Why is polygamy illegal?
-
@another_sam said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
@ben_lubar said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
Obviously it's all of them because I have ignored them and I am safe.
But Ben your immortal soul is in danger!
Unless someone can find a way to have an immortal soul without violating the laws of physics, I'm not worried.
-
@another_sam said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
How do you decide which parts are literal, which figurative, and which can be safely ignored (because "context" or something)?
whatever is proven to be wrong or absurd is figurative
-
@ben_lubar said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
soul
But then, if you replace each constituent part of your soul, bit by bit, is it still your soul?
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
if you replace each constituent part of your soul, bit by bit, is it still your soul?
If a candle burns halfway down, is it still the same flame?
-
@flabdablet said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
@Tsaukpaetra said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
if you replace each constituent part of your soul, bit by bit, is it still your soul?
If a candle burns halfway down, is it still the same flame?
One could argue that the flame is actually only a large amount of singular molecules rapidly oxidizing, and that what we observe as a flame is really the result of the oxidation process being maintained over time.
-
@Tsaukpaetra One could indeed argue that, but it isn't an answer to the question.
-
@flabdablet said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
@Tsaukpaetra One could indeed argue that, but it isn't an answer to the question.
Indeed, I don't seek to answer the question.
-
@Tsaukpaetra I'm sorry, am I still conversing with the same person?
-
@flabdablet said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
@Tsaukpaetra I'm sorry, am I still conversing with the same person?
This question is meaningless. Persons are an arbitrary construct.
-
@error said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
This question is meaningless. Persons are an arbitrary construct.
Are souls an arbitrary construct too?
-
@another_sam said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
@error said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
This question is meaningless. Persons are an arbitrary construct.
Are souls an arbitrary construct too?
Nope. Those are imaginary.
-
@error said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
Persons are an arbitrary construct.
Oh. OK.
I'm sorry, am I still conversing with the same arbitrary construct?
-
@flabdablet said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
@error said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
Persons are an arbitrary construct.
Oh. OK.
I'm sorry, am I still conversing with the same arbitrary construct?
Depends. How do you define "I"?
-
@error It's an arbitrary construct.
-
@error said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
Nope. Those are imaginary.
Doesn't that make them the ultimate in arbitrariness?
-
@another_sam Depends. How do you define "ultimate"?
-
@flabdablet said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
Depends. How do you define "ultimate"?
However I choose to imagine it at the time.
-
-
@flabdablet said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
@Tsaukpaetra I'm sorry, am I still conversing with the same person?
Unlikely.
-
@ben_lubar said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
I am safe
Not until you move out of that gun infested hellhole you call the USA
-
@Jaloopa said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
Not until you move out of that gun infested hellhole you call the USA
Wait, you're saying the guns are alive now?
-
@boomzilla not for long. They'll all be shot soon
-
Regarding atheism, I've had an atheist friend respond to the situation of "what if god(s) exist but we lack the evidence" with "anything without evidence might as well not exist". I thought it was an interesting response.
-
@fbmac said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
whatever is proven to be wrong or absurd is figurative
This seems arbitrary to me. How do you know that the other parts aren't figurative?
-
@antiquarian As long as you keep figuring things are absurd, you move them to the figurative bucket.
-
@fbmac Figurative bucket...what's the "mac" part stand for then?
-
@fbmac said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
figurative bucket
but what if there is a figurative hole in your figurative bucket?
-
@fbmac That is the standard procedure, but it seems to me that you could save a lot of time by simply moving everything to the figurative bucket immediately.
-
@boomzilla said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
@fbmac Figurative bucket...what's the "mac" part stand for then?
or
http://www.recipe.com/images/kiddie-mac-n-cheese-R130854-ss.jpg
-
@mikehurley said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
anything without evidence might as well not exist
I think there's a fallacy there somewhere, but I'm not sure.
Certainly, there is evidence that the typical human has a brain, but I don't have evidence that (you) have a brain, so I might as well assume (you) have no brain.
-
@Tsaukpaetra You're being too literal. It doesn't mean that you haven't collected evidence, but that there is none to be collected. We can build a pretty solid basis for a living person having a brain (the organ, not intelligence you fucking pendant asswipes).
It seems like a restatement of materialism. Smug atheists assume that repeating something like that is enough to disprove whatever someone else believes.
-
@boomzilla said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
Smug atheists
You rang?
@boomzilla said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
assume that repeating something like that is enough to disprove whatever someone else believes.
People believe all sorts of crazy nonsense, sometimes without evidence, sometimes in the face of contradicting evidence. Having the belief is mostly harmless and only the most militant atheists feel the need to actually convert you. The rest of us just for lulz.
But when the crazies get together and make decisions that affect others, a line has been crossed, and the sensible people will explain exactly why your decision-making process is faulty and has led to tyranny.
