I'm in the wrong job! £60 an hour for playing make believe!

[spoffle]

How do you know there's not a purple elephant about to stick his **** in your ear and scramble your brain? You don't apparently.

The key thing to remember here is logic. For either of those things to exist, they'd need to violate nearly every law of physics we have, and completely defy every aspect of common sense. I see no evidence that they exist (purple elephant, ghosts, jinns, gods) and MANY reasons why they cannot. Therefore it's a pretty safe, and logical assumption to say they don't.

Yes, we can't prove it, but that doesn't mean that it's an equal argument for and against their existence. EVERYTHING we have says they don't, nothing says they do. Fairly simple to explain that way.

You're using "logic" and "logical" incorrectly. You are using it as synonym for "right" and "correct".

logic [ˈlɒdʒɪk]
n
1. (Philosophy / Logic) the branch of philosophy concerned with analysing the patterns of reasoning by which a conclusion is properly drawn from a set of premises, without reference to meaning or context See also formal logic, deduction [4] induction [4]
2. (Philosophy / Logic) any particular formal system in which are defined axioms and rules of inference Compare formal system, formal language
3. the system and principles of reasoning used in a specific field of study
4. a particular method of argument or reasoning
5. force or effectiveness in argument or dispute
6. reasoned thought or argument, as distinguished from irrationality
7. the relationship and interdependence of a series of events, facts, etc.
(Philosophy / Logic)
chop logic to use excessively subtle or involved logic or argument
9. (Electronics & Computer Science / Computer Science) Electronics Computing
a. the principles underlying the units in a computer system that perform arithmetical and logical operations See also logic circuit
b. (as modifier) a logic element

logical [ˈlɒdʒɪkəl]
adj
1. (Philosophy / Logic) relating to, used in, or characteristic of logic
2. (Philosophy / Logic) using, according to, or deduced from the principles of logic a logical conclusion
3. capable of or characterized by clear or valid reasoning
4. reasonable or necessary because of facts, events, etc. the logical candidate
5. (Electronics & Computer Science / Computer Science) Computing of, performed by, used in, or relating to the logic circuits in a computer
logicality , logicalness n
logically adv

 

[DAnDan]

You're using "logic" and "logical" incorrectly.

I'm honestly a bit baffled that that is what you chose to reply with, especially as those definitions don't say that I've used either incorrectly.

 

[spoffle]

Because you're using it to as if it means right or correct.

"The key thing to remember here is logic"

You are implying that belief in the super natural is illogical as an absolute statement.

"I see no evidence that they exist (purple elephant, ghosts, jinns, gods) and MANY reasons why they cannot. Therefore it's a pretty safe, and logical assumption to say they don't."

You are using "logic" as if it means "correct" which it doesn't. Based on the assumption that these things would defy the laws of physics (a human construct) it's logical to believe they don't exist.

That's simply untrue. It is "logical" for some one who doesn't believe in the super natural or gods, to disbelieve in this sort of stuff, it's also logical for religious, and people who believe in the super natural to believe in this sort of stuff.

It is a consistent train of thought.

 

[DAnDan]

Because you're using it to as if it means right or correct.

"The key thing to remember here is logic"

You are implying that belief in the super natural is illogical as an absolute statement.

"I see no evidence that they exist (purple elephant, ghosts, jinns, gods) and MANY reasons why they cannot. Therefore it's a pretty safe, and logical assumption to say they don't."

You are using "logic" as if it means "correct" which it doesn't. Based on the assumption that these things would defy the laws of physics (a human construct) it's logical to believe they don't exist.

That's simply untrue. It is "logical" for some one who doesn't believe in the super natural or gods, to disbelieve in this sort of stuff, it's also logical for religious, and people who believe in the super natural to believe in this sort of stuff.

It is a consistent train of thought.

I'm sorry, but you're just spouting crap now. Saying that something which breaks the laws of physics isn't illogical (for anyone) is just wrong. No matter how many times you want to say that people can believe what they want, there are certain things which you can't just deny because you want.

You're honestly either trolling, or mentally ill. Either way you'll now be the first person to go on my ignore list, as your lack of basic intelligence and reasoning is genuinely irritating.

 

[spoffle]

I'm sorry, but you're just spouting crap now. Saying that something which breaks the laws of physics isn't illogical (for anyone) is just wrong. No matter how many times you want to say that people can believe what they want, there are certain things which you can't just deny because you want.

You're honestly either trolling, or mentally ill. Either way you'll now be the first person to go on my ignore list, as your lack of basic intelligence and reasoning is genuinely irritating.

