String theory is what?

[Twiglet]

Voting yes.

String theory, a theory is search of a reality to describe, and no evidence that I'm aware of suggests it's this one. Still a theory though

[The Dagda]

I'm a great believer in String theory

it has been destroyed so many times.

Cognitive dissonance?

Belief is a faith based object. So no.

Voting yes.

String theory, a theory is search of a reality to describe, and no evidence that I'm aware of suggests it's this one. Still a theory though

No it isn't there's a difference between a theory and a scientific theory.

[hackenslash]

You believe in something that has been destroyed?

Oh, and belief is an object now?

I hope you have your 'mindless proles' argument at the ready, because it looks like you might need it.

[The Dagda]

You believe in something that has been destroyed?

what does that have to do with anything, are you even thinking before you post this crap?

Please save your semantic postulations for someone who might give a shit. And try attacking what I said not how I said it.

Oh, and belief is an object now?

What are you on? And can I get some?

I hope you have your 'mindless proles' argument at the ready, because it looks like you might need it.

What are you babbling about? Seriously you are completely making no sense at all to me.

[hackenslash]

You believe in something that has been destroyed?

what does that have to do anything, are you even thinking before you post this crap?

That's what you said. I would say that indicates that you think it has something to do with something.

Oh, and belief is an object now?

What are you on? And can I get some?

Excuse me?

I hope you have your 'mindless proles' argument at the ready, because it looks like you might need it.

What are you babbling about? Seriously you are completely making no sense at all to me.

Ah, perhaps I assumed you were somebody else who also used that pic as his avatar when he was trolling another forum with similar ignorant bollocks. My apologies.

[The Dagda]

You believe in something that has been destroyed?

what does that have to do anything, are you even thinking before you post this crap?

That's what you said. I would say that indicates that you think it has something to do with something.

The answer is yes then you are just talking shit in lieu of making a point.

Oh, and belief is an object now?

What are you on? And can I get some?

Excuse me?

I hope you have your 'mindless proles' argument at the ready, because it looks like you might need it.

What are you babbling about? Seriously you are completely making no sense at all to me.

Ah, perhaps I assumed you were somebody else who also used that pic as his avatar when he was trolling another forum with similar ignorant bollocks. My apologies.

Get over yourself then, who do you think you are the internet police?

Is string theory a theory, no. That is the point, can someone believe in a theory that has been destroyed by philosophy, yes. Now for fucks sake shut up.

[hackenslash]

the answer is yes then you are just talking shit in lieu of making a point.

Err, except that you spouted the bollocks in the first place.

Get over yourself then, who do you think you are the internet police?

Perhaps I wasn't wrong after all. Maybe that avatar simply has the same effect on everybody who uses it. Who knows?

[Anonymous]

the answer is yes then you are just talking shit in lieu of making a point.

Err, except that you spouted the bollocks in the first place.

Get over yourself then, who do you think you are the internet police?

Perhaps I wasn't wrong after all. Maybe that avatar simply has the same effect on everybody who uses it. Who knows?

What bollocks?

I said I believe in a theory that isn't one because it has been destroyed. What are you some sort of internet clown?

Can you please tell me how its cognitive dissonance to have faith in something that might be true and might not?

I don't give a shit about your petty argument with someone on the internet I don't even have a clue about. Get over yourself.

http://mypicturesandsht.webs.com/Interweb%20police.gif[/imgc]

Perhaps you can get something like this so you can take control of peoples ideas on the internet?

[hackenslash]

What bollocks?

This:

I said I believe in a theory that isn't one because it has been destroyed.

And you don't see any dissonance there?

What are you some sort of internet clown?

As it happens, yes. Though what that has to do with M-Theory is a mystery to me.

Can you please tell me how its cognitive dissonance to have faith in something that might be true and might not?

Err, if it's been destroyed, then it isn't true. How hard is this?

I don't give a shit about your petty argument with someone on the internet I don't even have a clue about.

Good for you!

Get over yourself.

I am over myself, always.

Anyhoo, it's been fun, but now back to the topic at hand...

[Anonymous]

What bollocks?

This:

I said I believe in a theory that isn't one because it has been destroyed.

And you don't see any dissonance there?

What are you some sort of internet clown?

As it happens, yes. Though what that has to do with M-Theory is a mystery to me.

Can you please tell me how its cognitive dissonance to have faith in something that might be true and might not?

Err, if it's been destroyed, then it isn't true. How hard is this?

I don't give a shit about your petty argument with someone on the internet I don't even have a clue about.

Good for you!

Get over yourself.

I am over myself, always.

Anyhoo, it's been fun, but now back to the topic at hand...

