Actually what's demonstrable proof here is scientism's inability to inquire into itself, so thanks for that.
Negative, Ghost rider. It's demonstrable proof that one can't appeal to the rationality of people who are convinced that dead people walk, ascend "up" to heaven (a sort of "inconvenience" in a cosmos where no "up" exists), and can't demonstrate a heaven to begin with.
You don't even understand the basics of science, so why should I bother explaining...
How do you know this? Do you know the extent of my scientific understanding? If so, could you please demonstrate how my understanding of science is any less than yours? And how that might be consequential to our discussion?
...how science cooperated with all the other facets of modernity that led to the many sociological discontents of the 20th century which include the many genocides?
Still claiming it... not demonstrating it? I look forward to the part where you get around to demonstrating your claim... not just repeating it!
So yes, it doesn't matter what proof I give you...
Surely... it does. You're just not open the opposite because you're personally, emotionally invested in "being right". Does this argument sound familiar yet? Baseless. Utterly baseless assumption.
...it doesn't even approach the scope of the vast failure of Enlightment thought (including scientism) of the 20th century.
So we're stating our claim again... without providing proof. Wait for it!
This is why we should stop pretending to believe in something that we really don't and we know it too.
My point exactly! Stop pretending to believe, nothing... in nothing.
While I'm on the topic, I also find incoherent and terribly convenient is this meme that whatever good happens like the Polio vaccine its because of "science" but whenever its something awful like a nuclear bomb on Hiroshima its because of "humans".
And using your logic (you're welcome)... I also find it incoherent and terribly convenient that when something good happens, you credit your god... but whenever it's something awful like a tsunami in Indonesia... it's .... not god.
So until you can demonstrate some rigorous thought in this thread, I am not going to waste my time.
Giving up so soon?
But we were just getting around to the important stuff!
I'm not trying to be rude, but it gets really old putting in effort into my posts where the other person on the discussion doesn't want to do any thinking.
Brother... let me tell you. You and I are on the same sheet of music here.
All you've really done Michael, like pretty much all American former believers, is deny the existence of God and you hope to replace him with a better god that of a crude scientism, which maybe you will get what you really want, unlike how disappointed you were with an absent God.
Argumentum ad passiones much? Is there a point here? You're assuming an awful lot about my person in light of you not being able to defend your argument (I was really hoping you had one). ...wait for it!
You expect me to get you from point A to B when we really can't even start.Wait for it! ...
And honestly I really don't want to expend the time doing so because I find it boring and frankly I have some other projects that are much more interesting to me and worthy of my time than this discussion. Again not trying to be smug, but I'm done. So I guess you can wait indefinitely.Oh... thank you, Sir... I will sign for that package!
And... done. Perhaps in the same way members of this forum see other members as "having great expressions of Orthodoxy"... they will also see your inability to demonstrate claims... not of the metaphysical... or even the transcendental... but historical!
This is the part where I invite you to use your critical faculties to discern whether or not the positions you hold within your set of beliefs are true.
...but I suppose your emotional investment will keep you from doing so. And for that reason...
... I also hope you find peace.