Wait wait, you're using the ignore list because you disagree? Are you that emotionally unstable? As I've pointed out further up, just because you have a hard time understanding what I'm saying, doesn't mean that I'm talking rubbish. You don't have to get butthurt over what I've said.

I'm pointing out that you don't understand what logic means, you are again asserting that it's a synonym for right/true. The basic premise is that supernatural beings exist outside of the human construct of the "laws of physics". It isn't illogical and you very clearly don't understand what logic means.

It would be illogical for some one who lives their life and rules their beliefs in very strict accordance with the human construct of the laws of physics, to believe in things that go against the laws of physics, but to simply believe in something that is contrary to the laws of physics isn't by definition illogical.

 

[RoboCod]

What...... The hell........ Is that?

A character from the 1932 film, Freaks.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0022913/


Also, why do people still believe this rubbish?!

correct. Her/his name is Schlitze.

 

[MrMarvelous]

Poor spoffle is just scraping the bottom of the barrels so hard now that his fingers are starting to bleed.

 

[spoffle]

Poor spoffle is just scraping the bottom of the barrels so hard now that his fingers are starting to bleed.

Why? Are you asserting that DAnDan actually does understand logic and is using it correctly? If so, back it up instead of posting a one-liner as if just the mere stating of something makes it so.

 

[Nitefly]

What's a Jinn's favourite alcoholic drink?

Jinn and tonic.

What a Jinn's favourite soft drink?

Jinnger beer.

What's a Jinn's favourite Spice Girl?

Baby spice.

 

[DAnDan]

Wait wait, you're using the ignore list because you disagree? Are you that emotionally unstable? As I've pointed out further up, just because you have a hard time understanding what I'm saying, doesn't mean that I'm talking rubbish. You don't have to get butthurt over what I've said.

I'm pointing out that you don't understand what logic means, you are again asserting that it's a synonym for right/true. The basic premise is that supernatural beings exist outside of the human construct of the "laws of physics". It isn't illogical and you very clearly don't understand what logic means.

It would be illogical for some one who lives their life and rules their beliefs in very strict accordance with the human construct of the laws of physics, to believe in things that go against the laws of physics, but to simply believe in something that is contrary to the laws of physics isn't by definition illogical.

Why am I getting drawn into this again...

I understand logic perfectly well. To say that supernatural beings, which exist outside of all laws of physics "isn't illogical" may just be the funniest thing I've heard this week. Of course I'm using logical to refer to right and wrong here, because to do what I've said is illogical, is, well, simply... wrong. I'm glad you've managed to grasp it though, finally.

I bet you believe we didn't land on the moon either, and that the government puts drugs in the water to monitor what we do.

 

[spoffle]

Why am I getting drawn into this again...

You tell me.

I understand logic perfectly well. To say that supernatural beings, which exist outside of all laws of physics "isn't illogical" may just be the funniest thing I've heard this week. Of course I'm using logical to refer to right and wrong here, because to do what I've said is illogical, is, well, simply... wrong. I'm glad you've managed to grasp it though, finally.

You think you understand logic, putting it in to practice though, it seems you do not. Logical and illogical doesn't mean right and wrong.

As I pointed out above, it's logical for people who believe in the supernatural, to believe in things like ghosts, jinns, spirits and whatever else.

It's logical for some one who doesn't believe in that to dismiss such beliefs.

It's illogical for some one who generally doesn't believe in that sort of stuff, to express opinions that suggest they suddenly do.

You also seem to be struggling to grasp that both logic and the laws of physics are both human constructs.

I bet you believe we didn't land on the moon either, and that the government puts drugs in the water to monitor what we do.

Why?

 

[Xordium]

and that the government puts drugs in the water to monitor what we do.

That's stupid to believe that they put drugs in the water to keep us cooperative and passive. Well actually they get us to do that by encouraging the female members of the population to take contraceptive pills.

 

[DAnDan]

You tell me.

You think you understand logic, putting it in to practice though, it seems you do not. Logical and illogical doesn't mean right and wrong.

As I pointed out above, it's logical for people who believe in the supernatural, to believe in things like ghosts, jinns, spirits and whatever else.

It's logical for some one who doesn't believe in that to dismiss such beliefs.

It's illogical for some one who generally doesn't believe in that sort of stuff, to express opinions that suggest they suddenly do.

You also seem to be struggling to grasp that both logic and the laws of physics are both human constructs.


Why?

