JREF Homepage Swift Blog Events Calendar $1 Million Paranormal Challenge The Amaz!ng Meeting Useful Links Support Us
James Randi Educational Foundation JREF Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   JREF Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy
Click Here To Donate

Notices


Welcome to the JREF Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.

Reply
Old 15th February 2009, 09:03 AM   #161
Mashuna
Ovis ex Machina
 
Mashuna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Welsh Wales
Posts: 6,604
Originally Posted by zooterkin View Post
Where did you guys learn to count? He said
I'm sorry, I had to stop reading after nine words.
__________________
GENERATION 10: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and put in a random number. Anti-social experiment.
Mashuna is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2009, 09:08 AM   #162
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Nor Flanden
Posts: 25,529
Originally Posted by yrreg View Post
This is my concept of God as a theist:
The maker of heaven and earth and everything.

That's a concept of God expressed in eight words.


Now, atheists, you tell me in less than ten words what is your concept of God.

Imaginary being with supernatural powers.

Five words.
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2009, 09:16 AM   #163
Lord Emsworth
Je ne suis pas une de vos élèves
 
Lord Emsworth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Through the Cables and the Underground ...
Posts: 2,998
Originally Posted by yrreg View Post
This is my concept of God as a theist:
The maker of heaven and earth and everything.

That's a concept of God expressed in eight words.


Now, atheists, you tell me in less than ten words what is your concept of God.

A first cause style creator with libertarian free will.


Which is about as possible as a square circle. Anything that does not conform to this, say, something that could be seen as a first cause on one hand, that does not however have a choice to chose between different creations, does not count.

Preferably, that which is to be called 'God' exhibits clear anthropomorphic characteristics, like for example possesses speech. But I am less insistent here.

Ten words you wanted? Then run with the first line ... if you wish.
Lord Emsworth is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2009, 09:17 AM   #164
Bob Klase
Master Poster
 
Bob Klase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Largo, FL
Posts: 2,893
Originally Posted by yrreg View Post
Now, atheists, you tell me in less than ten words what is your concept of God.

concept of god
Bob Klase is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2009, 09:27 AM   #165
catbasket
atheist godfather
 
catbasket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: The naughty step
Posts: 1,486
Originally Posted by yrreg View Post
Now, atheists, you tell me in less than ten words what is your concept of God.

Yrreg
My concept of god is too great or extreme to be expressed in words though there is a school of thought that it is simply too sacred to be uttered. It's also ten words long. Sorry.
__________________
Mathew 13:13 Therefore I speak to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.
catbasket is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2009, 10:11 AM   #166
joobz
Tergiversator
 
joobz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: That's how you get ants
Posts: 18,001
MY concept of god is best understood through dance.

__________________
What's the best argument for UHC? This argument against UHC.
"Perhaps one reason per capita GDP is lower in UHC countries is because they've tried to prevent this important function [bankrupting the sick] and thus carry forward considerable economic dead wood?"-BeAChooser
joobz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2009, 10:33 AM   #167
X
Slide Rulez 4 Life
 
X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Launching the army, waiting for Hok to commit her forces (then the moles strike...)
Posts: 4,120
Originally Posted by yrreg View Post
And please don't bring in names of gods and goddesses of earlier folks or more technologically backward peoples, unless and until you update and upgrade them to the level and quality of our current cognitive sophistication.

Ahura Mazda fits your definition. So does Bagadjimbiri, and Nanabozho. Along with Tezcatlipoca, Kaang and Bunjil.
In fact, every god on this list (some appear more than once under different names) fits your definition.

If a god concept fits your definition (maker of heaven and earth and everything), then what grounds do you have for rejecting it?
"earlier folks" and "more technologically backward peoples" are not grounds to dismiss a claim. They are (say it with me): Ad-Hominem attacks.

If you don't like people bringing in god concepts of "earlier folks or more technologically backward peoples", then perhaps you should ensure that your definition makes clear which particular god concept you are talking about.

The definition you have given is not sufficient convey the concept of a particular god. All it can do is convey a very general concept which applies equally well to many different god concepts.
So you can either improve the definition, or stop whining every time someone mentions a god you don't believe in.


----- ----- -----


Further, I don't think much of your demands that we make short posts. I mean, look at your own. They are long, repetitive, and needlessly wordy.

Until you make your posts short and to the point, your demands that we do so are hypocritical. And I for one will not acquiesce to them.

You asked the question, you've had your answers.

Deal with it.
__________________
It is sad that this is necessary:
Argumentum Ad Hominem: "You are wrong because you are ugly."
Not Ad-Hom: "You are wrong and you are ugly."

