As simple as possible to summarize the best way you can, first, please. Feel free to expand after, or just say whatever you want lol. Honest question.
As simple as possible to summarize the best way you can, first, please. Feel free to expand after, or just say whatever you want lol. Honest question.
I… Yes? That’s a correct interpretation, but you denied an answer to me. Or perhaps I misunderstood your position, that nobody should ever convert or consider any religion?
I’m saying that your assertion isn’t justified (e.g. it’s just a subjective opinion). That you can’t expect to apply the scientific method to something that transcends the material world and that there are indeed logical arguments for why someone should believe in God as opposed to not believing in God.
I’m an Orthodox Christian.
I don’t think you’re correct with your argument. Why would someone choose any particular religion? That’s the argument. There is no logical argument for that. There are arguments for choose one in general, although logically very flawed. Still, there’s no logical argument I’m aware of to choose a specific one.
There is argumentation beyond the transcendental argument to believe, for example, the Christian God. It has to do with prophesy, metaphysics, theology etc
So… Feelings. I would really like to explore this rationale in your mind. Nobody should convert or join any religion on feelings. Yet, prophecy, metaphysics, theology… So the edge of scientific reasoning but just slightly outside? Or because their father and mother practice it?
To prove you have any good faith in your “critique”. State my argument back to me.
My refute: it is always feelings, the alternative is science
Can you explain?
Then the other person stated how there is no logical argument, that you have to use “feelings” (explaining again the same refutal)
What we refer to then is feelings?
This is this discussion so far from my viewpoint. To add to that, I have to say also that it is clearly triggering for you and difficult to discuss. I don’t mind but take a breather whenever. It makes for a better quality enlightenment.
( Small aside: The supposition that we don’t use science in matters of theology and metaphysics is very important to examine. What do we use? )
Ironically you tried to push this back in my face as if I’m some pedant when it’s the most pragmatic way to make sure we aren’t talking past one another. If you just said “I have no idea” it would have been a better response.
I’ve had some great discussions in this thread and everyone is better for it. You haven’t bothered to even understand what I’m arguing though so this exchange is a waste of time.
Classic run away tactic. Not even one response just more personal attacks. Okay thanks for trying! It was pretty unpleasant to talk to you.