Because the stuff you're saying is equally as barmy as most of the conspiracy theories. You're not quite at Magick levels, yet, but you're close, worryingly close.
I get what you're saying, the may think it's logical for them to think it because that's what they (unfortunately) believe. That still doesn't make it a logical thought process in general though. It might make sense to them, that doesn't make it correct, or even acceptable.

Also, are you really claiming that the laws of physics can be broken at will because they're a "human construct". They're our way of definitely the rules of the universe, yet they are still the rules, which things have to obey. That's not a choice, it's simple fact, even you with your warped sense of things can't deny that.

Anyway, this is going in circles, and my 4 year old nephew seems to understand things better than you, so I'm actually going to stop replying now (I mean it this time ).

 

[DAnDan]

That's stupid to believe that they put drugs in the water to keep us cooperative and passive. Well actually they get us to do that by encouraging the female members of the population to take contraceptive pills.

 

[spoffle]

Because the stuff you're saying is equally as barmy as most of the conspiracy theories. You're not quite at Magick levels, yet, but you're close, worryingly close.
I get what you're saying, the may think it's logical for them to think it because that's what they (unfortunately) believe. That still doesn't make it a logical thought process in general though. It might make sense to them, that doesn't make it correct, or even acceptable.

And that's why I said you don't understand what logic means. What I'm saying is no way at all "barmy" or even related to conspiracy theories. Why is it suddenly my issue that you don't understand?

You are taking a stance that everything you believe is correct, and that it would be illogical to believe other things. That's not what logic means or how it works. As I've said, logic is dependent on the person using it. It isn't a synonym for right, wrong, truth or false.

Also, are you really claiming that the laws of physics can be broken at will because they're a "human construct". They're our way of definitely the rules of the universe, yet they are still the rules, which things have to obey. That's not a choice, it's simple fact, even you with your warped sense of things can't deny that.

See, you are having a seriously hard time understand what I'm saying.

I never once suggested or even implied that the laws of physics can be broken at will, where are you getting this from?

Anyway, this is going in circles, and my 4 year old nephew seems to understand things better than you, so I'm actually going to stop replying now (I mean it this time ).

Sure he does. Just try not to instill in to him your beliefs that everything you believe is 100% correct, and if some one thinks something else, they are illogical and mentally unwell.

 

[Johno please?]

People like Spoffle and others on this forums often say "oh people are bad, they just use religion as an excuse"

While the first is true, the second part I think is wrong, they are bad because they are religious, no one flys a plane into a civilian building or blows themselves up in a market full of kids just because "some people are bad" they do it because they think they're going to paradise afterwards and that its a righteous act.

Skip to about 8:00, i couldnt agree more.

 

[spoffle]

It doesn't really apply though, these religious people doing things like that make no sense. Those actions go against the religions that these people supposedly believe in.

Religion doesn't make people bad, and it's very naive to think it does. People do bad things because they do bad things. There are plenty of people who do bad things that do so without any religious reasoning.

Most of the time though, when some one does thing that's horrible, it only really seems to be related to religion when the person is a supposedly a Muslim.

The same way people don't seem to class something as terrorism if the person doing it isn't brown. The actions of that man, Anders Breivik, weren't classed as as terrorism despite being exactly that, it also wasn't classed as religious either despite the guy's beliefs.

Linking a video of Christopher Hitchens is presenting an argument from authority.

 

[bluDawg]

I believe in a god called the space banana that has the ability to poses anyone at any time, it has the ability to make you sleepy within the space of 24 hours ( :O ) . If you want to be cured of the evil spirit banana you must pay me £300 per hour to read from my religious book the elbib to make you feel better while spraying you with water and caffeine. There is no proof of the space banana, but it exists because I say it does and there is a book that is 15 billion years old that says that im correct, but only I can see it if I close my eyes and look into a hat. Its made of solid gold and was sent to me by the banana.

 

[Xordium]

Hitchen's argument is faulty there though (which he acknowledges and later clarifies). His issue was really with the subservient and unquestioning acts that are in the name of religion, someone who assumed a traditional religious role eg the god Emperor of Japan+Mao etc, or indeed anything else that was blindly followed. That's a misrepresentation of his refined arguments.

 

[elmarko]

Yep... No different to horror scopes (astrology) or fortune tellers etc etc... Can't believe these 'trades' are still doing so well!

That would be the never ending wave of stupid people who are more than willing to lap it up.

Personally, I think you should be able to sue them for false advertising (no selling it as entertainment get of jail free card rubbish either when clearly people believe it)