Las Vegas Advisor Menu
« LVA Forums « Vegas Free-for-All

Frank Update

FrankKneeland
FrankKneeland
Aug 31, 2011
6:20am
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: DonDiego
Quote
Originally posted by: FrankKneeland
The excerpt is from the introduction. It explains the scientific reasons for belief formation later in the book. Of course everything can always be debated. It is one of the best researched books I've read. He states nothing without tracking his sources and reasons for conclusions.

In other words he handles flawlessly why he believes what he believes about belief...and leaves it open for you to reach different conclusions with his data. Where science has different theories on something he states all of them.

~FK
From the excerpt: "Wow. More people believe in angels and the devil than believe in the theory of evolution. That’s disturbing."
DonDiego sees no source or reason cited for the conclusion:"That's disturbing."


You are talking about excerpts on his website. I'm talking about the actual book.

The book has more info than what's on the web-page. I'm guessing that's so people buy the book.

Are you just being funny, or did you really expect everything in the book to be on the web?
FrankKneeland
FrankKneeland
Aug 31, 2011
6:27am
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: KayPea
Quote
Originally posted by: KarenTN
contentious religion threads


Is there any other kind? The only difference I see between religious and political threads is that the names are changed. Otherwise it is people arguing beliefs that are wired into their brains and they are not going to change them. Just trying to rewire someone's brain makes them agitated and fly off the handle. I think a discussion of how beliefs are formed and why people fight them so vehemently would be more interesting that the specific beliefs themselves.

With that being said, I could be one of those people who believe in angels and the devil rather than believe in the theory of evolution, but first we'd have to define "angels", "devil", and "theory of evolution" to be sure we're talking about the same concepts.


The turning point in my life, when I decided to reevaluate my own deeply held religious beliefs, was when I met someone that believed something completely different (and that I knew to be false) more fiercely than I did. I thought, "Hay, if he could be this wrong and cling to it so strongly, maybe I could be doing the same thing?"

I was! I'm not any longer!

Since then I have adopted a policy of never ALWAYS THINKING I'M RIGHT.

Time has proven to me that this is a good policy...of course I could be wrong!
pearlguy
pearlguy
Aug 31, 2011
6:32am
Block User
GOOD GOD ! (so to speak)
Don
Don
Aug 31, 2011
8:16am
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: FrankKneeland
Are you just being funny, or did you really expect everything in the book to be on the web?
What a curious choice. These are not mutually exclusive.
DonDiego is clearly not being funny; FrankKneeland can ask anyone.
DonDiego did not expect everything in the book to be on the web; he does expect when the author places an excerpt from his own book on his own web-site, it represents what is in the book.


FrankKneeland
FrankKneeland
Aug 31, 2011
8:37am
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: DonDiego
Quote
Originally posted by: FrankKneeland
Are you just being funny, or did you really expect everything in the book to be on the web?
What a curious choice. These are not mutually exclusive.
DonDiego is clearly not being funny; FrankKneeland can ask anyone.
DonDiego did not expect everything in the book to be on the web; he does expect when the author places an excerpt from his own book on his own web-site, it represents what is in the book.


Oh well that seems reasonable. I believe the reason he didn't do that in this case was it was simply too long of a subject. The part that would qualify the web comment is basically the first three chapters.

I'm sorry I have forgotten the point to this discussion? Oh now I remember. Ok, so if you think he's going to try to talk you out of believing in anything, that is not the thrust of the book. It just explains the reasons for belief, it does not directly attack any particular belief. At least it didn't seem that way to me.

Of course you may wish to reevaluate some beliefs yourself after understanding how they are formed, but that's up to you.

Not everything people believe is false, and not everything people believe is true, but in either case it never hurts to check your sources. Truth has little to fear from scrutiny, only falsehood fears the light.

Since information about why so many people don't think the same way we do has such great utility to all of us, the only reason I can think of for not wanting to read a book like this is if one was subconsciously afraid they might find out their own reasonings were flawed. Essentially, it should only be disturbing to people wanting to cling to things they know deep in their hearts are false. If you were REALLY sure you were right in your own beliefs the book could only be good information.

~FK
mrmarcus12LVA
mrmarcus12LVA
Aug 31, 2011
9:34am
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: jenaphir
i just want to push the buttons on the machine.
Girl power!!

