
God is not a man...neither the son of man....

IS THAT SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND?

>>2309629

Holy shit, you're as myopic as religious nuts. Replace capitalism with religious incentives, and you basically have the worldview of Christians. You seriously believe that creativity is purely the byproduct of indulging some base need, and can't exist purely because of the higher urge to create? You're no scientist, and you're no artist. You have a completely false outlook on people.

The starving artist trope exists for a reason, and some of those who starve for their passions can be scientists and inventors.

You MIGHT be right about people at large, but such a generalized view is technically incorrect and therefore entirely incorrect.

Without the incentive of capital, we would still see advancements in art and science. Sure, at a degenerated rate, and that does somewhat validate your view, but not sufficiently enough to speak so objectively.

I'm not knocking capitalism, nor the drive of base urges, nor the worldview that MOST people are pushed by such simple drives. But please do not speak with such pure dismissal.

>>2309978
I'm pretty sure the bible says God is a magical man in the sky who rides clouds

File: SMDH TBH FAM.gif (3MB, 414x382px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 414x382px

>>2309114
too true anon

>>2310886
I'm pretty sure you haven't read a single book in the Bible if that's what your impression is

File: 1484357668505.jpg (329KB, 600x399px)

329KB, 600x399px

>>2309752
:^)

>>2310603
In which case, it would have had to been such minor changes that they fall below the precision we can currently estimate. Sure, if all God did was kill a few giant sloths a few thousand years ago while early humans were already driving them to extinction, we would have no way of knowing. But the kind of God who exclusively intervenes in minor, essentially undetectable ways is again not the sort most non-deists propose. Killing a few giant sloths in the midst of a bunch of giant sloth deaths is not the same as making the sun dance around, for example.

>>2309752
Well, getting out of bed this morning was officially worth it.

>>2310910
>you haven't read a single book in the Bible through the lens of a people from a different culture a thousand years after it was written full of Hellenistic ideas about God
Fixed that for you

>>2309525
>overlaping themes stories and figures in most texts
thats because religion borrows idea from previous religions.
not because there is a similar god(s) that all human experience.

>>2309978
>bible and god makes no sense
>blame it on atheists

what is metaphysics?
I've heard that word a few times recently

>>2310395
We don't need a religion board. We just need a note in the sticky that paranormal discussion of religion belongs on /x/.

>>2310045
Yeah, I know, I'm pretty pathetic.

I keep coming to 4chan because I enjoy the diversity of ideas and material it exposes me to; I see a lot of shit here that I wouldn't see anywhere else and there's just the right mix of obsessive weirdos that you come across some fairly obscure shit.

>>2311380
It's actually a difficult term to define. One description I heard is that it's anything that attempts to answer the questions of "What is there?" and "What is it like?"

So in a classical sense, metaphysics was concerned with the fundamental nature of reality, the causes behind things, and free will.

It comes from Aristotle, where metaphysics was the portion of his work that went beyond physics.

>>2310395
Make your own damn thread. /his/ is too damn slow as it is.

>>2309140
The worst is this almost universal acceptance of propertarian ethics. Try talking to a liberal about abortion, or to a conservative about the need for public good-work.

>>2309140
This is a failure on your part not their own.

You need to convince them that the value you place as the basis of your system is a better one than the one they place as the basis of their own. You're talking to someone with a fundamentally incompatible value system and expecting them to value the same shit you value despite the fact the very fundamental aspect of what you believe doesn't even register in their frame of mind.

>can not confirm validity of their sources
>invent complex metaphysical problems to cover it up

You know actually who I'm talking about.

>>2310867
You known something? I agree with you, but read the first post I did, and I clearly state "if we are going that way".
Atheism did not make science great, yes science works because it benefits society, but the so does religion for benefitting society with the means to start economical and technological progress. I was playing with that guy way of thinking that simply the fact that science exists already makes any other of knowlodge (be it metaphisical or philosophic) invalid, I tried to show the man that it is sinply not true.

