Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]


Regional Summary




Founded - 30 April 2005
Population - 165 Nations
World Ranking - 61
Regional Power - High

Government of the Global Right Alliance


Speaker of the People's Assembly and World Assembly Delegate
Pidgeon Island

Members of the Committee
TBA

World Assembly Delegate
Angusp (aka Bodegraven)

High General of the GRADF
Joe Bobs
Welcome to the Global Right Alliance's forums!

Firstly, you can only see a very limited amount of the forums at the moment. You will be able to see the full forums and properly participate in our region and its community when you register.

Join our Community


Now, on to the region itself. Don't let the name, specifically the "Right", fool you. We've got members from across the political spectrum, and our political parties have always reflected this. The Global Right Alliance (GRA), as primarily a gameplay region, has been everything from an anarchy to a monarchy to a homegrown rotatorship. The region has had such governments because of its culture, which adores political intrigue and thrives on confrontation. With the increase of the region's population, many veterans have returned. It is the beginning of a new Global Right Alliance and a new government system.

I know the forums can be quite intimidating; there's people who have been here for nearly a decade and have over 10,000 posts. However, we welcome new members and encourage them to get involved. If you want help finding your way around, we have resources to help you to get on your way.

Getting Started


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features.

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 4
Viruses of the Mind
Topic Started: Dec 21 2006, 08:05 AM (318 Views)
Love and Honour
Member Avatar
Yes Sir; No Sir: 3 Bags Full Sir
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Have a read and tell me what you think?

I'm interested on what opposing viewpoints would be.

http://cscs.umich.edu/~crshalizi/Dawkins/v...f-the-mind.html
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Replies:
Athiestica
Member Avatar
Citizen
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
lol. I exist because I have an IP address which can be traced to where I live and you could see me in the flesh is if you wanted.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pidgeon Island
Member Avatar
Not so stale.
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Ok then, fly over to britain tomorrow.

...and bots have an ip address as well.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Love and Honour
Member Avatar
Yes Sir; No Sir: 3 Bags Full Sir
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
:OffTopic:

Did anyone read it?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Athiestica
Member Avatar
Citizen
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
There is proof of my existence because a bot doesn't make mistakes or have questions or ideas like a person does.

Anyway back to God. If you think about it maybe the more intellectual people of the day during the Old Testament felt they needed to creat a God because people were acting like such beats. So they wrote some stuff down to scare the living shit out of them and told them what rules to live by and there we have a moral code.

But in todays world we know right from wrong well most of us. We have laws and Science to guide and are no longer in need of going to Hell or Heaven if we have been good or bad. Just like Santa. Does anyone else see this?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pidgeon Island
Member Avatar
Not so stale.
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Love and Honour
Dec 21 2006, 07:52 PM
:OffTopic:

Did anyone read it?

You do realise nobody wants to talk about your beloved prat, don't you? We'd far prefer to argue about interesting, worthwhile things.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Love and Honour
Member Avatar
Yes Sir; No Sir: 3 Bags Full Sir
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I was referring to the link on the first post not you :P
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pidgeon Island
Member Avatar
Not so stale.
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I don't think I'm your beloved prat. If I am, I think I'll go and commit suide now.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Love and Honour
Member Avatar
Yes Sir; No Sir: 3 Bags Full Sir
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Oh! the temptation :wub:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jonewest
Member Avatar

[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Athesitica
Dec 21 2006, 07:56 PM
Anyway back to God. If you think about it maybe the more intellectual people of the day during the Old Testament felt they needed to creat a God because people were acting like such beats. So they wrote some stuff down to scare the living shit out of them and told them what rules to live by and there we have a moral code.

But in todays world we know right from wrong well most of us. We have laws and Science to guide and are no longer in need of going to Hell or Heaven if we have been good or bad. Just like Santa. Does anyone else see this?

So now the "Old Testament people" were intellectuals? So putting my faith to the side here, what is wrong with me believing [living according to] a set of morals that are wholesome, loving, and good, rather than me believing [living according to] the cold hard "facts" of Science which tell me to care about my survival and let the weak die off in "natural selection". One final question for you Ath, if the Bible wasn't divinely inspired, how was does it flow so fluently considering the people who wrote it came from all different walks of life, from shepherds to kings, with different levels of education and different writing styles, and people who lived hundreds and thousands of years apart?
Seems to me just the sure mass of information and novelty of the Bible would take more than a couple of "intellectuals" wanting to give mankind the benefit of the doubt by creating a "Rule Book" to scare the crap out of them. Also note, ath, that if these people didn't know "right from wrong", as I'm about to bring up, why would they even bother to listen to these "Old Testament People?"