[X's posts are] ...as good as having 24 hours of Justin Bieber piped into your ears! - kmortis

Last edited by X; 15th February 2009 at 10:35 AM.
X is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2009, 10:47 AM   #168
Ron_Tomkins
Satan's Helper
 
Ron_Tomkins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: NYC
Posts: 35,265
Sorry, yrreg but never told me what was wrong with my definition of the Tooth Fairy. Could you please reply to my post?
Ron_Tomkins is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2009, 11:24 AM   #169
MIKILLINI
Incromulent Logic
 
MIKILLINI's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: The Illini State
Posts: 2,988
Originally Posted by yrreg View Post
This is my concept of God as a theist:
The maker of heaven and earth and everything.

That's a concept of God expressed in eight words.


Now, atheists, you tell me in less than ten words what is your concept of God.

Evasive as this thread's author.
5 words, Gerry.
Now get to the point.
__________________
Attempting to build a case without evidence is just another day spent with no use of common sense.-Me

The conspiracist is not merely illogical: he assaults logic.~ Pomeroo

Last edited by MIKILLINI; 15th February 2009 at 11:28 AM.
MIKILLINI is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2009, 11:30 AM   #170
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Nor Flanden
Posts: 25,529
Originally Posted by X View Post
The definition you have given is not sufficient convey the concept of a particular god. All it can do is convey a very general concept which applies equally well to many different god concepts.

It also excludes all non-creator gods, which have as much right to be included in the definition of "god" as creator gods, at least from the point of view of atheists, who yrreg claims to be trying to engage with here.
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2009, 11:47 AM   #171
Hokulele
Official Nemesis
 
Hokulele's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Trying to decide whether to set defenses against an army, or against mole rats.
Posts: 28,168
Originally Posted by yrreg View Post
Now, atheists, you tell me in less than ten words what is your concept of God.

Penis.
__________________
Yvette: "Blasty! Blasty! Blasty!"
Some person: "Why did you shoot that?"
Yvette: "Blasty! Blasty! Blasty!"

- Tragic Monkey
Hokulele is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2009, 11:55 AM   #172
Elizabeth I
Olympic Equestrian Wannabe
 
Elizabeth I's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Defending the Alamo
Posts: 9,920
Quote:
Man is the measure of everything even God, wherefore man defines God.

Of course, now that we are so concerned about whether He does exist or not, then we start with the concept itself of God in our brain.

Here is my concept of God in my brain:
The maker of heaven and and earth and everything.
And here is my idea of what a definition is good or useful for to man, as understood by man, who is himself the measuring entity of everything that is of concern to man.

At this point of the thread I like to invite people to concentrate on the word God as at least referring to a possible entity inside the brain of humans at least some, which word God refers to the concept again in the brain of at least some people connoting:
The maker of heaven and earth and everything.
If you have trouble with everything, it means everything that man knows now and can know in the future and also they thought they knew in the past but now know better.

So if you are a man or a woman or anything in between provided still human with a genetically human brain,* everything means everything you know now or in the future.

Some people know more things than others of course, but everyone knows everything he does know.

If you are again and still having trouble with knowing everything, then just pretend that you don't know something of the everything that you know, then that should still be all right in regard to the everything that you now know, whereas you actually know one more than everything you now know with the pretended ignorance of one thing of the everything you know without pretending to not know the one thing you do know without the said pretension*.

Please, for the love of viable communication, don't be more smart and thus all entangled in useless knots because you want to imagine that you are a super intelligence all knowing entity, and not just a human knowing entity, knowing the limited number of things you do know which to you is everything you know, and include in that also all the things you don't know but can know, and even cannot know because your brain no matter how much it exposes itself to and for how long, will still not know everything in objective reality that can be known by what I postulate to be the concept of God:
The maker of heaven and earth and everything.
And please don't bring in names of gods and goddesses of earlier folks or more technologically backward peoples, unless and until you update and upgrade them to the level and quality of our current cognitive sophistication.

Okay? So, for the present let us all if I may include all of you to consider just the intrinsic possibility of the concept of God as:
The maker of heaven and earth and everything.
Then we will work on His existence outside the concept in our brain, but of course corresponding to the concept.
He writes this stuff in his native language (Lower Middle Incoherent), then does a copy-paste into Babelfish and posts the resulting "translation," doesn't he?
__________________

• There is something about the outside of a horse that is good for the inside of a man. - Winston Churchill
• Never wrestle with a pig - you just get dirty and the pig enjoys it.
• My blog: Pardon me, may I ask...
Elizabeth I is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2009, 12:11 PM   #173
blobru
Philosopher
 
blobru's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 6,829
Originally Posted by Hokulele View Post
Originally Posted by yrreg View Post
Now, atheists, you tell me in less than ten words what is your concept of God.
Penis.

Batur asked the master: "Is God yin, or yang?"

