AggieDave 6 #101 October 3, 2003 I copied and pasted from a one line post you posted a few pages back. I'm just now starting to get to read this thread, so I'm a little behind in the responses.--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #102 October 3, 2003 Quotebill, I believe AggieDave is coming at this from a Philo 101 perspective and from that point of view, his definitions are, I believe, the "truth". That's so mean. I have 130credit hours, you'd think that I've taken more then just 101 classes.--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,111 #103 October 3, 2003 >So you're going to tell me that your basic belief system is not going >to influence, at all, your perception of truth as a whole? There is only one truth. There are as many perceptions of truth as there are people. Those perceptions do not change the truth. They are not all "valid" - claiming we should accept creationism as just as valid as evolution is nonsense, as is claiming that "the earth is flat" has some validity because many people believe it. The earth isn't flat, and not all the belief in the world will make it so. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #104 October 3, 2003 I don't agree with you, but I know you won't listen to my reasoning about this point, so I'm going to let it drop... As a side note: about the flat-earth, you know about the modern group of individuals that claim that the earth really is flat. They are trying to back up their version of the truth with all sorts of physics and such. If you haven't heard of this, you should google it, you'd get a good laugh out of it, I'm sure. (Yes, they ARE serious, not joking).--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #105 October 3, 2003 Quote That's so mean. I have 130credit hours, you'd think that I've taken more then just 101 classes. Oh, no doubt, but the definitions part comes straight from a Philo 101 class -- or it certainly -should- have been covered there. It's the basis for quite a bit so it really needs to be covered first.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #106 October 3, 2003 Yup, foundations to be built upon... Anyways, did you find the post I quoted?--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #107 October 3, 2003 Quote (Yes, they ARE serious, not joking). I don't believe they -actually- believe it, but are simply using it as an exercise. I've always been amused by The Flat Earth Society.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #108 October 3, 2003 Quote Anyways, did you find the post I quoted? I gotta be careful here, because maybe you're actually being cleaver and digging up something I said 28 years ago, but it's certainly not something I said in this thread. Edited to add -- Nope, I did manage to find the EXACT quote and it was made by Ron, not me -- http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_view_flat;post=691509;so=ASC;sb=post_latest_reply;#691509 I was pretty damn sure it wasn't me that you were quoting because I generally use ellipsis properly . . . like this.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,111 #109 October 3, 2003 >I don't agree with you, but I know you won't listen to my reasoning >about this point, so I'm going to let it drop... Well, OK - but I haven't really heard your reasoning on the point yet. Is it that people's beliefs, if strong enough, can make the world flat? Or is it that there _is_ no objective truth, that the world all might be one big computer simulation since we perceive it only with fallible senses etc? (sort of a phenomenological approach I suppose) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #110 October 3, 2003 Here's the exact quote: "Never claimed to be "Fair and Balanced" only truthful" I replied from that post, follow the "in reply" link and you'll see. it. --"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #111 October 3, 2003 No, its that people's beliefs will always distort what they know and see, thus, what they believe is truth is not the same as what someone else believes as truth. Your statement that there are facts doesn't really apply. Look at the advancement of science across the past 2000years. The major advancements in science are when someone disregards the "facts" as they know it and applies what they think is the truth to the situation, then are able to disprove the previous facts with their truth. Who's to say that we have the "facts" right now? Who's to say that in 1000 years people will look back and think we're absolutely ludicris for thinking that our "facts" were infalable truths?--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #112 October 3, 2003 Perhaps that's what you thought you quoted me as saying, but if you go TO THIS POST you'll see you actually quoted Ron's post. Also see THIS POST, which is the post in question about you misquoting me. Doh!quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JeffGordon 0 #113 October 3, 2003 kinda ironic when you consider the literal translation of his last name. