Where's Naomi, Her Trenchant Views In R&s Are...

[sandyRoe]

...missed?

[Khandro]

Ed; I'm not grumpy at all, in fact I feel quite chipper; the sun is shining and I'm off for a round of golf shortly. I asked; "How do we explain rationality and intelligibility themselves,?" to which you answered "it stands to reason" modified to 'evident') and my old sparring partner jomifl writes a long essay without even addressing the question :-)
One or two pars and two or three bogies will cheer me even more, ta-ta.

[pixie373]

Khandro, "reasonable /rational" is something that you can work out with logic in steps. We all need reason. If i tell you there are fairies at the bottom of my garden. Would you believe me? And, either way, what would your reasons be?

[naomi24]

Khandro, regarding your question to Pixie, //Are these questions superfluous, or just too hard to answer?//

…. and mine to you, which you’ve ignored : // How do you reach your conclusions?//

I wouldn't say that question is superfluous, so is it just too hard to answer?

[pixie373]

Hmmm. From wiki-

//It is possible that religion itself may be a trigger for schizophrenia; religious imagery is often very grandiose, and defies commonly held beliefs of what is realistic and natural in the world. Experiencing an intense religious experience may trigger a psychotic episode in those who are vulnerable to them, because religion often requires a believer to suspend their usual idea of what is possible and impossible//

[AB Editor]

jim360 - I still like the questions!

Khandro. I didn't say you were grumpy. I said I see how others get grumpy with you. An example:

I was answering one element of your question - the bit I outlined in my post. You can't decide that I answered a different one of your questions!

You've either not aware of how people communicate with one another, or you're trying very hard to be difficult.

I think it's the latter!

[sandyRoe]

Pixie, whoever posted that in Wiki likely didn't believe that He changed water into wine, fed 5000 from a basket of loaves and fishes, walked on water, and, this the most heartening of all, rose from the dead.
Would it be unfair to say one who was so blinkered must be bonkers?

[pixie373]

Why do you think they don't believe it? Looks reasonable to me. Thinking someone has turned water into wine/rose from the dead is either a hallucination or delusion. What is bonkers? That i think people don't rise from the dead?

[pixie373]

Sorry- you meant they don't believe it happened. I read it as whoever wrote it didn't believe what they wrote!
Now, how is it blinkered? I have NEVER heard if anyone rising from the dead in real life, so am sceptical and there is no proof. Surely that's rational?

[sandyRoe]

Probably. But faith and rationality make for uneasy bedfellows.

[pixie373]

Can you really believe in something you think is irrational?

[sandyRoe]

With the precious gift of faith, yes.

[jim360]

Can you explain why it's a good thing to have the "precious gift of faith" to let you believe in something that, in any other context, would certainly be complete nonsense?

[pixie373]

I prefer the precious gift of rationality. Far more useful:-)

[sandyRoe]

It helps make the journey through this vale of tears easier for some of us.

[pixie373]

Bless you x. In all seriousness- antidepressants?

[sandyRoe]

Antidepressants? No. My hold on rationality is frail enough :-)

[jomifl]

/my old sparring partner jomifl writes a long essay without even addressing the question/
and the question was? :o)

[beso]

Khandro //why do you assume that the universe hangs together in a way that makes explanation possible?//

Because rational scientific investigation has been so incredibly successful in explaining everything we have seen.

These explanations, built upon the two pillars of physical science, General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics have prevailed in every conceivable test for more than a century at the hands of the most brilliant minds among us.

Several logical explanations for the origin of the Universe itself are offered and we continue to make observations to determine which are are able to best match reality.

Meanwhile the God hypothesis has repeatedly has failed miserable with the only "explanation" being the non-explanation "God works in mysterious ways".

As such the faithful prefer to think that the Universe is inexplicable.

[jomifl]

/My hold on rationality is frail enough/

Loosening your hold on irrationality would be a step in the right direction :o)

[Khandro]

jomifl; I asked several questions; viz. "why do you assume that the universe hangs together in a way that makes explanation possible?" Well beso has just attempted that, but not "Where do our notions of explanation, regularity and intelligibility come from?" or, "How do we explain rationality and intelligibility themselves, for that matter?" I then added the postscript; "Are these questions superfluous, or just too hard to answer?"
:-)