Said master: "God can go **** himself. You figure it out."

commentary: guess apples weren't the only fruit in the garden.
__________________
"Say to them, 'I am Nobody!'" -- Ulysses to the Cyclops

"Never mind. I can't read." -- Hokulele to the Easter Bunny
blobru is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2009, 12:14 PM   #174
Frozenwolf150
Formerly SilentKnight
 
Frozenwolf150's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Under cold, moonlit skies
Posts: 3,772
Originally Posted by yrreg View Post
And please don't bring in names of gods and goddesses of earlier folks or more technologically backward peoples, unless and until you update and upgrade them to the level and quality of our current cognitive sophistication.
Right, because those Bronze Age tribal folk from 1800 bce who thought that the Earth was flat and created in six days couldn't possibly have known what they were saying about God.
__________________
Currently reading The Bluest Eye by Morrison.
Frozenwolf150 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2009, 04:32 PM   #175
yrreg
Master Poster
 
yrreg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,389
Before anything else, I apologize to any people for my unacceptable words.

Before anything else, I apologize to any people for my unacceptable words.


Please, in the name of camaraderie -- addressing also Tricky as a common poster here, abstain from reporting what you think is an offensive line in my message which you believe should be reported, because it is not necessary to report it to the moderator for him to issue a warning.

Just tell me directly and ask me to rewrite the post with no more offense to you, and also demand even an apology.

That should save a lot of unnecessary time and trouble for all concerned.




Originally Posted by AndyD View Post
I'm not certain your earlier demand for exactness and specificity meets with your new demand for brevity but here you go anyway...

An apparently imaginary being that some believe made everything.

Whoo! Nine words! What do I win?!?!

EDIT: Damn! zooterkin has succinctness down to a fine art.

That is a useful description of God, it says essentially the same concept as mine: the maker of heaven and earth and everything.


I award you with the reference to an online text of The Cloud of Unknowing, a mystical work attributed to a 14th century English monk.


You see AndyD, what I am trying to find out is whether atheists here can accept that concept of God, namely: the maker of heaven and earth and everything, as one that is possible in the human brain, but prescinding from the question of God's existence at this point of the thread.





Yrreg
yrreg is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2009, 04:39 PM   #176
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Nor Flanden
Posts: 25,529
Originally Posted by yrreg View Post
Before anything else, I apologize to any people for my unacceptable words.


Please, in the name of camaraderie -- addressing also Tricky as a common poster here, abstain from reporting what you think is an offensive line in my message which you believe should be reported, because it is not necessary to report it to the moderator for him to issue a warning.

Just tell me directly and ask me to rewrite the post with no more offense to you, and also demand even an apology.

That should save a lot of unnecessary time and trouble for all concerned.

On the evidence of the rest of this thread (and of your last few threads) it doesn't appear that you take much notice of anything that others post here, so this would probably be a futile course of action.
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2009, 04:44 PM   #177
yrreg
Master Poster
 
yrreg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,389
Just point out what is impossible in my concept of God as concept.

For the rest of you, just point out what is impossible in my concept of God as concept.
The maker of heaven and earth and everything.

You see, everyone, atheists bring in so many concepts of God, but theists like yours truly tell you that in many of their concepts of God, they are missing out on what theists like myself harbor in our brain as the concept of God.






Yrreg
yrreg is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2009, 05:04 PM   #178
Elizabeth I
Olympic Equestrian Wannabe
 
Elizabeth I's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Defending the Alamo
Posts: 9,920
Quote:
You see AndyD, what I am trying to find out is whether atheists here can accept that concept of God, namely: the maker of heaven and earth and everything, as one that is possible in the human brain, but prescinding from the question of God's existence at this point of the thread.
Prescind: v.tr. To separate or divide in thought; consider individually.
v.intr. To withdraw one's attention.


In this context, I'm not sure prescind is the word you wanted.
__________________

• There is something about the outside of a horse that is good for the inside of a man. - Winston Churchill
• Never wrestle with a pig - you just get dirty and the pig enjoys it.
• My blog: Pardon me, may I ask...
Elizabeth I is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2009, 05:25 PM   #179
yrreg
Master Poster
 
yrreg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,389
Remember not to be straitjacketed by dictionaries.

Originally Posted by Elizabeth I View Post
Quote:
You see AndyD, what I am trying to find out is whether atheists here can accept that concept of God, namely: the maker of heaven and earth and everything, as one that is possible in the human brain, but prescinding from the question of God's existence at this point of the thread.
Prescind: v.tr. To separate or divide in thought; consider individually.
v.intr. To withdraw one's attention.


In this context, I'm not sure prescind is the word you wanted.


You must remember that language is greater and deeper and higher than any dictionary can contain.


And it is a great catastrophe that people have this idea that they should be enslaved by dictionaries which are made by fellow men who need not be the most versatile and prolific in the use of language.



Anyway, Elizabeth, suppose you tell me what I want to say with that phrase, prescinding from, and rewrite my disputed line for me, then I will examine it and tell you whether you get my thought correctly or not.



Or you want to witness a contest of bringing up the nth number of dictionaries to prove... what?

