littlegreenpills posted:so are the differences. there are people on here, real live english speaking people, who dislike the smell of cumin. they use it as shorthand for the smell of an unwashed vagrant. Cumin! come on, it's one of the most delicious spices
i guess i don't see why this matters? those people still have a sense of beauty and hopefully sometimes perceive it in things not tangled up in their personal sex drive. if i said i also find it curious that the universe seems to be built to create and support life would you counterargue with "but there are a lot of different forms of life"?
i dunno man? i'm not trying to convert you, but nerds like me gotta take what we can get
thirdplace posted:i think most agree with the general statement
this is what you're absolutely failing to demonstrate
littlegreenpills posted:this is what you're absolutely failing to demonstrate
if you can't see beauty in a coral reef or cardinal or a redwood forest or an orchid or a crystal formation or a peacock tail or at least some of those then it sucks to be you i guess! most people can and do
getfiscal posted:trying to ground beauty in reason... no thanks.
but what about reason in beauty???
thirdplace posted:sexual selection explains the existence of extraneous flourishes to demonstrate surplus fitness but it does not explain the form of those flourishes and in particular it does not explain that form routinely retaining appeal between entities seperated by 100s of millions of years of development
plus, jellyfish look good, as do many rocks; no sexual selection there. to rest it on mere symmetry is to simultaniously fail to explain the absence of platonic geometries floating around in the ocean and to miss the point
this is pretty weak. the jellyfish's form appeals to us because our minds are pattern-seeking and narrative-driven. our form probably does not "appeal" to the jellyfish.
getfiscal posted:trying to ground beauty in reason... no thanks.
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/medical-education/other-studies/aesthetics
iFederico posted:The arguments for the existence of God are so poor that a shitty first year philosophy student who has read Mackie should be able to deal with them. The usual response to that is to a) either shift the burden of proof (Plantinga et al) or b) invoke science you don't understand (Deepak et al).
statickinetics posted:I'm God.
statickinetics posted:I'm God.
<church lady voice> Well isn't that special
drwhat posted:if we discuss liberation theology without addressing theism itself isn't that just adopting theology as agitprop & patronizing actual people of faith
What in the Lord's name did you just say about me, you little atheist? I'll have you know I graduated top of my class in Ministry school, and I have over 300 confirmed prayers. I am trained in the religion Baptist and I'm the top Priest in the entire Christian religion. You are nothing to me but another non believer.
I will teach you the word of God with the largest choir that has ever been seen; mark my works. You think you can get away with not believing in a god? Think again, atheist. As we speak I am contacting my secret network of churches across the USA and you're going to be forced to believe in god right now, so you better prepare for the faith, sir. The faith that wipes out the pathetic thing you call atheism. You're Christian now, sir. I can teach you anywhere, anytime, and I can preach in over seven hundred ways, and that's just off the top of my head. Not only am I extensively trained in preaching from memory, but I have access to the entire mob of the United States Christian Club and I will use it to its full extent to force you into Christianity, you little atheist. If only you could have known what unholy retribution your little religion was about to bring down upon you, maybe you wouldn't have challenged the word of god. But you couldn't, you didn't and now you're praying the price, you imbecile. I will teach the word of God all over you and you will drown in it. You're a christian now, kiddo.
