Topic: No Other Foundation Than That Which Is In Flying Monster Spaghetti - page 2. (Read 6011 times)

I've come to the conclusion that government is merely a reflection of people; though it can often contribute to creating people in a certain image, ultimately it's people who define their government and if they decide that schools as they are are fine, then that's how they'll be, whether or not they're detrimental.  Another side-effect of rational thought is people taking an incredible interest in politics, as you and I are both anarchists and can attest to

I don't believe it necessarily has to be forced education however; I believe children are naturally curious individuals, though they have their own ways of learning.  It's better to foster their natural curiosity than try to push it out to reinforce an ideology; I can't say a person who wants to understand the "why" of everything can ever change without being punished for it.  Of course I'm only speaking of the right now, where we have to adapt to an authoritative environment, but in an anarcho-capitalist environment, people, including children, are free to go to school or not; the schools adapt entirely to what the market asks for, and in a society where everyone is rational, they're going to want the best schools whose sole focus is to train a person to think, young or old--assuming this is the best method of schooling.  This all works out great since everyone's intelligent enough to at least function in such an environment; in order for anarchism to work, it necessitates secular rationalism; without this, it's always doomed to fail, as non-rationals inevitably revert to seeking guidance from someone who is, or at least claims to be in the case of many rulers.  So there's no worry about anarcho-capitalists being unable to raise children properly, the schools just provide a more quality service.  Until this point in time, however, changes have to be made outside of the system, which then are reflected into government; this is why it takes so long for these shifts to occur.  So long as the Internet remains open and people see a reason to favor rationality over all else, which they primarily are exposed to through the Internet, the gradual shift is toward liberty and anarchy, not away.  It's a slow start, if we count the first anarchists, but it's definitely accelerating.

So in the entire history of the world, no one has ever thought they could fly, and that is the reason no one ever has?  You believe you're going to be the first person ever to break the laws of nature and defy gravity?

This is why no one can talk with you - you have no touch with reality.

Remember dank, you might believe you can't die, but that doesn't mean your actions won't harm others. Think before you do criminally dangerous things on a public road, if just to spare your mother the heartbreak.

If that were the case, how come people in mental institutions don't have superpowers?  Oh wait, because it's not possible.

Thank you! That one's going right up on the mantle next to the award I received for the sequel I wrote to Finding Nemo, an animated musical in which an adolescent Nemo struggles against undersea predujice after falling in love with an eel, titled That's A Moray!

Isn't rational reasoning saying, this happened so this will happen.

How logical is that?

Patterns only repeat themselves because people do not see the pattern to abrupt it their self.

We create the patterns of our reality because it's what we believe.  We believe we can't fly so we can't.  Beliefs formulate our reality, you see what you believe you see, don't you?

If you are capable in believing more than what meets the eye, it may indeed meet the eye.

You're not going to convince someone that has broken logic after seeing physics totally violated in the physical plane.  I'm not the only one to have experienced things like these.

There are no laws in our universe, only energy.  If your energy allows you to do it, you can.

Very true. I've always wondered how to educate children to think for themselves, but it's kind of circular: you have to forcefully educate them not to be forcefully educated...
I guess children will mostly take after their parents, so yes, you'd have to start by convincing parents to give their children as much latitude as possible to figure stuff out for themselves.


Generally speaking, the issue of education has always bothered me as an anarcho-capitalist. It's an ideological black hole for me. I don't think the state is doing a good job with education (or with anything else, for that matter), but what will happen if every parent had completely free reign in educating their children? Seeing as most parents are irrational, religious and uneducated, it could be even worse...

Dank can't make the correlation between multiple universes and physical laws.

Of course there is a theory that an infinite number of universes exist and the laws of physics can be different in each one.

However, the universe we occupy has set laws that cannot be broken.  Maybe in another universe, but not ours.  There is no technology to even view other universes, much less get to them. 

So in our universe a person cannot levitate or stop clouds from moving.  There is no such thing as magic, therefore gods cannot exist.  It's impossible.  A normal person will look at this and understand, but a brainwashed person cannot.

The problem dank has is when he gets stoned and messes up his brain chemistry he thinks he is in another universe, which of course he isn't.  He's just a stoned loser in our universe.  And unfortunately because he smoked pot when his brain was still developing, he probably will never understand it.

So no, you cannot argue logically with dank, because he doesn't have the capability.

