11 Feb 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobieElaborate on 'divine principles' and i'll have pop at falsification.
yes, here is the equation
adherent + application of divine principles = more loving, tolerant, happy and purposeful individual.
Perhaps you would like to subject it to falsification?
😉
11 Feb 10
1 edit
Originally posted by Proper Knoblol, you cannot have a pop at falsification, it cannot be done, there is no physical specimen that you could point to and say, here is an adherent that has applied divine principles and look he is less happy, less fulfilled, less purposeful than he was before, because how can you measure happiness? even if you could do it in principle, how would you do it in practice?
Elaborate on 'divine principles' and i'll have pop at falsification.
11 Feb 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWell then divinity cannot be classed in the same way as light and magnetism as you were trying to do.
lol, you cannot have a pop at falsification, it cannot be done, there is no physical specimen that you could point to and say, here is an adherent that has applied divine principles and look he is less happy, less fulfilled, less purposeful than he was before, because how can you measure happiness?
11 Feb 10
1 edit
Originally posted by Proper Knobwhy not? i was merely stating that there should be an effect, i did not say it was measurable. Observable yes, but not measurable.
Well then divinity cannot be classed in the same way as light and magnetism as you were trying to do.
11 Feb 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobieEither happiness is measurable or it isn't. If it isn't then your equation contains a category mistake ie the phrase 'more happy' is meaningless.
lol, you cannot have a pop at falsification, it cannot be done, there is no physical specimen that you could point to and say, here is an adherent that has applied divine principles and look he is less happy, less fulfilled, less purposeful than he was before, because how can you measure happiness? even if you could do it in principle, how would you do it in practice?
If happiness is measurable, then what is stopping us from measuring it in practice?
If it is measurable and we cannot measure it in practice, then does it matter?
11 Feb 10
Originally posted by twhiteheadactually its not that it is not measurable in the sense that there is a happometer, but in relation to what the individual and adherent was previously. Thus it becomes a matter of states, unhappy, unfulfilled to happy and fulfilled.
Either happiness is measurable or it isn't. If it isn't then your equation contains a category mistake ie the phrase 'more happy' is meaningless.
If happiness is measurable, then what is stopping us from measuring it in practice?
If it is measurable and we cannot measure it in practice, then does it matter?
11 Feb 10
1 edit
Originally posted by amolv06why? its no skin off my nose if you don't believe. non-theists generally make claim that faith and faith based groups live under mass delusion yadda yadda. Prove God does not exist, and you'll be able to prove that we're deluded. Until then....
Shouldn't the burden of proof rest with the claimant?
11 Feb 10
Originally posted by duecerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_proof
why? its no skin off my nose if you don't believe. non-theists generally make claim that faith and faith based groups live under mass delusion yadda yadda. Prove God does not exist, and you'll be able to prove that we're deluded. Until then....