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,111 #114 October 3, 2003 >No, its that people's beliefs will always distort what they know and > see, thus, what they believe is truth is not the same as what > someone else believes as truth. I agree there. However, there is still an absolute truth. The person whose beliefs bring him closest to that truth is the most "correct" in his beliefs. I'm afraid I don't buy that everyone's beliefs have equal validity; flat-earthers are simply wrong. >Your statement that there are facts doesn't really apply. Look at the > advancement of science across the past 2000years. The major > advancements in science are when someone disregards the "facts" > as they know it and applies what they think is the truth to the > situation, then are able to disprove the previous facts with their > truth. I disagree. No one who prefers to believe that things fall at 0fps^2 on Earth will be able to discover anything valid about gravity. They may postulate a new theory that says we should all float off the planet, but his belief in his new system will not cause us to all float off the planet. The truth that is the force of gravity will remain. There are basic, immutable laws that govern matter and energy in the universe. They don't change depending on our beliefs. We understand some of them, and since we can reproduce results based on that understanding, we have come close to the truth there. That's not to say we understand everything. We understand little about the Higgs boson, for example, and we don't really understand much about how gravity propagates. As we learn more we will get closer to the truth > Who's to say that we have the "facts" right now? Who's to say that > in 1000 years people will look back and think we're absolutely > ludicris for thinking that our "facts" were infalable truths? Most physicists make a pretty careful distinction between facts and theories. Things fall at 32fps^2 on the earth - fact. No future experimenter will be able to show that things really fell _up_ in 2003. although he may have a new theory on why they do fall down. EM waves propagate - fact. A future researcher may have a different theory on how they are generated, but that will not make all radios suddenly stop working. The universe doesn't change. Our understanding of it does. The more we understand it, the closer we come to the truth - and that truth is a constant. We understand a lot of it to great detail - it's unlikely that a future organic chemist will claim the laws of thermodynamics are invalid. We all believe what we want. If you believe something that is very close to the underlying truth, you are close to being correct. If your belief is far from that underlying truth, you're wrong. I know that's not a very politically correct thing to say, but so be it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Deuce 1 #115 October 3, 2003 Q-dog, anybody who ever spoke in front of a large crowd would relish the power of casting the kind of spell that would have over 100,000 people cheering madly one moment, and perfectly rapt with attention the next. Any comedian, rock star, or evangelist would be lying if they said different. I would probably use the Pope John Paul's multilingual address on Easter Sunday as my example, but it is not as mediagenic. I do emphatically think this is ridiculous last-minute mudslinging. I hope that it extinguishes the usefulness of negative campaigning for good. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #116 October 3, 2003 Quote>Things fall at 32fps on the earth - fact. reply] I know what you meant to say, but since this is about facts and perception of reality and learning as absolute facts vs perception, you want to take another look at this one. Including significant figures, the units being ft/s/s not ft/s, assumptions on tidal distortions, elevation, etc. Or else someone with bite on this harmless example and try to reduce that list of what you consider absolute. The point being is your point. Which is well taken. If someone knows there is an absolute fact, but has his perspective of that fact incorrect, he could really make some bad subjective judgement calls because his basis is flawed. In this example, thing fall at "32 fps" might result in you not opening you parachute in time since you actually made it to 120 or 150 or 180 mph during your jump. Extend this line of thought to political judgements.... ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites quade 4 #117 October 3, 2003 Quote I do emphatically think this is ridiculous last-minute mudslinging. I hope that it extinguishes the usefulness of negative campaigning for good. As I've said repeatedly in this thread, it was to be expected and this tactic is used by BOTH sides. Will it ever stop? I seriously doubt it. Want a FutureCam™ prediction? Look for GWB to go negative on the opposition (probably Clark) between the Dem primary and the national election.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SkyDekker 1,465 #118 October 3, 2003 QuoteQ-dog, anybody who ever spoke in front of a large crowd would relish the power of casting the kind of spell that would have over 100,000 people cheering madly one moment, and perfectly rapt with attention the next. Any comedian, rock star, or evangelist would be lying if they said different. I would probably use the Pope John Paul's multilingual address on Easter Sunday as my example, but it is not as mediagenic. I do emphatically think this is ridiculous last-minute mudslinging. I hope that it extinguishes the usefulness of negative campaigning for good. I agree Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites AggieDave 6 #119 October 3, 2003 D'oh! Sorry about that, no wonder we were confusing each other. What I posted the 2nd time is what I was really meaning to post. *embarressed over here, sorry*--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites sssbc99 0 #120 October 3, 2003 Quotekinda ironic when you consider the literal translation of his last name. I'm way to lazy to look it up. Post a link dammit. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Ron 10 #121 October 3, 2003 Dave I think just copied and pasted without checking what he copied...I have done it myself to be honest. QuoteI was pretty damn sure it wasn't me that you were quoting because I generally use ellipsis properly . . . like this. Im lazy and at work ok!!!! Geeze what a harsh crowd!!!!! How the hell did RSL's get dragged into this any way?"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites quade 4 #122 October 3, 2003 Clearly! But even after I pointed it out to him, his eyes couldn't see it. It's an interesting phenomenon summed up best by the character "The Rock Man" in the movie "The Point". It also applies to this entire thread and in general most of life. The Rock Man said, "You see what you want to see. You hear what you want to hear."quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Jib 0 #123 October 3, 2003 QuoteThe Rock Man said, "You see what you want to see. You hear what you want to hear." I thought that was a Simon & Garfunkel tune? -------------------------------------------------- the depth of his depravity sickens me. -- Jerry Falwell, People v. Larry Flynt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites quade 4 #124 October 3, 2003 Perhaps a sentiment voiced by several, but clearly by The Rock Man in "The Point". Trust me, I'm a professional. quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites freeflybella 0 #125 October 3, 2003 Not to take sides on this issue - I have no feelings either way about A.S. I think we would all agree that we would like our leaders and future leaders to admire great people with great ideas - that were subsequently adored for their character and strength, etc. Not to admire hateful people with the ability to influence and manipulate. Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next Page 5 of 9 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
quade 4 #117 October 3, 2003 Quote I do emphatically think this is ridiculous last-minute mudslinging. I hope that it extinguishes the usefulness of negative campaigning for good. As I've said repeatedly in this thread, it was to be expected and this tactic is used by BOTH sides. Will it ever stop? I seriously doubt it. Want a FutureCam™ prediction? Look for GWB to go negative on the opposition (probably Clark) between the Dem primary and the national election.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #118 October 3, 2003 QuoteQ-dog, anybody who ever spoke in front of a large crowd would relish the power of casting the kind of spell that would have over 100,000 people cheering madly one moment, and perfectly rapt with attention the next. Any comedian, rock star, or evangelist would be lying if they said different. I would probably use the Pope John Paul's multilingual address on Easter Sunday as my example, but it is not as mediagenic. I do emphatically think this is ridiculous last-minute mudslinging. I hope that it extinguishes the usefulness of negative campaigning for good. I agree Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #119 October 3, 2003 D'oh! Sorry about that, no wonder we were confusing each other. What I posted the 2nd time is what I was really meaning to post. *embarressed over here, sorry*--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sssbc99 0 #120 October 3, 2003 Quotekinda ironic when you consider the literal translation of his last name. I'm way to lazy to look it up. Post a link dammit. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #121 October 3, 2003 Dave I think just copied and pasted without checking what he copied...I have done it myself to be honest. QuoteI was pretty damn sure it wasn't me that you were quoting because I generally use ellipsis properly . . . like this. Im lazy and at work ok!!!! Geeze what a harsh crowd!!!!! How the hell did RSL's get dragged into this any way?"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #122 October 3, 2003 Clearly! But even after I pointed it out to him, his eyes couldn't see it. It's an interesting phenomenon summed up best by the character "The Rock Man" in the movie "The Point". It also applies to this entire thread and in general most of life. The Rock Man said, "You see what you want to see. You hear what you want to hear."quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jib 0 #123 October 3, 2003 QuoteThe Rock Man said, "You see what you want to see. You hear what you want to hear." I thought that was a Simon & Garfunkel tune? -------------------------------------------------- the depth of his depravity sickens me. -- Jerry Falwell, People v. Larry Flynt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #124 October 3, 2003 Perhaps a sentiment voiced by several, but clearly by The Rock Man in "The Point". Trust me, I'm a professional. quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflybella 0 #125 October 3, 2003 Not to take sides on this issue - I have no feelings either way about A.S. I think we would all agree that we would like our leaders and future leaders to admire great people with great ideas - that were subsequently adored for their character and strength, etc. Not to admire hateful people with the ability to influence and manipulate. Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