When people start arguing on the basis of dictionary definition, I usually prescind from their presence.

Wrong use of prescind in that line? You have got to be versatile and prolific in language to understand that word prescind in that line from me.


Haha, gotcha!


Oooops, might get in trouble with some people again.


Can't people here some not ever get any magnanimity of spirit, but must complain to the police precinct for any so much as the most effervescent ether of an offense in the words of Yrreg here?





Yrreg
yrreg is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2009, 05:44 PM   #180
RoboTimbo
Hostile Nanobacon
 
RoboTimbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Prosperity, AZ
Posts: 25,006
Originally Posted by yrreg View Post
Just tell me directly and ask me to rewrite the post with no more offense to you, and also demand even an apology.
You've already said that you don't read posts. How about just stopping with the name calling?

Quote:
That should save a lot of unnecessary time and trouble for all concerned.
I don't mind you getting in trouble.
RoboTimbo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2009, 06:01 PM   #181
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 13,965
Originally Posted by yrreg View Post
For the rest of you, just point out what is impossible in my concept of God as concept.
The maker of heaven and earth and everything.

You see, everyone, atheists bring in so many concepts of God, but theists like yours truly tell you that in many of their concepts of God, they are missing out on what theists like myself harbor in our brain as the concept of God.






Yrreg
The problem with your definition is not that it is impossible. It is that it is incomplete. I do not think you have considered just what a definition is. A definition defines, and in so doing, it does not only state what it applies to, but what it does not apply to. It is in that latter area that your definition falls short.

I truly think that you have not taken this seriously, and also that you are quite mistaken as to what other theists "harbor in their brains as the concept of God." If your definition were what they harbor in their brains, it would be the definition that we see in dictionaries, and it would be the definition arrived at by theologians when they discuss at length the nature of God. But it is not. Those definitions you spurn are the definitions of other theists, not of atheists, for whom the details of God's specific properties and attributes are irrelevant.
__________________
Sir, I have found you an argument; but I am not obliged to find you an understanding. (Samuel Johnson)

I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)
bruto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2009, 06:01 PM   #182
GeeMack
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Not Bandiagara
Posts: 7,241
Originally Posted by yrreg View Post
Just tell me directly and ask me to rewrite the post with no more offense to you, and also demand even an apology.

That should save a lot of unnecessary time and trouble for all concerned.

Okay, yrreg, since you first arrived here you've been rude, insulting, and demanding. You've refused to even acknowledge all but a few legitimate replies to your posts. You've changed the subject more times than anyone here can count, yet you get all pissy when other people slide off topic a bit. You've bailed out completely on threads where you've been proven to lack the knowledge or sense to continue the discussion, instead of showing some integrity and admitting that you've failed. You've regularly shown you don't have the courage to admit you're wrong about anything. You choose your vocabulary in an effort to sound smart rather than in an effort to communicate effectively, and you ignore everyone's request that you make yourself clear. You rely on the most ridiculous collection of strawmen. You won't refine your definition of god to make it useable in a conversation. And you've threatened through hundreds and hundreds of posts to bring in your evidence to substantiate the existence of a god but never even remotely begun to do that.

You need to essentially start over and rewrite pretty much all your posts. The raw stupidity in most of them is offensive. The complete blind ignorance certainly is, too. You owe us all an apology for the total lack of consideration and respect you've shown to the people here who have made an honest effort to engage you in a productive dialog.

Quote:
You see AndyD, what I am trying to find out is whether atheists here can accept that concept of God, namely: the maker of heaven and earth and everything, as one that is possible in the human brain, but prescinding from the question of God's existence at this point of the thread.

We accept that concept as one that is possible in the human brain. That concept, ridiculous as it is, obviously exists in your brain.
GeeMack is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2009, 06:37 PM   #183
Shalamar
Dark Lord of the JREF
 
Shalamar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Super Star Destroyer Executor
Posts: 2,796
Originally Posted by yrreg View Post
This is my concept of God as a theist:
The maker of heaven and earth and everything.

That's a concept of God expressed in eight words.


Now, atheists, you tell me in less than ten words what is your concept of God.


Yrreg
"Man created God in his own image."

Seven words. What do I win?
__________________

"The truth is out there. But the lies are inside your head."
Shalamar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2009, 07:18 PM   #184
Lord Emsworth
Je ne suis pas une de vos élèves
 
Lord Emsworth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Through the Cables and the Underground ...
Posts: 2,998
Originally Posted by yrreg View Post
For the rest of you, just point out what is impossible in my concept of God as concept.[/indent]

Clear up "maker" and I might tell you. Until then, your concept remains insufficient to me. A machine, for example, would not count as God, even if it *could* be called "maker:"
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/coffeemaker


And then there is still this "everything" problem. By definition there cannot exist anything apart from everything, maker or not. This ain't cleared up either and if it is to be taken at face value, then you have your impossibility. A something that is not amongst the existing.
Lord Emsworth is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2009, 07:30 PM   #185
Elizabeth I
Olympic Equestrian Wannabe
 
Elizabeth I's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Defending the Alamo
Posts: 9,920
Quote:
You must remember that language is greater and deeper and higher than any dictionary can contain.