Looking from a historical point of view there is no proof that people didn't know from "right and wrong," mooncalf. I wasn't aware that Santa wielded the power to send a child to Heaven or Hell. So "Science" guides us, eh? Guides whom? You, perhaps, but I personally couldn't give more of a flip about science or its "ever changing" theories. One thing me knows is reality does change, it's been here just like it is for thousands of years; so why is it Science, something that is suppose to explain reality, always changes its minds about reality, something never changing?

Now I don't believe I attacked you as a person at all there, so I expect all of my questions to be met with your opinions.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jonewest
Member Avatar

[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Love and Honour
Dec 21 2006, 07:05 AM
Have a read and tell me what you think?

I'm interested on what opposing viewpoints would be.

http://cscs.umich.edu/~crshalizi/Dawkins/v...f-the-mind.html

I've read this little excerpt and find it to be a complete waste of my time, I want my money back ;)

Quote:
 

References

Browne, Sir T. (1635) Religio Medici, I, 9
Dawkins, R. (1976) The Selfish Gene. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dawkins, R. (1982) The Extended Phenotype. Oxford: W. H. Freeman.
Dawkins, R. (1989) The Selfish Gene, 2nd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dennett, D. C. (1983) Intentional systems in cognitive ethology: the ``Panglossian paradigm'' defended. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 6, 343--90.
Dennett, D. C. (1984) Elbow Room: The Varieties of Free Will Worth Wanting. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dennett, D. C. (1990) Memes and the exploitation of imagination. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 48, 127--35.
Grafen, A. (1990a) Sexual selection unhandicapped by the Fischer process. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 144, 473--516.
Grafen, A. (1990b) Biological signals as handicaps. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 144, 517--46.
Hofstadter, D. R. (1985) Metamagical Themas. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Kenny, A. (1986) A Path from Rome Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kilduff, M. and Javers, R. (1978) The Suicide Cult. New York: Bantam.
Thimbleby, H. (1991) Can viruses ever be useful? Computers and Security, 10, 111--14.
Williams, G. C. (1957) Pleiotropy, natural selection, and the evolution of senescence. Evolution, 11, 398--411.
Zahavi, A. (1975) Mate selection --- a selection for a handicap. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 53, 205--14.


He sure does have some novel ideas, doesn't he?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Love and Honour
Member Avatar
Yes Sir; No Sir: 3 Bags Full Sir
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
I personally couldn't give more of a flip about science or its "ever changing" theories.


You are an Anti-intellectual

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pidgeon Island
Member Avatar
Not so stale.
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Love and Honour
Dec 21 2006, 09:42 PM
Quote:
 
I personally couldn't give more of a flip about science or its "ever changing" theories.


You are an Anti-intellectual

You are a close-minded prat who has total disregard for other people's beliefs. If someone chooses to believe in a supreme being and not believe in a load of theories, which just *might* be true, then is tat really a problem to you? No, but you go around posting links to articles by people cuch as yourself and telling people who have differing views to you that they are stupid.

Well screw you, as soon as the courts get set up I am going to personally try you for crimes against the region for your months as a dictator and for your plans to invade townships and dislodge the elected government. Let us hope that that will be the last of you and your anti-religious nonesense.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jonewest
Member Avatar

[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Love and Honour
Dec 21 2006, 09:42 PM
Quote:
 
I personally couldn't give more of a flip about science or its "ever changing" theories.


You are an Anti-intellectual

No, you mistake me, I am fine with people inventing new ideas and philosophies, that's all gravy, but I think it's a little fruitless for people to invest their lives into something that can change. I'm afraid I pity the martyr for Scientology.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Love and Honour
Member Avatar
Yes Sir; No Sir: 3 Bags Full Sir
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Pidgeon Island
Dec 21 2006, 09:48 PM
Love and Honour
Dec 21 2006, 09:42 PM
Quote:
 
I personally couldn't give more of a flip about science or its "ever changing" theories.


You are an Anti-intellectual

You are a close-minded prat who has total disregard for other people's beliefs. If someone chooses to believe in a supreme being and not believe in a load of theories, which just *might* be true, then is tat really a problem to you? No, but you go around posting links to articles by people cuch as yourself and telling people who have differing views to you that they are stupid.

Well screw you, as soon as the courts get set up I am going to personally try you for crimes against the region for your months as a dictator and for your plans to invade townships and dislodge the elected government. Let us hope that that will be the last of you and your anti-religious nonesense.

Again (if you read what I said) you will see I have never said there is no God just that I believe there is no God. The existance of which cannot be proved or not.

