h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

>>Your last post is so incoherent to me.<<

I'm not in the least bit surprised, your cognitive deficit is massive.

A Test-case for the Dunning-Kruger Effect if ever there was one.

http://tiny.cc/forexample

And while we wait on Warner to break his self-imposed embargo, here's an interesting video about morality. (I think he might be Gif's more handsome twin - at least they sound similar when arguing. )

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWNW-NXEudk

<>

what you describe there is intuition

the brain proccess information

the body gathers information even without the concious mind knowing it, it automatic, just like your heartbeat or breathing, you don't have to think about it

a 'feeling' is the minds interpitation of all this procesed data that has been gathered subconiously and interpritated by the monkey in the hind brain

eerie feeling/unconsious stimuli/ no sounds/too quiet/predetor near

human response "my spidey sense is tingling"

Hi Warner,

>Then you're either very confused or being dishonest ..
>You can not know either way whether God exists or not from emperical knowledge, such as scientific analysis .. God is by definition not visible, not material
>ie. spiritual, abstract concept like "the mind" ( wherever it may originate! )

Afraid you're wrong there. Did you not see 'logical thinking' in my list? I can concluded that if there is no evidence for something, it is very unlikely to exist (Occam's Razor, aka the Principle of Parsimony). I can, if necessary, back that up from my observed experiences of the world. There is no necessity at all to start making exceptions to 'non-material' things - the same rules apply to sound, light, even emotions, etc. It's only when it comes to God that people start claiming we need to use different rules.

>> 'just knowing' things has an extremely poor record of accuracy, wouldn't you say?
>You mean that you doubt *your* existence, as your "just knowing" is unreliable?

But I don't 'just know' that I exist. Taking myself purely as a physical object, I can use all 5 of my senses to detect my own existence. In terms of a mental object, I can 'observe' myself directly. Neither of those things is true for 'God' - again, why do you suddenly need to switch the rules around?

>Dont' you "just know" when you're in pain? Don't you "just know" when you're feeling good?

Yes - but these are not to do with the 'external world'. If you wish to argue that God is merely a feeling, go right ahead. But that line of argument is of no help if you are trying to argue for a God that exists outside your own head.

Gif

So decided I could get to London and back for less than £35 so I'll be in Hyde Park come Saturday at the Protest The Pope March.

Should be fun.

Meanwhile feeling in the grove of an activist, if you want to get your MP's attention, the PtP campaign have a nifty email gadget that lets you forward a letter detailing the major crimes of The Catholic Church and why this view should be a concern for our eleced representatives.

http://campaign.publicaffairsbriefing.co.uk/EmailSupport.aspx?cid=1091d6ee-6faa-48f4-9411-4176c3279d20

So now I'm off to the local print merchants to see if I cna get this printed up as a placard.

http://s2.b3ta.com/host/creative/66433/1270974689/popeandchild.jpg

That is going to be one hell of a placard

'God is by definition . . .'

I didn't realize there had been a definition.

>>Dont' you "just know" when you're in pain? Don't you "just know" when you're feeling good? Doesn't a policeman with experience have a "nose"? Doesn't he "just know" when somebody's guilty, and have a good track record of being right?<<

Clive: No, no, and NO! several times over.

Gif: Yes - but these are not to do with the 'external world'


Just to anticipate something.

I note with a wry sense of amusement that me and Gif have addressed this challenge is diametrically opposite ways, which if someone were feeling devious they might use to demonstrate inconsistency.

However, I think, in spite of the semantics, we are actually making the same point.

Gif says we can know our subjective states but these are not necessarily functions of the objective world. I agree our such subjecitive knowledge can and may be compromised. Which is how come I alighted upon examples of pain and or euphoria which are entirely subjective not related to any injuries except neurological, which is where the phenomena originate.

So actually we agree even though it might look like we don't.

And Gif is right Warner, that advances your argument about God precisely nought.

>>That is going to be one hell of a placard.<<

I may just get sent there* if I keep this up.

Right - off I go.




*probably not.

Hi Clive,

To be fair, I only addressed the first two of Warner's four points. I might well have answered 'no' to the second two - or perhaps 'it's more complex than that, and certainly not reliable'.

You might like to ask the Guildford Four, Birmingham Six, etc, about 'policemen's noses'.

Gif

Ronald Reagan's Attorney General Ed Meese argued that the police shouldn't have to read a suspect his rights since the police don't arrest innocent people anyway.

Have I got this right? warner is arguing god exists because of a copper's hunch?

I think he's arguing that the police have some kind of Sanctified Common Sense™

That would be Sanctified Copper Sense, surely?

(Proof of the existence of Plod.)

Gif

Or maybe he's 'found' a bag with a sandwich in it and exclaims 'Whatever did I give the wife?'

He gives me a headache I know that!

Well to be fair... if I must.

I was just rather amused that to the same stimulus we'd both gone "Yes" / "No" and then imagined looking at each other quizzically.

Sanctified Copper Sense I think needs adding to the Hall of Ridicule alongside Carpenter Time.

I missed the whole Carpenter Time thing the first time round - caught it several times since though.

Things some people JUST KNOW:
http://www.mt.net/~watcher/cyberk~1.html
(NB: this knowledge is SO SECRET it must be written in white on a white background. While this will MOST CERTAINLY fool any NEFARIOUS GOVERNMENT ALIEN SPY who wants to PREVENT YOU KNOWING THE TRUTH, you can read it by highlighting the text. It's quite something, especially since, as the author assures us, 'That is what I know for a fact'.)
or http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:HboaI3HPc3cJ:www.irishufology.net/forums/index.php%3Fshowtopic%3D956+paranormal+antarctica&cd=81&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk ('these are ‘the facts’. I did say Facts folks!')



Gif

>>I didn't realize there had been a definition.<<

Here's what some may consider a definition.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06612a.htm

And a few years ago I blogged about the alleged evidence for the existence of the Catholic's particular sky fairy:

http://back42.blogspot.com/2006/02/triple-o-god-official-roman-catholic.html

taliesin,
Mmm

The def from catholic encyclopaedia is good .. as is God