And it is a great catastrophe that people have this idea that they should be enslaved by dictionaries which are made by fellow men who need not be the most versatile and prolific in the use of language.

Anyway, Elizabeth, suppose you tell me what I want to say with that phrase, prescinding from, and rewrite my disputed line for me, then I will examine it and tell you whether you get my thought correctly or not.

Or you want to witness a contest of bringing up the nth number of dictionaries to prove... what?

When people start arguing on the basis of dictionary definition, I usually prescind from their presence.

Wrong use of prescind in that line? You have got to be versatile and prolific in language to understand that word prescind in that line from me.

Originally Posted by Through the Looking Glass
'To be sure I was!' Humpty Dumpty said gaily as she turned it round for him. `I thought it looked a little queer. As I was saying, that seems to be done right -- though I haven't time to look it over thoroughly just now -- and that shows that there are three hundred and sixty-four days when you might get un-birthday presents --'

`Certainly,' said Alice.

`And only one for birthday presents, you know. There's glory for you!'

`I don't know what you mean by "glory",' Alice said.

Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. `Of course you don't -- till I tell you. I meant "there's a nice knock-down argument for you!"'

`But "glory" doesn't mean "a nice knock-down argument",' Alice objected.

`When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.'"
Of course, one can operate in this manner, but then one shouldn't expect anyone to understand what he says. And language, whether spoken or written, is intended to communicate.

How the hell should I know what you meant?

Quote:
Can't people here some not ever get any magnanimity of spirit, but must complain to the police precinct for any so much as the most effervescent ether of an offense in the words of Yrreg here?
Yep, I was right. It's a Babelfish translation, cut and pasted.
__________________

• There is something about the outside of a horse that is good for the inside of a man. - Winston Churchill
• Never wrestle with a pig - you just get dirty and the pig enjoys it.
• My blog: Pardon me, may I ask...

Last edited by Elizabeth I; 15th February 2009 at 07:31 PM. Reason: to correct quote
Elizabeth I is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2009, 07:49 PM   #186
yrreg
Master Poster
 
yrreg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,389
Remember what is the distinction between "sensu aienti" and "sensu neganti." *

Originally Posted by bruto View Post
Posted by yrreg
For the rest of you, just point out what is impossible in my concept of God as concept.

The maker of heaven and earth and everything.

You see, everyone, atheists bring in so many concepts of God, but theists like yours truly tell you that in many of their concepts of God, they are missing out on what theists like myself harbor in our brain as the concept of God.



The problem with your definition is not that it is impossible. It is that it is incomplete. I do not think you have considered just what a definition is. A definition defines, and in so doing, it does not only state what it applies to, but what it does not apply to. It is in that latter area that your definition falls short.

I truly think that you have not taken this seriously, and also that you are quite mistaken as to what other theists "harbor in their brains as the concept of God." If your definition were what they harbor in their brains, it would be the definition that we see in dictionaries, and it would be the definition arrived at by theologians when they discuss at length the nature of God. But it is not. Those definitions you spurn are the definitions of other theists, not of atheists, for whom the details of God's specific properties and attributes are irrelevant.

Dear Bruto, I hope you are not one to lack in magnanimity unlike pusillanimous souls here who would swoon in fits of anger at the mention of brain peculiarity on their part.


You say about my description of God as the maker of heaven and earth and everything:
The problem with your definition is not that it is impossible. It is that it is incomplete. I do not think you have considered just what a definition is. A definition defines, and in so doing, it does not only state what it applies to, but what it does not apply to. It is in that latter area that your definition falls short.

Let's attend to this particular text from you:
"A definition defines, and in so doing, it does not only state what it applies to, but what it does not apply to. It is in that latter area that your definition falls short."
To be diplomatic I will just say that you have a peculiar idea that dictionaries have the job of restricting people from applying a word to objects they don't include in their definitions.

I for my own part definitely maintain something altogether distinctly different from your idea of the job of dictionaries, namely, that if they do at least imply what objects their definitions apply to, they don't in effect restrict their definitions to only those objects.


I will just seriously suggest to you to think: whether your employment of dictionaries in that respect is doing yourself a service or a disservice, and giving credit to the authors of dictionaries.




Yrreg
*See my post here, in a past thread.
yrreg is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2009, 07:57 PM   #187
MIKILLINI
Incromulent Logic
 
MIKILLINI's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: The Illini State
Posts: 2,988
Originally Posted by Elizabeth I View Post
Of course, one can operate in this manner, but then one shouldn't expect anyone to understand what he says. And language, whether spoken or written, is intended to communicate.