Quote
Originally posted by: snidely333
I prefer ridicule to eternal damnation.
I think I might adapt to either.

BobOrme
BobOrme
Aug 31, 2011
12:00pm
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: FrankKneeland
Quote
Originally posted by: DonDiego
Quote
Originally posted by: FrankKneeland
Are you just being funny, or did you really expect everything in the book to be on the web?
What a curious choice. These are not mutually exclusive.
DonDiego is clearly not being funny; FrankKneeland can ask anyone.
DonDiego did not expect everything in the book to be on the web; he does expect when the author places an excerpt from his own book on his own web-site, it represents what is in the book.


Oh well that seems reasonable. I believe the reason he didn't do that in this case was it was simply too long of a subject. The part that would qualify the web comment is basically the first three chapters.

I'm sorry I have forgotten the point to this discussion? Oh now I remember. Ok, so if you think he's going to try to talk you out of believing in anything, that is not the thrust of the book. It just explains the reasons for belief, it does not directly attack any particular belief. At least it didn't seem that way to me.

Of course you may wish to reevaluate some beliefs yourself after understanding how they are formed, but that's up to you.

Not everything people believe is false, and not everything people believe is true, but in either case it never hurts to check your sources. Truth has little to fear from scrutiny, only falsehood fears the light.

Since information about why so many people don't think the same way we do has such great utility to all of us, the only reason I can think of for not wanting to read a book like this is if one was subconsciously afraid they might find out their own reasonings were flawed. Essentially, it should only be disturbing to people wanting to cling to things they know deep in their hearts are false. If you were REALLY sure you were right in your own beliefs the book could only be good information.

~FK

Now that post makes me want to read the book. Psych was my minor in college. I made it my minor out of curiosity as to how the human mind works, especially my own. A course I took in abnormal psychology was very enlightening.
FrankKneeland
FrankKneeland
Aug 31, 2011
7:21pm
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: snidely333
What is the worse that can happen:

Don't believe in evolution: intellectual ridicule.

Don't believe in angels and satan: eternal damnation.

Pretty easy to pick the winner here.


You know this was the topic of Pascal's Wager back in the mid 1600. Check it out. I think you'll find it humorous. Naturally, it contains several intentional logical fallacies, that oddly, most people never spot.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_Wager

Then after that, you can read the rebuttal and see if you caught the errors: https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_wager

Enjoy! ~FK
snidely333
snidely333
Aug 31, 2011
10:38pm
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: FrankKneeland
Quote
Originally posted by: snidely333
What is the worse that can happen:

Don't believe in evolution: intellectual ridicule.

Don't believe in angels and satan: eternal damnation.

Pretty easy to pick the winner here.


You know this was the topic of Pascal's Wager back in the mid 1600. Check it out. I think you'll find it humorous. Naturally, it contains several intentional logical fallacies, that oddly, most people never spot.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_Wager

Then after that, you can read the rebuttal and see if you caught the errors: https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_wager

Enjoy! ~FK


Central to the "believing brain" is that the people in the survey are followers of Pascal's Wager. Most people are. The Bible is even set up to reinforce this thought process. The people in the survey are asked "do you believe in God?" One could be asked if they believed in angels, Satan, evolution but really, those are mostly just euphemisms for belief in God. This question of their beliefs is Pascal's Wager. People will say they believe in God because something good could come out of it. Saying "no" could doom them so why say it to some random survey taker. This survey taker could be a messenger from God.
Random
Random
Sep 1, 2011
1:29am
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: FrankKneelandThen after that, you can read the rebuttal and see if you caught the errors: https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_wager

Enjoy! ~FK


Errors? Calling them errors may be a hint of your current belief system. :-)

The rebuttal is a different viewpoint that highlights the weak points of the wager, but the "logical fallacies" depend on acceptance of the assumptions contained in the rebuttal.

Rather than debating the existence of God, lets do something easy.

How about an analysis of Singer's system with bet progressions and his 1,754 undefined special plays made under different circumstances depending on denomination and proximity to a win goal. :-)
Already a LVA subscriber?
To continue reading, choose an option below:
Diamond Membership
$3 per month
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Limited Member Rewards Online
Join Now
or
Platinum Membership
$50 per year
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Exclusive Member Rewards Book
Join Now