Search results

A LIGHT IN THE BLACK / RAINBOW https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYrW3yONR44

I mean it should be a choice once they become adults so are free to decide for themselves But before then they should be taught as much as possible and with no freedom to choose

There are two distinctive types of ignorance. The first is genuine ignorance where someone does not know something but is willing to learn it while the second is deliberate ignorance where someone does not know something but is not willing to learn it. I think most of the general population...

I see unbelievably ridiculous nonsense on the internet that no amount of critical thinking will ever overcome and the Earth is flat is my all time favourite I would bet my life that if all of the flat Earthers were taken up into space and could see it from the International Space Station they...

It is more than an educational issue because it is a psychological one also. Knowing how to think critically is no good unless it is actually applied. Those who are not interested in it cannot be persuaded. Closed minds cannot be educated so the best that can be done is provide the tools so...

One can educate anyone about the difference between fact and opinion but merely knowing the difference is not enough because if that knowledge is not employed it has zero effect upon general discourse. Ditto logical fallacies and critical thinking. Now one is never going to rid the internet of...

A brain could still be reliable without having to know that what it was observing was actually real As it would simply have to be capable of making logical deductions based upon that observation But it would require a minimum of two brains to do any science since it has to be inter subjective

Do not confuse observation of something with reality. As science has nothing to say about whether observable phenomena are real or not. And while most if not all scientists probably do think that they exist it is not a necessary requirement for them to have in order for them to do science

Posted the link at Rat Skep. I was surprised to read that a turbine can be as small as I00mm. For I think of them as huge generators powering factories and ocean liners. Not something really tiny. I was also surprised that no one came up the idea before. It seems so blindingly obvious

A state of absolute nothing would have to exist if the beginning of the universe was also the beginning of time. Because anything that existed before that point would be subject to change which is measured over time. However absolute nothing can only exist very briefly at the quantum level...

This is not true. Science only investigates observable phenomena so has nothing to say about the nature of said phenomena beyond its physical properties. Ontology is a subject for philosophy not for science. And a small niggle. Math is not a science. It is a system of logic

First comes physics. Then comes chemistry. Then comes biology. That is the natural order required for the existence of life So the transition from non life to life is from chemistry to biology. There is nothing special about this. As It is merely another stage in the evolution of the...

That argument is invalid because it assumes the existence of God without any evidence. It also assumes that subjective interpretation constitutes proof. Now just because something is obvious does not automatically make it true. For if the existence of God was obvious from an objective...

The non existence of God would not automatically be evidence of no objective morality The existence of God would also not automatically be evidence of objective morality The non existence of God and of objective morality could be entirely coincidental The existence of God and of objective...

rational forums / philosophy forums / sceptic conventions

Atheists might have fewer children than theists. But those children are not going to be indoctrinated into the belief system of their parents So will therefore as a consequence be better critical thinkers and sceptics. In evolution it is not so much how many offspring an organism has [ though...

The title of this thread Evolution Hates Atheists is completely ridiculous because it is not capable of conveying emotion. Now you no doubt intended it to be metaphorical rather than literal but it is still equally ridiculous. Also there is absolutely no reason why atheists cannot have as...

I agree with this. Those on our side know you re one of the best when it comes to identifying flaws in argumentation. So are only too happy to learn from you. Whereas those on the other side have no such obligation. I think it more psychologically satisfying from your perspective because some...

Shifting the burden of responsibility is a logical fallacy. The one who makes the claim has to justify it it is not the responsibility of one who disagrees with it to disprove it. They can if they want to but it is not actually necessary Knowledge of future events will impact upon free will...

Evidence is not actually required for a purely hypothetical argument. Instead what is required is logical consistency across the argument in question. Such as between each of the premises and the final premise and the conclusion. This but nothing else I would question the necessity of making...