T_Clark

I don't think that's true. Also, I've never thumped a bible. If you were paying any attention to my arguments at all, you'd know I don't make any clai...

There are some very smart people with very good ideas who express them very well here on the forum. Yes, I am avoiding your question.

How about a little more philosophizing and a lot less fetishizing rationality fairytales? Did you see that, how I turned that around. Now that's philo...

There's a good chance there is someone in your area who teaches Buddhist meditation or a similar practice. Find them and start practicing. You should ...

I aspire to be a pretty smart guy with pretty good ideas who expresses them pretty well. From what I've seen, you meet those criteria pretty frequentl...

Come on, 180, if we didn't repeat threads ad nauseum, we'd have nothing to talk about. I once counted six threads about free will active at the same t...

I don't consider your opinions about religious believers' beliefs or psychological motivations credible. You're just too biased.

I was referring to the argument, not you.

Seems like a pretty good definition to me. Anyway, it doesn't matter what you think or what @"180 Proof" thinks the right definition is. That just sho...

Whenever I come across the old omnipotent God/immovable object argument I always want to ask "In a fight between Superman and Santa Claus, who would w...

In order for this argument to be meaningful, you have to consider that hell is real and as described by some religious sources. You write about it as ...

This is just more anti-religious bigotry, so prevalent here on the forum.

As I noted, the fact that you don't consider something good evidence doesn't mean it isn't evidence. That's one of the things reason is supposed to do...

Birds, including owls, are chordates too. All vertebrates - fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds, mammals.

That makes sense. I think I'm confused by the fact that to flame someone is to say something unreasonable and very harsh about them.

Yes. I agree.

I'm sure it's come up on the forum before. I just haven't followed up on it.

I'm a non-theist who is sympathetic to religion. Your questions are good ones for which I don't have any specific answers. On the other hand, bad peop...

No particular instance in mind. I just see it around and keep wondering what it's supposed to mean.

So, it means I agree with you, but you should still burn in hell. Makes sense to me.

With Cara Caras, you have to use duck blood. Thanks.

A little help please. What does this mean? :fire: If someone responds to one of my posts with this, does that mean they agree or disagree?

I read the Wikipedia article on "The Cloud of Unknowing." The quotes included seemed really down to earth and practical, just, as you intimated, like ...

You make the statement, then you provide the justification. I think, in this situation, "seems to me" is a perfectly fine justification - it's like ca...

If you can't get them at your grocery store, just take regular mineolas and soak them in blood. Any kind will work. I like chicken, but whatever you c...

Looks like it must be a pup, or kit, or joey, or foal, or fawn.

Rhinoceroses are chordates, as are fish, as are we all.

Looks like someone also removed the horn so there would be no reason to poach the animal.

You haven't made an argument, you've made a statement. You don't seem to understand how this whole justification thing works. You don't seem to unders...

I don't have to prove it exists. You made the claim. You have to provide the justification.

Sez you.

Your entire argument is metaphysical. I think your rigid reductionism blinds you to that. As I've said elsewhere, metaphysical arguments can not be re...

As Anderson acknowledged, higher levels in a hierarchy develop based on the principles of the lower level, i.e. reductionism. That does not mean that ...

/uploads/resized/files/xk/1kk3t3pbafbv2dtb.png I understand you can get this at a discount, since it is slightly damaged.

The last one looks like what the Wizard gave the Tin Man in the porno version of the Wizard of Oz.

I suggest other participants in this discussion take a look and decide for themselves.

The discussion in the Reductionism and the Hierarchy of Scale thread makes it clear why the premise of this thread and reductionism in general is balo...

I think that's true. I think that's true too.

And the history of life is full of examples of species collapsing because of the competition from invasive organisms, asteroid impacts, vulcanism, glo...

As I indicated in my OP, I think that's a metaphysical division. It's useful, so we use it.

I'm skeptical of this view, but I don't know enough to give a very credible response. Yes. Frustration from arguments with reductionists brought me to...

Do you have a specific reference?

As I was reading this, I thought of something Hoffman wrote about in "Life's Ratchet." He was discussing how proteins became enzymes at random and the...

I thought about you when I was writing these posts. The subject reminded me of discussions we've had in the past. I'm glad you responded. When you tal...

I've never been to Kazakhstan, but I have been to Kansas, and I ain't never seen no rabbit-eating thistle.

Sauted or roast is the most common way of getting brussels sprouts these days. Those are ok, but I love them steamed with just a little butter and sal...

Oops. My post was intended to be ironic. I reject a reductionist approach to understanding and I was trying to show the somewhat absurd consequences o...

As you go down the hierarchy from particle physics to psychology, complexity increases.

/uploads/resized/files/tr/ucext0p7ghpb41mb.jpg

The hierarchy is of scale and complexity, not importance. Anderson is very clear about that. That's really the whole point of his paper and this threa...