zherzog's Profile > Messages Posted


Subject: Re: Game! Answer a Question with a Question

Forum: Game! Answer a Question with a Question
How much sleep is necessary for good health?

Subject: Re: Shot. Gun.

Forum: Shot. Gun.
1. Free - nothing
2. Parachute - pessimist
3. Wedding - Union
4. Corner - store
5. Legs - walking
6. Antique - model-sailboat
7. Smile- simile (without an i)
8. School - learning
9. Earth - habitat
10. Luggage - lugging

Subject: Re: All Humans Need…

Forum: All Humans Need…
When morality and ethics are at play there will always be divisions. Whenever there is a concrete, a fact of the matter, there will always be those who say yes and those who say no. What united humans are our shared DNA. Rationality, Companionship, Love, even Spirit (if there is such) could be shared by other species (aliens perhaps...) and so are not solely restrictive to humans but rather the more elusive 'persons'. Even to say we are a part of the category 'human' is to make a division.

As a slight tangent, I would say division is natural and necessary for persons because it creates boundaries within which we can actually live and function. When we are completely free and all is open and one it seems things run amuck.

The question is, why do humans divide or have this need for divisions?

Subject: What do you do to memorize?

Forum: What do you do to memorize?
There are many situations we find ourselves in where we must either memorize something either for short or long term retention. Such situations might be memorizing vocab words (in one's own or a foreign language), quickly remembering voting codes for CNet, or memorizing a presentation. What strategies do you use to memorize content?

Since I have a rather negligent memory, such strategies would at least be helpful for me. Thanks!

Subject: Re: Paying for College?

Forum: Paying for College?
I am in the same position as lahoefl was (is) regarding my parents and even the FAFSA. I do work part time along with Full Time college and although it is not always easy (especially on my sleep), it is rewarding because I am learning to manage my time and money, to prioritize as it were. My parents, one set at least, have said they will help financially if I really need it, and otherwise they every once in a while help with food. My other set of parents would be more than willing to help pay for more of my college but I rather enjoy the responsibility and the struggle. Albeit, that looming debt is starting to cast an uncomfortable shadow in my future. Through it all I have realized that I am content with less. It's good to know that other's share my position (whatever the financial situation of their parents).

Subject: What does it mean to be human?

Forum: What does it mean to be human?
Here's an easy one: what does it mean to be human? This is a question that has only recently been brought up for discussion in acedamia and of course there is only one right answer. Also, you're getting graded on how close your answer is to the correct one and if you guess or answer wrong you get negative points.

Subject: Re: Do you believe in God?

Forum: Do you believe in God?
Warum sprichtst du jetzt auf Deutsch? Und warum nimmst du an, dass ich immer falsche Denken zu der Unterhaltung bringen werde? Du nimmst meine Wörter aus ihren Kontexte und dann benutzt
sie, um zu zeigen, dass ich falsche Logik benutze, damit du meine Behauptung etwa leicht absagen können. Das ist ein bisschen unfair in meine Meinung und ich habe versucht von deinen Behauptungen gut denken. Bitte können wir die Behauptungen einander in der besten Licht nehmen.

Do you take the above as a red herring? I know the logical fallacies, both those you accuse me of and the rest. Please don't treat me like I am a small child needing his illogical thoughts to be corrected. I have not engaged in the fallacies you accuse me of and if you would follow my thoughts in the best light rather than assuming that they are immediately wrong because of my stance, then you would see that. I would love to keep discussing with you, but no one long can withstand a continued tide of accusation and misattribution.

Talk of miracles was a side point and not merely hypothetical speaking.

Talk of the Bible is not circular. I do not assume God, so the Bible is trustworthy, so God. I say, determine whether the Bible is trustworthy, analyze and compare the Bible with other sources, specifically for what is said about Jesus and his followers, and then come to a conclusion about God. This is a perfectly valid path of reasoning and moreover follows general scientific inquiry regarding historical documents. That is what I have been arguing in my previous posts. There are of course other arguments, but this is the outline of an argument I present now.

Subject: Re: ...what are you "first?"...

Forum: ...what are you "first?"...
I am first second, second me, me a bird on the wind, a hawk, a crow, a dove, sometimes alighting, sometimes watching, sometimes preaying, sometimes crying, but always ever me.

Subject: Re: Do you believe in God?

Forum: Do you believe in God?
To Jack,

Actually, I wasn't really thinking of miracles since, if a miracle were actually to occur, from an objective point of view, it could just as well have been caused by some other supernatural being. There would of course be one miracle of particular importance regarding Jesus: his resurrection. Although irreproducible, that does not mean this miracle should then be rejected. If it can be shown that the Bible is a reliable source of information, namely the New Testament and its descriptions of Jesus, the followers of Jesus, and the events surrounding Jesus, you can then conduct various tests to establish the truthness of the claims. You can compare documents and histories of the time. The evidence I propose is not direct (because we do not have access to direct evidence) nor is it conclusive (because one can always explain all evidence with the natural at the end of the day--Hume I believe said something along those lines). There is evidence but it only gives reasons to believe, reasons appealing more to logic than to science.

You say: "even if he did then that does not mean that he was sent by or otherwise an avatar of the Christian god." Yes, Jesus could in fact have lived, even have been divine, even resurrected from the dead, and he could have believed and even "known" he was God, but actually have just been some other supernatural being unrelated to 'God.' But there is no reason to believe that Jesus was other than who he said, explicitly or implicitly, he was, all else being true. I see what your meaning is though, even if we establish all other facts of the matter regarding Jesus that would indicate his specific divinity, one would still need to believe that it was actually so, that Jesus was actually God. This in fact is just where 'belief' in God begins. Not even scientific theories are 100% provable. Though the evidence is largely secondary, it is the same with the theory that God exists.

You say: "No one has been able to perform miracles since that time." How do you know? What makes you say that this is so? Many people around the world would say that they are either the beneficiaries of a miracle or have themselves performed a miracle. I am not saying that all such claims are true but, that does not mean that they are all false. Our proper response to a miracle should be doubt, just because of the very nature of miracles being unnatural and uncommon.

Thank you for your thoughts and I look forward to continued discussion.

Subject: Re: Do you believe in God?

Forum: Do you believe in God?
To Jack,

I love that quote, it made me smile in appreciation! It is so intelligently humorous.

I would like to ask you though, what makes the Christian God unverifiable? By the nature of 'god' of course, it is difficult at best to present justifiable reasons, objective evidence, that God, or any god, exists, I'll give you that. The finite set of data is just that which we can individually/collectively observe and includes both what we can observe now, what we can observe from what is recorded, and what we can observe from what we predict and discover to be the case. God may well exist but not be verifiable by our methods of observing. That is not helpful and gives no reason to believe in God let alone that God exists. So, for us to make any sort of accurate claim regarding God, God would have to be somehow physically manifested. I would say that God was physically manifested as Jesus of Nazareth the Christ. If we investigate the person of Jesus, and it turned out that there was a high likelihood that Jesus existed and did what is said that he did, and said what is said he said, and was God as he and as his followers claim, then there would be verification that God exists and reason to believe in God (apart from any other sort of non-logical, non-scientific, non-historic, aka subjective evidence (historical records written about historical events and people are subjective, but their content is regarding the objective)).

This candidate's