-
@another_sam said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
But when the crazies get together and make decisions that affect others, a line has been crossed, and the sensible people will explain exactly why your decision-making process is faulty and has led to tyranny.
Indeed, I find myself explaining this stuff to many crazies.
-
@boomzilla Sometimes you're the crazy, sometimes you're the crazer.
-
@boomzilla said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
Smug atheists assume that repeating something like that is enough to disprove whatever someone else believes.
As opposed to smug theists, who assume that simply believing in things hard enough can make them real.
-
@flabdablet said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
@boomzilla said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
Smug atheists assume that repeating something like that is enough to disprove whatever someone else believes.
As opposed to smug theists, who assume that simply believing in things hard enough can make them real.
You mean
?
-
@error Works for me...
- Whatever I clearly and distinctly perceive to be contained in the idea of something is true of that thing.
- I clearly and distinctly perceive that bullshit is contained in the idea of the Abrahamic God.
- Therefore, the Abrahamic God is bullshit.
-
@flabdablet said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
@boomzilla said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
Smug atheists assume that repeating something like that is enough to disprove whatever someone else believes.
As opposed to smug theists, who assume that simply believing in things hard enough can make them real.
I haven't observed this, but I guess I'll take your word for it.
-
@boomzilla said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
I haven't observed this, but I guess I'll take your word for it.
With the exception of martyrs, does beatification as a step towards canonization count?
-
@PJH said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
With the exception of martyrs, does beatification as a step towards canonization count?
Wikipedia's summary says this:
Beatification (from Latin beatus, "blessed" and facere, "to make") is a recognition accorded by the Catholic Church of a dead person's entrance into Heaven and capacity to intercede on behalf of individuals who pray in his or her name.
So I could see how one could think that. But thinking more about it, this happens after they've affirmed a miracle.
Since the reforms of 1983, one miracle must be believed to have taken place through the intercession of the person to be beatified, though the medical investigations of the Church are conducted privately and therefore subject to speculation about their methods
Maybe before 1983, but it seems like now they're just officially recognizing something, not creating it by their belief.
-
@boomzilla said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
this happens after they've affirmed a miracle
That's the "simply believing in things hard enough can make them real" bit I was alluding to....
-
@PJH Then it doesn't make any sense to me as an example except as a smug put down that falls apart when you look at the details. They certainly don't believe that believing in the miracle made the miracle. They looked at an event and decided to believe that it was a miracle.
I'd say the millenarian in Stephenson's Anathem is a better example of someone making something real by believing in it. Though now we're going to annoy @Polygeekery because he has issues with translating a concept from a single universe to multiple separate universes.
-
@boomzilla said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
They certainly don't believe that believing in the miracle made the miracle
But miracles don't exist. But they believe that in believing
X
is a miracle, then it is a miracle.
Or, on second reading of those posts, is the argument that the miracle must exist for everyone after the fact? In which case I'll keep barking up this tree over in the corner.
It's the wrong tree, but it's still a tree...
-
@PJH said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
But miracles don't exist.
Sez you.
@PJH said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
Or, on second reading of those posts, is the argument that the miracle must exist for everyone after the fact?
Ummm....analogy time? Does a guilty verdict in a trial mean that crime really happened? No. It just means that the jury was convinced that the defendant did it. When the Church beatifies, they've "convicted" the subject of committing a miracle.
Even though the jury acquitted him, OJ really did kill his wife and her boyfriend. But legally, that was that (on the criminal side of things).
-
@boomzilla said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
Though now we're going to annoy @Polygeekery because he has issues with translating a concept from a single universe to multiple separate universes.
I am going to shit in your shoes.
-
@Polygeekery said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
I am going to shit in your shoes.
Hah! It's summer. I don't wear shoes!
-
@boomzilla The whole miracles business is a red herring, and you know it. The thing allegedly brought into existence by sheer force of belief is the Abrahamic God itself.
No believer in the existence of the God of the Bible has any better reason for that belief than an underlying belief that religious faith, in and of itself, is good or unavoidable or both.
Religious faith is not reason, and not reasonable; religious faith seen through the lens of reason is simple question-begging.
-
@boomzilla said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
@Polygeekery said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
I am going to shit in your shoes.
Hah! It's summer. I don't wear shoes!
So later in the year when you do, they will be extra ripe.
Filed under: Or were those two statements unrelated?
-
@flabdablet said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
The whole miracles business is a red herring, and you know it.
So why are you complaining to me? I wasn't the one who brought it up.
@flabdablet said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
The thing allegedly brought into existence by sheer force of belief is the Abrahamic God itself.
-
@ben_lubar said in Why is polygamy illegal?:
Unless someone can find a way to have an immortal soul without violating the laws of physics, I'm not worried.
This is, of course, predicated upon the implicit assumption that the laws of physics are already known thoroughly enough to make a statement like that worth stating. Considering all of the "impossible" things we've done in the last century alone, such a position seems like pure hubris IMO.