As for the rest of your rant


LMAO
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jonewest
Member Avatar

[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Jonewest
Dec 21 2006, 09:30 PM
Athesitica
Dec 21 2006, 07:56 PM
Anyway back to God. If you think about it maybe the more intellectual people of the day during the Old Testament felt they needed to creat a God because people were acting like such beats. So they wrote some stuff down to scare the living shit out of them and told them what rules to live by and there we have a moral code.

But in todays world we know right from wrong well most of us. We have laws and Science to guide and are no longer in need of going to Hell or Heaven if we have been good or bad. Just like Santa. Does anyone else see this?

So now the "Old Testament people" were intellectuals? So putting my faith to the side here, what is wrong with me believing [living according to] a set of morals that are wholesome, loving, and good, rather than me believing [living according to] the cold hard "facts" of Science which tell me to care about my survival and let the weak die off in "natural selection". One final question for you Ath, if the Bible wasn't divinely inspired, how was does it flow so fluently considering the people who wrote it came from all different walks of life, from shepherds to kings, with different levels of education and different writing styles, and people who lived hundreds and thousands of years apart?
Seems to me just the sure mass of information and novelty of the Bible would take more than a couple of "intellectuals" wanting to give mankind the benefit of the doubt by creating a "Rule Book" to scare the crap out of them. Also note, ath, that if these people didn't know "right from wrong", as I'm about to bring up, why would they even bother to listen to these "Old Testament People?"

Looking from a historical point of view there is no proof that people didn't know from "right and wrong," mooncalf. I wasn't aware that Santa wielded the power to send a child to Heaven or Hell. So "Science" guides us, eh? Guides whom? You, perhaps, but I personally couldn't give more of a flip about science or its "ever changing" theories. One thing me knows is reality does change, it's been here just like it is for thousands of years; so why is it Science, something that is suppose to explain reality, always changes its minds about reality, something never changing?

Now I don't believe I attacked you as a person at all there, so I expect all of my questions to be met with your opinions.

If you don't mind L&H why don't you answer the questions I asked Ath as well?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Love and Honour
Member Avatar
Yes Sir; No Sir: 3 Bags Full Sir
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
JW Scientology?

You don't mean the religion? (I use that word with caution ;) )

Unlike PI who is unable to detach his emotions from this debate I believe you can.

Read the article and tell me what is the flaws in his logic.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Love and Honour
Member Avatar
Yes Sir; No Sir: 3 Bags Full Sir
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
If you don't mind L&H why don't you answer the questions I asked Ath as well?


With respect I asked my question first :P
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jonewest
Member Avatar

[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Jonewest
Dec 21 2006, 09:41 PM
Love and Honour
Dec 21 2006, 07:05 AM
Have a read and tell me what you think?

I'm interested on what opposing viewpoints would be.

http://cscs.umich.edu/~crshalizi/Dawkins/v...f-the-mind.html

I've read this little excerpt and find it to be a complete waste of my time, I want my money back ;)

Quote:
 

References

Browne, Sir T. (1635) Religio Medici, I, 9
Dawkins, R. (1976) The Selfish Gene. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dawkins, R. (1982) The Extended Phenotype. Oxford: W. H. Freeman.
Dawkins, R. (1989) The Selfish Gene, 2nd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dennett, D. C. (1983) Intentional systems in cognitive ethology: the ``Panglossian paradigm'' defended. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 6, 343--90.
Dennett, D. C. (1984) Elbow Room: The Varieties of Free Will Worth Wanting. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dennett, D. C. (1990) Memes and the exploitation of imagination. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 48, 127--35.
Grafen, A. (1990a) Sexual selection unhandicapped by the Fischer process. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 144, 473--516.
Grafen, A. (1990b) Biological signals as handicaps. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 144, 517--46.
Hofstadter, D. R. (1985) Metamagical Themas. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Kenny, A. (1986) A Path from Rome Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kilduff, M. and Javers, R. (1978) The Suicide Cult. New York: Bantam.
Thimbleby, H. (1991) Can viruses ever be useful? Computers and Security, 10, 111--14.
Williams, G. C. (1957) Pleiotropy, natural selection, and the evolution of senescence. Evolution, 11, 398--411.
Zahavi, A. (1975) Mate selection --- a selection for a handicap. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 53, 205--14.


He sure does have some novel ideas, doesn't he?

I believe I already did, dear.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Love and Honour
Member Avatar
Yes Sir; No Sir: 3 Bags Full Sir
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
So you read the entire article?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pidgeon Island
Member Avatar
Not so stale.
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Love and Honour
Dec 21 2006, 09:55 PM
Unlike PI who is unable to detach his emotions from this debate I believe you can.

What's a debate without emotion? Or does lover-boy Dawkins tell you that you can't have emotions? Is it "unscientific"?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Create your own social network with a free forum.
Learn More · Sign-up for Free
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · OMAHD Archives · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 4