So if I make a logical argument destroying a theory about God existing I would automatically destroy religion overnight?

Thanks for the heads up, if you reply to this I'm going to put you on ignore, clearly you are just trying to annoy me with your contentless wankery.

Epistemological validity of faith

There exists a wide spectrum of opinion with respect to the epistemological validity of faith. On one extreme is logical positivism, which denies the validity of any beliefs held by faith; on the other extreme is fideism, which holds that true belief can only arise from faith, because reason and evidence cannot lead to truth. Some foundationalists, such as St. Augustine of Hippo and Alvin Plantinga, hold that all of our beliefs rest ultimately on beliefs accepted by faith. Others, such as C. S. Lewis, hold that faith is merely the virtue by which we hold to our reasoned ideas, despite moods to the contrary.[7]

William James was thinking that the varieties of religious experiences should be sought by psychologists, because they represent the closest thing to a microscope of the mind—that is, they show us in drastically enlarged form the normal processes of things. For a useful interpretation of human reality, to share faith experience he said that we must each make certain "over-beliefs" in things which, while they cannot be proven on the basis of experience, help us to live fuller and better lives.

Try a crash course in philosophy and take your foot out of your mouth.

[JimC]

Guys, this topic seems to be heating up again, and on the verge of getting a tad personal at times...

(not quite over the line yet...)

I thought, with a certain poster gone to that great String in the sky, we might get back to purely attacking arguments...

Let's reduce the temperature a little, eh...

[The Dagda]

Guys, this topic seems to be heating up again, and on the verge of getting a tad personal at times...

(not quite over the line yet...)

I thought, with a certain poster gone to that great String in the sky, we might get back to purely attacking arguments...

Let's reduce the temperature a little, eh...

That's fine by me, it depends whether this self confessed clown wants to stop talking shit at me in lieu of an argument.

[hackenslash]

Epistemological validity of faith

There exists a wide spectrum of opinion with respect to the epistemological validity of faith. On one extreme is logical positivism, which denies the validity of any beliefs held by faith; on the other extreme is fideism, which holds that true belief can only arise from faith, because reason and evidence cannot lead to truth. Some foundationalists, such as St. Augustine of Hippo and Alvin Plantinga, hold that all of our beliefs rest ultimately on beliefs accepted by faith. Others, such as C. S. Lewis, hold that faith is merely the virtue by which we hold to our reasoned ideas, despite moods to the contrary.[7]

William James was thinking that the varieties of religious experiences should be sought by psychologists, because they represent the closest thing to a microscope of the mind—that is, they show us in drastically enlarged form the normal processes of things. For a useful interpretation of human reality, to share faith experience he said that we must each make certain "over-beliefs" in things which, while they cannot be proven on the basis of experience, help us to live fuller and better lives.

Try a crash course in philosophy and take your foot out of your mouth.

Ah, yes, because the belly-button is a source of knowledge.

Am I ignored yet?

[The Dagda]

Epistemological validity of faith

There exists a wide spectrum of opinion with respect to the epistemological validity of faith. On one extreme is logical positivism, which denies the validity of any beliefs held by faith; on the other extreme is fideism, which holds that true belief can only arise from faith, because reason and evidence cannot lead to truth. Some foundationalists, such as St. Augustine of Hippo and Alvin Plantinga, hold that all of our beliefs rest ultimately on beliefs accepted by faith. Others, such as C. S. Lewis, hold that faith is merely the virtue by which we hold to our reasoned ideas, despite moods to the contrary.[7]

William James was thinking that the varieties of religious experiences should be sought by psychologists, because they represent the closest thing to a microscope of the mind—that is, they show us in drastically enlarged form the normal processes of things. For a useful interpretation of human reality, to share faith experience he said that we must each make certain "over-beliefs" in things which, while they cannot be proven on the basis of experience, help us to live fuller and better lives.

Try a crash course in philosophy and take your foot out of your mouth.

Ah, yes, because the belly-button is a source of knowledge.

Am I ignored yet?

Are you just trolling because you are an idiot or despite being one?

So you're not just wrong and talking shit you can't admit it either? Yeah I think I might apply the ignore button as clearly you are not worth anyone's time. I bet that person you mentioned was reasoned and you were the one talking shit. If your posting style is any indication.

[The Dagda]

Guys, this topic seems to be heating up again, and on the verge of getting a tad personal at times...

(not quite over the line yet...)

I thought, with a certain poster gone to that great String in the sky, we might get back to purely attacking arguments...

Let's reduce the temperature a little, eh...

That's fine by me, it depends whether this self confessed clown wants to stop talking shit at me in lieu of an argument.

Obviously he doesn't, sorry.