Demons cause non-human animals to be gay. - Page 7 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

veggihatetank · #91 05-20-2012, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aklim

If the animal is sentient and able to give consent legally, I'd say you could go for it.

I'd leave that for you to try. You could even use it as a way to promote evolution.

cmbdiesel · #92 05-20-2012, 08:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MS Fowler

Seems like opposite sides of the same coin to me.

It would seem obvious to me that the person arguing for the existence of an unseen being would carry a significantly larger burden than the person who claims the invisible creature does not exist.
Maybe I'm just a pragmatist.

kerry · #93 05-20-2012, 08:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MS Fowler

Seems like opposite sides of the same coin to me.

So you're saying that claiming that something exists without evidence is the same thing as saying since there's no evidence of the existence of something it doesn't exist?
Do you think that existence claims require evidence? Do you think non-existence claims require the non-existence of evidence?

One side has a reason to justify it's claim, the other doesn't.

cmbdiesel · #94 05-20-2012, 08:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kerry

So you're saying that claiming that something exists without evidence is the same thing as saying since there's no evidence of the existence of something it doesn't exist?
Do you think that existence claims require evidence? Do you think non-existence claims require the non-existence of evidence?

One side has a reason to justify it's claim, the other doesn't.

oh...wait... I thought I was in a birther thread again....

elchivito · #95 05-20-2012, 09:03 PM

Seems to me like, in the absence of material proof (a demon pickled in a jar or something) the burden of proof lies with the believer and the point goes to the non-believer.

kerry · #96 05-20-2012, 09:15 PM

I've actually been in the presence of so-called 'demons'. No evidence there.

elchivito · #97 05-20-2012, 09:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kerry

I've actually been in the presence of so-called 'demons'. No evidence there.

Me too, and they were all quite human.

MS Fowler · #98 05-20-2012, 09:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kerry

So you're saying that claiming that something exists without evidence is the same thing as saying since there's no evidence of the existence of something it doesn't exist?
Do you think that existence claims require evidence? Do you think non-existence claims require the non-existence of evidence?

One side has a reason to justify it's claim, the other doesn't.

We are talking about non-material beings, right? Beings who can not be observed by the normal senses. Since they ( if they exist) are outside what humans can observe, their existence, or non existence is totally a matter of faith.
Just what evidence could one muster to show the existence on non-material beings? --especially to people who accept the physical world as the only world?

I have no dog in this particular hunt, just observing from the sidelines, but it struck me that the rationalists always think their position is somehow superior, when they are simply accepting on faith that the immaterial world cannot exist. Humans, forever, have considered the possibility of non-material beings. Is it arrogant to simply dismiss the possibility?

Honus · #99 05-20-2012, 09:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MS Fowler

...but it struck me that the rationalists always think their position is somehow superior...

Don't you think your position of faith is superior? If so, then how are the rationalists any different?

kerry · #**100** 05-20-2012, 10:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MS Fowler

We are talking about non-material beings, right? Beings who can not be observed by the normal senses. Since they ( if they exist) are outside what humans can observe, their existence, or non existence is totally a matter of faith.
?

No. Most sophisticated monotheists over the centuries have had good reasons for their view that God exists. Most have never left it to faith. It's only very recently that people have begun to think that arbitrarily asserting the existence of something without evidence is a virtue.

It requires no faith to think that immaterial beings don't exist because there's never any reason to suppose they do to begin with.

aklim · #**101** 05-20-2012, 10:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by veggihatetank

I'd leave that for you to try. You could even use it as a way to promote evolution.

I'll pass. I'm not the parenting sort. Besides, most any fool knows that inter-species procreation is very difficult, to say the least.

aklim · #**102** 05-20-2012, 10:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kerry

I've actually been in the presence of so-called 'demons'. No evidence there.

I also saw Santa Clause.

aklim · #**103** 05-20-2012, 10:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MS Fowler

We are talking about non-material beings, right? Beings who can not be observed by the normal senses. Since they ( if they exist) are outside what humans can observe, their existence, or non existence is totally a matter of faith.
Just what evidence could one muster to show the existence on non-material beings? --especially to people who accept the physical world as the only world?

I have no dog in this particular hunt, just observing from the sidelines, but it struck me that the rationalists always think their position is somehow superior, when they are simply accepting on faith that the immaterial world cannot exist. Humans, forever, have considered the possibility of non-material beings. Is it arrogant to simply dismiss the possibility?

Possibility? Yes. However, until you can prove it, all that remains is a possibility. Winning the Megabucks lottery 10 times in a row is a possibility too. Not very probable but possible.

MS Fowler · #**104** 05-21-2012, 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aklim

Possibility? Yes. However, until you can prove it, all that remains is a possibility. Winning the Megabucks lottery 10 times in a row is a possibility too. Not very probable but possible.

How would you convince a color blind person that the color "red" existed? He cannot see it. If his only authority is himself, then it cannot be proved. He must allow some other authority to rule on the matter, right?

davidmash · #**105** 05-21-2012, 11:03 AM

I do not think that is the same. I have never seen a black hole or an atom for that matter but I have no reason to believe that science is lying to the world about them.

All sighted people (except for color blind people) can see color and will verify tot the blind person that there is a color red. I guess it is possible that every single person could lie to the blind person but I find that highly unlikely.

As for demons, there is no scientific proof that they exist and it seems far less than a majority of people believe they exist. As far as I am concerned there is more evidence (mathematical probability) that life exist some where in the universe than the idea that demons exist.