magician

This is exactly what JonasM is talking about. There's a serious difference between "beer I brew myself" and "beer I, myself, brew." I suspect that if you brew yourself the beer will taste lousy.

I believe that people without formal philosophical training shouldn't be allowed to talk about beer.

Why stop there? People without formal philosophical training shouldn't be allowed to talk.

(Really kidding this time! )

ltweintz

Bill.....you're killing me man. I do see your point though!

JonasM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by magician
[B]

This is exactly what JonasM is talking about.

magician

Mostly poking fun, but agreeing with an important point you make. How often do you hear someone say something like "everybody didn't pass the test" when they mean "not everybody passed the test"? The former means that everyone failed; the latter allows that some, even most, possibly all but one, passed.

While an undergraduate I found that I had to take a philosophy course as part of my general education requirements. As I had no interest in having some professor try to teach me some intellectual gobbletygook, I chose Logic as the most innocuous course to take. (Also, as a math major, the one in which I could get an A without having to study.) The first chapter of our textbook covered the development of logic and the philosophers who contributed to that development. On our first exam one of the questions read, "Name two philosophers who contributed to the development of logic and tell what they are best known for." One of the philosophers I listed was Leibniz, who was mentioned in our text. As to what he was best for, I put "inventing calculus." The professor marked it wrong. I told him that if he had wanted to know what Leibniz' best known contribution was to the development of logic he should have asked for that and I would have given him that. But I asssured him that if he went into the quad and grabbed ten students at random, and if they had even heard of Leibniz, it would have been for inventing calculus. Even philosophy professors have trouble using English from time to time. (Historical note: a couple of years later that professor was convicted of stalking and murdering the boyfriend of one of his students with whom he was smitten.)

mingster

Bill, that's some weird ass professor you had!

I've never heard of Leibniz, but of course I dropped Calculus TWICE in college and took some other (don't even remember what it was!) math class to satisfy the lower GE requirements. I can tell you though that avoidance costed me at least 1 mid term exam in my MBA program

God's math must be amazing. Maybe one day he can explain mathematically how it is possible to go beyond c (lightspeed) without using up infinite energy.

Fastfreddie

Ya know... with all the hate,,, killing and war's in the name of GOD, I'm just not so sure that this is something that I'm going to buy into.
I need more proof, and until then, I'm going to be walking the fence.

No one has seen this dude. We've just read about him in a book that is so old that the translations have lost a lot of their meaning. Just read some of the things that have been written,,,, c o m e o n !

cthree

It's called freedom. Freedom of thought, freedom of expression, freedom of speech, freedom of religion.

If that's how these people want to spend their vacation time then so be it. They are exercising their rights to congregate and if you don't like it exercise your right to not show up.

That's what freedom is all about.

Now if it were government sponsored then that would be a different story (regardless of the view being expressed - pro/anti). That's separation of church and state.

VisualEchos

I am not nearly religious, but I don't believe it can be said better than this.

Good one Dario.

Andrew

JonBoy

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Fastfreddie
[B]Ya know... with all the hate,,, killing and war's in the name of GOD, I'm just not so sure that this is something that I'm going to buy into.

JonBoy

"I do not believe there is a God"

"I believe there is no God"

I can't seem to see how those are different statements. Sure, I can see your point about the first being a disbelief and the second being a belief, but they are saying the same thing. The essence of the two is the same.

If I said "I do not believe there is an abominable snowman" and then said "I believe there is no abominable snowman", I am saying the same thing, just in different ways.

If an atheist has a disbelief in a god, you could also logically say that they have a belief in no god (taking the first negative from "disbelief" and changing it to the "no" negative in front of "god"). If I said, "I don't want to go" or "I want to not go", it is the same thing. Sure, the first doesn't say what I want to do, but that is not our concern is it? The only part we're concerned with is "go".

Perhaps I'm just having a bad brain day, but does anyone else see this the way I am?