.
He is one who speaks of mastery in English. He may know all the words but does not structure them well for effective communication. In fact, it seems he tries to use every English word there is in one thread.

Case in point: Look at post #186.
__________________
Attempting to build a case without evidence is just another day spent with no use of common sense.-Me

The conspiracist is not merely illogical: he assaults logic.~ Pomeroo
MIKILLINI is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2009, 08:05 PM   #188
NobbyNobbs
Gazerbeam's Protege
 
NobbyNobbs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: The Mended Drum
Posts: 5,634
Originally Posted by yrreg View Post

To be diplomatic I will just say that you have a peculiar idea that dictionaries have the job of restricting people from applying a word to objects they don't include in their definitions.

I for my own part definitely maintain something altogether distinctly different from your idea of the job of dictionaries, namely, that if they do at least imply what objects their definitions apply to, they don't in effect restrict their definitions to only those objects.


I will just seriously suggest to you to think: whether your employment of dictionaries in that respect is doing yourself a service or a disservice, and giving credit to the authors of dictionaries.

Yrreg,

Your basketball is most definitely liquidity and sharp.

And by "basketball" I mean "argument". By "liquidity" I meant "ridiculous" and by "sharp" I meant "pointless".

But since you and I don't let dictionaries restrict us in the use of words, you already understood what I meant, didn't you?

__________________
I wish someone would find something I wrote on this board to be sig-worthy, thereby effectively granting me immortality.--Antiquehunter
The gods do not deduct from a man's allotted years on earth the time spent eating butterscotch pudding.
AMERICA! NUMBER 1 IN PARTICLE PHYSICS SINCE JULY 4TH, 1776!!! --SusanConstant
NobbyNobbs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2009, 08:11 PM   #189
yrreg
Master Poster
 
yrreg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,389
You want to tell people what you deny or lack in your repertory of concepts...

You want to tell people what you deny or lack in your repertory of concepts, yet you don't want to concur with people on their concepts like God which you deny or maintain to lack knowledge of.


That is why it is almost impossible to have any productive exchange of thoughts with atheists.


Thanks just the same for your contributions, because I am sure from my part that people are having fun here who do derive enjoyment from reading our posts, and also in some way to some extent they are getting some enhancement of their intellectual culture.


Apologies to folks where whose posts I do not react to, because as the saying goes, ars longa, vita brevis,* i.e., art is long but life is short, that is why I have to just limit myself to the posts that I usually answer to, the ones in particular that come immediately after my last post of the previous session.



Another thing, I stop using the word mind, but instead use the word brain, because it is certainly most empirical compared to the word mind.


So, please bear with me: brain is the only thing in a human that no human can deny without erasing himself from the universe of existence as human.





Yrreg

*Ars here has nothing to do with the posterior sewage opening of animals, it is the latin word for art.
yrreg is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2009, 08:19 PM   #190
MIKILLINI
Incromulent Logic
 
MIKILLINI's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: The Illini State
Posts: 2,988
Well Yrreg you can have your concept of God, but that's all you have: A concept. How did you acquire the conception of God?
Or did you just come up with the concept all on your own?

Simple questions, yrreg. Can you answer them?
__________________
Attempting to build a case without evidence is just another day spent with no use of common sense.-Me

The conspiracist is not merely illogical: he assaults logic.~ Pomeroo

Last edited by MIKILLINI; 15th February 2009 at 08:20 PM.
MIKILLINI is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2009, 08:56 PM   #191
X
Slide Rulez 4 Life
 
X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Launching the army, waiting for Hok to commit her forces (then the moles strike...)
Posts: 4,120
Originally Posted by yrreg View Post
Just tell me directly and ask me to rewrite the post with no more offense to you, and also demand even an apology.

That should save a lot of unnecessary time and trouble for all concerned.

Here's a novel idea, mate: Stop insulting people. Seriously. I cannot fathom how you manage to think the problem lies with people reporting your posts. It lies with the way you write them. Stop being rude, and your posts won't get reported.


----- ----- -----


Originally Posted by yrreg View Post
For the rest of you, just point out what is impossible in my concept of God as concept.
The maker of heaven and earth and everything.

You see, everyone, atheists bring in so many concepts of God, but theists like yours truly tell you that in many of their concepts of God, they are missing out on what theists like myself harbor in our brain as the concept of God.


"Impossible" is an odd word choice. If I say nothing is impossible with that definition, will you jump out, yell "Haha Gotcha!" and claim I admitted your god is possible?

Read carefully: Your definition fails to inform other people of what you are talking about.

Allow me to quote you: "theists like myself harbor in our brain as the concept of God."

"the concept of God."

"THE CONCEPT OF GOD"

"THE CONCEPT OF GOD"

What do you notice about the bit I've emphasized?

