Comments on: Occam’s Razor On Religion

By: nyokki

nyokki — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 00:35:55 +0000

@conan776: Being called to task by the Pope from Avignon is essentially useless info too. By those standards, I'd be too religious. But, yes, he did seem to value the life of a Franciscan Monk.

By: conan776

conan776 — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 21:34:03 +0000

@nyokki: Hard to get more religious than to be a Franciscan friar in Europe at that point in time. William of Ockham was later excommunicated by the Church for spreading ideas the Pope considered /too/ religious o_O. Besides, if everyone was Catholic back then the image should note that the bottom half is not drawn to scale. (The red line should actually go back to ~70AD anyway.)

By: nyokki

nyokki — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 18:05:24 +0000

@conan776: Everyone in the 14th century was Catholic, until Henry VIII anyway. Being Catholic, or even a friar, doesn't really give us any info about how religious a person was.

By: conan776

conan776 — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 17:41:33 +0000

This image is fail. Do you see why? (Answer: Mr. Occam was Catholic! A friar no less!)

By: thelotuseater725

thelotuseater725 — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 06:48:57 +0000

Goddamnit.

By: nyokki

nyokki — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 04:56:36 +0000

@thelotuseater725: Of course, that's the way I read it. He may have meant something else.

By: thelotuseater725

thelotuseater725 — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 04:55:05 +0000

Alrite that’s what i thought he was getting at but i wasn’t sure if he meant something simpler or deeper. I need to stop reading these threads, they make me look way too deep into things.

By: nyokki

nyokki — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 04:37:06 +0000

@thelotuseater725: I think he's saying that you don't know it exists unless you look (verify). It's the difference between knowledge and belief. He can say his dick is an impressive 12", but that doesn't make it true. If I want to know how big his dick, he must show it to me and I should bring a ruler, hopefully I wouldn't need a magnifying glass.

By: thelotuseater725

thelotuseater725 — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 03:53:13 +0000

Correct me if i am wrong here paul but because you can’t see something it doesn’t exist?

By: Paul_Is_Drunk

Paul_Is_Drunk — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 03:05:02 +0000

I’ll never fail to be amazed at those that claim atheism (default assumption: Gods don’t exist) is on even footing with religions (default assumption: at least one god exists).*

How many times must I say this? The burden of evidence lies on the positive existential proclamation. The default assumption is, no, I do not have a 12inch cock, until you see it. (Even then, you have to pay).

*Many eastern religions can be said to be devoid of deities, including Buddhism & Confucianism.

Egh. I’m giving this one a 4/10… so far…