>>2310689
You are so fucking stupid it hurts, specially posting data from modern times when we are talking about industrialization in the first revolution and you basically ignore other catholic countries potential for industrializing because "muh USA had the better landz", forgetting that Brazil had the monopoly on coffee until 1929.

>Lots of spare food and lots of natural resources to exploit is what fuels industrial development.
You may be true in a economical sense but dismissing culture is just a bold move, and I am not talking about the USA alone either, UK, Netherlands, and many other protestant countreis industrialized first since catholicism condamned usure amd calvinism praised it.

>>2311214
>Atheists are too fucking stupid to wrap their minds around basic metaphysics
>Blame it on Christians

>internet forum/board
>thread about belief
>its a bunch of fedoras expecting to convince or be convinced
Literally why do you do this?
Are you aware that there are beliefs that don't recruit?
Do you also think that you will be allowed inside Trumps house if you believe he's the POTUS?

>security, theres a man trying to enter my house
>niggers, I believe on him

>>2311782
>thread about belief
no, it's a bait thread about arguing with atheists

>>2311807
Yes, and I posted what bugs me about said talks.

>>2311491
This, you also need to be able recognize these fundamental differences and make sure you explain them as comprehensively as possible as soon as you do.

I find that a lot of people simply assume that they're arguing from the same basis as the other person and then everyone ends up just talking past each other. This isn't just a problem for people in the on the extremes either, but even for people who have views that would otherwise be very close to each other and would be easily reconcilable if they normalized their frame of refrence for the sake of discussion.

>>2311491

>You're talking to someone with a fundamentally incompatible value system and expecting them to value the same shit you value

No, I don't. That's the whole point of my post. I don't and they do. I can recognize that our differences stem from fundamentally different values. When I try to explain that, I get a number of reactions that usually fall into those types of behaviors.

Also, I'm not getting paid to argue with them.I just avoid those people and that's it. When I meet someone who I'm going to spend time with, I always discuss something and see if they can see that other people may fundamentally disagree with them while not being evil or insane. If they can't, I never discuss anything with them ever again. Life's too short.

>>2310700
You know it's true.

>>2310204
>With provisional, simplified answers: light is a pulse of energy in the form of a wave, specifically electromagnetic energy.
A wave is not a thing. A wave is what something does. Strike one.

>Gravity, as far as we can tell right now, seems to be mass-induced deformations in the shape of space.
Gravity is an acceleration. Strike two.

>Magnetism is the force applied by a magnetic field, resulting from the interactions of charges.
Defining things by themselves. Also wrong. Magnetism is dielectric acceleration after being induced by an electrical field. Strike three.

>What exactly a field is depends on what scale you're looking at, but broadly it'a a mathematical construct used to approximate the strengths and directions of phenomena at various distances.
No definition of a field exists. 0 extra credit for trying.

>>2310333
>scientific terms that are well-known and clearly defined

Bullshit.

>>2310437

Light does not "travel" at any "speed", nor do photons exist. Light is a coaxial longitudinal circuit that has a rate of induction, not a "speed". Light does not "travel" "through" anything, nor does any light source "emit" anything.

>>2311627
When you say "Christian" what exactly do you mean? Protestantism has no meaningful metaphysics to speak of. catholicism and orthodoxy do.

>>2309114
Retard.

>>2312956
Yes, a wave of electromagnetic energy. However, in certain contexts, such as tsunamis and photons, it is useful to look at the wave itself.

>Gravity is an acceleration
If we play the game you did last point, no, gravity "is" not an acceleration, rather, acceleration is the action that an object acting under the influence of gravity may perform assuming the influence other forces do not balance gravity perfectly. What gravity "is" is a fundamental force mediated by the deformation of space, not an acceleration.

>Defining things by themselves
You didn't ask me what a magnetic field was, you asked me what magnetism is. And what it is is what I said, because the definition is significantly broader than the common everyday experience of magnetism entails.

>No definition of a field exists
I just gave you one, actually.