No, not the fact that I've quoted is multiple times.
No, not the fact that I've written it in caps.
No, not the fact that it is bolded.

The important thing here is that it is singular. You are plainly talking about one specific concept of one specific god.
But your definition does not tell us which god this is.

As has been pointed out to you (repeatedly), there are many (that "many" is a link, btw, to a list of creator gods) god concepts which can easily be described as the "maker of heaven and earth and everything".

The fact is that you obviously have a specific god concept in mind.
Your definition, however, does not inform the reader of which one you have in mind.
That is why your definition is not good enough.




I've said this same thing 3 or 4 times now, in this very thread. Yet thus far you have ignored it.

Please reply, Yrreg, so I know that you understand why I reject your definition of god.






Edit: One final point: Verbosity does not equal eloquence.
(In simpler terms: using lots of big words does not mean you are communicating well.)
__________________
It is sad that this is necessary:
Argumentum Ad Hominem: "You are wrong because you are ugly."
Not Ad-Hom: "You are wrong and you are ugly."

[X's posts are] ...as good as having 24 hours of Justin Bieber piped into your ears! - kmortis

Last edited by X; 15th February 2009 at 08:58 PM.
X is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2009, 08:56 PM   #192
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 13,965
Originally Posted by yrreg View Post
Dear Bruto, I hope you are not one to lack in magnanimity unlike pusillanimous souls here who would swoon in fits of anger at the mention of brain peculiarity on their part.


You say about my description of God as the maker of heaven and earth and everything:
The problem with your definition is not that it is impossible. It is that it is incomplete. I do not think you have considered just what a definition is. A definition defines, and in so doing, it does not only state what it applies to, but what it does not apply to. It is in that latter area that your definition falls short.

Let's attend to this particular text from you:
"A definition defines, and in so doing, it does not only state what it applies to, but what it does not apply to. It is in that latter area that your definition falls short."
To be diplomatic I will just say that you have a peculiar idea that dictionaries have the job of restricting people from applying a word to objects they don't include in their definitions.

I for my own part definitely maintain something altogether distinctly different from your idea of the job of dictionaries, namely, that if they do at least imply what objects their definitions apply to, they don't in effect restrict their definitions to only those objects.


I will just seriously suggest to you to think: whether your employment of dictionaries in that respect is doing yourself a service or a disservice, and giving credit to the authors of dictionaries.




Yrreg
*See my post here, in a past thread.
Nobby nobs has said it more artfully that I can, perhaps, but I will just say that you are quite wrong about what you presume I believe about dictionaries. Dictionaries help us to understand the meaning of words as we use them in discourse with each other. It is thus that we can make sure that when we use a word it accomplishes the job of clear communication. If we define a word in our own peculiar way, communication is impeded.

Let me see if I can try once more to express what I mean as if I were speaking to someone who cares about meaning and has a willingness to understand something other than what he already thinks (I realize it's a long shot, but here goes....)

Let us define God, in a way that is incontrovertible, if there is a god at all.

I define God as "something creative"

Now if there is a god at all, this statement is entirely true, and cannot be denied.

But is it a good definition? I don't think so. I think it is a very stupid definition.

Why is it a stupid definition? Because it does not DEFINE. It omits what we need to know to distinguish the thing we are speaking of from other things that are not it.

I could define a dog as "an animal," and would be 100 percent correct, yet the definition would be a bad one, worthless in fact, because other things that are not dogs are animals too.

You see, a statement, even if it is true, is not necessarily a good definition if it does not establish some difference between what it refers to and what it does not.

Now let us look at the definition of god as the creator of everything (including heaven and earth, in case we cannot comprehend what the word "everything" might include). Is that a good definition? Does it distinguish the god belonging to one faith from the god belonging to others? Does it impute any actual characteristics, properties, or attributes to the god in question? It does not. Does it exclude possible forces other than those generally reckoned to be divine? It does not.

So, if you define God as you have, you have perhaps defined the concept of "first cause," which in most theologies is one of the several attributes of God, just as being an animal is one of the several attributes of a dog. You have not, however, come up with a very good definition of God.

And I continue to wonder why you bother with this discussion, since if you chose, you could almost certainly provide a better and fuller definition, or reference one, which would resolve much of this debate even if it did not convince anyone that the god in question actually exists.
__________________
Sir, I have found you an argument; but I am not obliged to find you an understanding. (Samuel Johnson)

I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)
bruto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th February 2009, 12:01 AM   #193
Ron_Tomkins
Satan's Helper
 
Ron_Tomkins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: NYC
Posts: 35,265
Ok..... ............how about this one for the "Tooth Fairy"?

A kindred spirited little girl with pointy ears and transparent wings who floats in a pink cloud of dust, is about 12 centimeters tall and has the ability to grant wishes to children
Ron_Tomkins is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th February 2009, 12:24 AM   #194
Hokulele
Official Nemesis
 
Hokulele's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Trying to decide whether to set defenses against an army, or against mole rats.
Posts: 28,168
Originally Posted by blobru View Post
Batur asked the master: "Is God yin, or yang?"