I'll have to think about this more; I really do believe we're arriving at the same conclusions, just with a different viewpoint.  Anyway, I'd like to believe there's an effective method of drawing people toward rational thought; so far, the fastest way I know of is to instill such a foundation in a person's childhood, in place of what would've went there, i.e. bogeymen and authorities, such as God or the state, to conquer them.  This seems a gradual shift, as parents will either raise their children with the beliefs and mannerism they were raised with, or those parents went through life-changing events before having kids and made a conscious decision not to raise their kids in the same way.  So this change must occur in adulthood before it can be passed onto children.

The second method would be through changes in education; if a child is taught not how to listen and conform, thus forming a dependency on getting all their knowledge from schools, but instead taught how to learn and thus capable of seeking wisdom on their own (libraries have always been around and now with the Internet, it's a trivial matter to learn anything), the child will be able to draw their own informed conclusions on reality, which should remain in-line with what rational thinkers believe.  Again, for the school system to change, people must accept that it is need of improvement, which also begins with adults.  Which is why I point out, once there is a majority of rational thinkers in any given society, the effect the rational can have is multiplied greatly; so long as we are divided, we're easily conquered.  One thing that makes the internet such a great technology, IMO

Now that's a religion I can get into!

So buying and/or selling near legal drug analogs online?

I completely agree. I just wish I knew how to get people to be rational about their beliefs 


One caveat though: I still don't think usefulness is relevant. God doesn't need to be useful to persist in people's minds. God is a meme, perhaps the most powerful meme ever invented, and memes are like viruses. They propagate themselves by convincing infected minds to transfer the meme to uninfected minds. Religion is so powerful because it is a meme with a built-in replication device: one of the core tenets of almost every religion is that a religious person must do everything is his power to convince more people to believe what he believes (and occasionally kill people who don't). Religious people are brainwashed from a young age that they must never stop believing, and get others to believe as well.
Therefore, god can cling to people's minds without serving any positive use. In fact, I would say all "uses" of god are imagined by believers in order to rationalize their irrational beliefs. God doesn't need to be useful to exist just like viruses are not useful for our cells.

Ha ha well, you may have a point there.  However, I bring this up because, though these arguments make sense to us, they don't seem to have an effect on the people they're geared toward; someone who believes in God may not be completely irrational, but they are at least irrational toward the idea of God; so if the only use of an argument is to appeal to someone who already has a foundation in logical reasoning, thereby allowing the individual doubt on the existence of God, is it valuable?  If not, it would seem, then, that a focus on refuting God is not important; a focus on cultivating rational thinkers matters more.  It's like speaking two different languages; one speaks logic, the other doesn't.  For any of this to make sense to a believer of God, they first need to understand why rational thought is preferable to faith, and if they are rational thinkers, they will already agree with the argument.

This is why I bring up the idea of God being useful; if people can find a use in God, for whatever purpose, and they're surrounded by people who also believe God has a use, then God will continue to exist outside the purview of rationals; if rationals are a minority, then it is far more common for God to exist than for God to not exist; whether or not we can argue God's existence, if people don't have rational thought as their fundamental interpretation of the world, it doesn't matter if what is said makes logical sense if it cannot appeal to the people who are going to wind up changing your life in some way or another, whether through politics or otherwise.  Because of this, the only way to stop the existence of God--and he does exist, for God has and is making a huge impact on the world, albeit only through his believers--is with secular rationalism, thereby ending God's usefulness; a person can't get away with murder "in the name of God" if society doesn't believe there is a God, nor can a person rule by divine right, nor can a person ask forgiveness an infinite amount of times, knowing they must be forgiven for they are God-fearing; though we, i.e. rationals, can argue God isn't real, he's very much alive and well in his believers and always willing to exert his omnipotence--and by that I mean, people are with God as their backing.  There is no use in pointing out God's existence, then; there is only a use in helping people to accept a rational mindset; it is from there they can then understand God's existence.

It will be invested.  Webular based, web based.  I like to make words sound cooler sometimes.

I just got it lol.

Pun of the week award 

Today is Sunday.  Do any other atheists feel the need to gather together and reassure each other we're not crazy?  I sure don't. 

So I'm guessing you still spent the 3k$ you had instead of you know, paying Squall. Also what the hell is a webular business?

He wasn't a true pirate; he was a false profit.

lol 

Does that mean pirateat40 lowered global temperatures???

As you can see here:


Nothing changes the mind of a person who believes