Said master: "God can go **** himself. You figure it out."

commentary: guess apples weren't the only fruit in the garden.

Well, that is certainly a new interpretation of kenshō .
__________________
Yvette: "Blasty! Blasty! Blasty!"
Some person: "Why did you shoot that?"
Yvette: "Blasty! Blasty! Blasty!"

- Tragic Monkey
Hokulele is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th February 2009, 02:13 AM   #195
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Nor Flanden
Posts: 25,529
Originally Posted by yrreg View Post
For the rest of you, just point out what is impossible in my concept of God as concept.
The maker of heaven and earth and everything.

OK, let's go through it...

Your definition contains redundancies: "heaven" and "earth" are included in "everything". "The maker of everything" is the same definition.

Your definition contains a potentially ambiguous term: "heaven" could mean the physical universe apart from the earth, or it could mean the supernatural realm in which the afterlife is alleged to occur. If you are to use this definition as a basis for trying to prove that god exists, you will need to prove the existence of "heaven" (I suspect that atheists will accept that the physical universe exists).

Your definition is to broad to be useful to theists, as it doesn't provide enough detail to identify a particular creator god. Theists are generally very specific as to which particular god they believe in.

Your definition is too narrow to include all gods, as some are not creator gods.

Allow me to suggest a definition of a specific "God" that can be used as a basis for discussion, and which I think you can agree with:
The God of the Bible.
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th February 2009, 02:33 AM   #196
six7s
veretic
 
six7s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Aotearoa
Posts: 8,711
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
Your definition is too narrow to include all gods, as some are not creator gods.

Allow me to suggest a definition of a specific "God" that can be used as a basis for discussion, and which I think you can agree with:
The God of the Bible.
One question:

Which Bible? (there's oodles to pick and choose from)
__________________
Evolution and the rest of reality fascinates the be-jeebus out of me!
six7s is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th February 2009, 03:07 AM   #197
yrreg
Master Poster
 
yrreg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,389
Thanks, Mikillini; yes, I will react to your post.

Originally Posted by MIKILLINI View Post
Well Yrreg you can have your concept of God, but that's all you have: A concept. How did you acquire the conception of God?
Or did you just come up with the concept all on your own?

Simple questions, yrreg. Can you answer them?

I got that concept of God from The Apostles' Creed which I have memorized from childhood:
I believe in God,
The Father Almighty,
Creator of heaven and earth,

Etc. etc. etc.

I just rewrite it as a definition of God, making it easy to understand for any brain with a minimum command of English vocabulary:
The maker of heaven and earth and everything.




Yrreg
yrreg is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th February 2009, 03:14 AM   #198
six7s
veretic
 
six7s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Aotearoa
Posts: 8,711
Originally Posted by yrreg View Post
I got that concept of God from The Apostles' Creed which I have memorized from childhood:
I believe in God,
The Father Almighty,
Creator of heaven and earth,

Etc. etc. etc.
Fairy nuff

One question:

Why the Apostles Creed and not In Which a Search Is Organdized, and Piglet Nearly Meets the Heffalump Again?
__________________
Evolution and the rest of reality fascinates the be-jeebus out of me!
six7s is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th February 2009, 03:22 AM   #199
paximperium
Penultimate Amazing
 
paximperium's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Silicon Valley-Stuck between Google and Apple
Posts: 10,724
Ahhhh, Yrreg, now wasn't that easy?
Your Definition of God:
Quote:
Apostles Creed
I believe in God, the Father Almighty,
the Maker of heaven and earth,
and in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord:


Who was conceived by the Holy Ghost,
born of the virgin Mary,
suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, dead, and buried;


He descended into hell.

The third day He arose again from the dead;
He ascended into heaven,
and sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty;
from thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead.


I believe in the Holy Ghost;
the holy catholic church;
the communion of saints;
the forgiveness of sins;
the resurrection of the body;
and the life everlasting.


Amen.
You could have easily defined your god as "God of the Bible" and I doubt many here would have much of an issue with that definition.
__________________
"The method of science is tried and true. It is not perfect, it's just the best we have. And to abandon it with its skeptical protocols is the pathway to a dark age." -Carl Sagan
"They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it's not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance."-Terry Pratchett
paximperium is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th February 2009, 03:28 AM   #200
Aitch
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: StAines
Posts: 2,730
Originally Posted by yrreg View Post
I got that concept of God from The Apostles' Creed which I have memorized from childhood:
So it's not your concept; it's someone else's that you accepted as a child and still hold.

Have you ever queried/examined it?
Aitch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

JREF Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:27 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2001-2013, James Randi Educational Foundation. All Rights Reserved.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.