For the Atheists by youtuber JohananRaatz

Anything that doesn't fit anywhere else below.

Moderators: Calilasseia, DarthHelmet86, Onyx8

Re: For the Atheists by youtuber JohananRaatz

#221  Postby Sovereign » Mar 03, 2013 5:17 pm

jfraatz wrote:
Sovereign wrote:You do realize that the link you posted states in the last paragraph that the view is subjective. I want to ask you a question. What is science and what is the process of science? Also, what in quantum biology proves your position? All I see is you trying to use philosophy to refute science and repeating that philosophy is greater than the scientific method at determining reality. If that were the case, then why did we abandon the pursuit of philosophy for the scientific method during the enlightenment? Philosophy doesn't answer questions about the nature of reality. If it did, we would have never developed the scientific system we have today.



No I'm not. I'm using philosophy to refute scientism. (Attempts to use science to answer questions that are not in the empirical domain -which is of course a category error)

And philosophy does have answers about the nature of reality. We know this because philosophy is the basis of the scientific method. 8-)


Well Rumraket addressed this.
Sovereign
 
Posts: 2989
Male

United States (us)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: For the Atheists by youtuber JohananRaatz

#222  Postby Sovereign » Mar 03, 2013 5:24 pm

jfraatz wrote:
So in other words, when you're faced with a counter argument you can't address, you dismiss it and act like it doesn't exist...


No, it was dismissed because the whole thing was built on a fallacious premise: that empirical neuroscience actually studies the non-empirical subjective properties of mentality.

This isn't science, it's scientism, and I have better things to do with my time than to keep repeating why it is wrong.


You're being intentionally obtuse here. So you're claiming that we have all the knowledge regarding the system of the brain (ignoring neuroscience aka internet trolls but we'll get to that) and that your position has it all? Prove it? Show me there is nothing else for us to learn regarding the biological system we know as the human brain.


I didn't say that. What I was saying is that we have everything there is to know about the brain AS FAR AS the Hard Problem is concerned. Meaning we can find more out about the brain, but it will never be able to solve the Hard Problem because it will all be categorically empirical only, and subjective mentality is by definition not empirical.

The brain still exists. If those firings stop indefinitely, you're dead. The structure of the brain still exists. When surgeries are done, the brain's activity decreases until you are clinically brain dead due to anesthesiology. You cannot and will not remember anything from the surgery under those conditions. When the brain is taken of of the drugs, it resumes its normal activity. If your position was right, you'd still remember the surgery if your brain's activity was slowed to that critical number. In cases where people have remembered their surgeries, it was because somebody messed up on anesthesiology.


From the reality frame of the neurosurgeon yes. That's not a problem for my position though.

Aka, I can't argue against them.


Ok, let's "take it seriously" then. :lol: Please empirically verify the verification principle for me. Go and give me some peer-reviewed papers as to where the verification principle was located, and what means they used to empirically verify it's existence.

Until then, you have no evidence for positivism.

What beef do you have against science?


I don't have a beef against science. I have a beef against conflating science with scientism.

We're having this round and round discussion and you fail to understand the methodology of how one goes about determining what is correct and what is not.


Huh? Oh no, I understand proper epistemology. A priori knowledge comes PRIOR (hence why it is called a PRIORi) to a posteriori knowledge which comes POSTERIOR (hence why it is called a POSTERIORi). Makes sense now? :grin:

You dismiss my argument summarily out of hand because you can't and will not address it. I hold my position. a priori is conclusions first then force fit data to say, "look fire" when in reality it's fluttering painted paper.


Ok, let's "take this seriously" as well. Without a priori knowledge that it is, how do you even know that your sensory data is reliable anyway? Might your senses be fooling you? How do you know?

Saying that we know because the data told us so, is the same as saying that "We know the Bible is God's Holy Word, because we looked it up in the Bible." (in this case it's "We know sensory data about the world is valid, because we looked it up in the world")

Please take your argument to Sye Ten Bruggencate. I'm sure you and he will get along very well! :smile:


Really? Yet here we are arguing. Why am I not reading about you in Nature if your position is testable? Oh that's right, anyone who does actual peer reviewed science is a troll. Makes perfect sense.

Again, dodging what neuroscience is showing us.


Actually neuroscience does not show us anything about the mind, because neuroscience does not study the mind -only its empirical correlates.


I was going to go through and address this but then I noticed this post in your other thread. I'm curious to see how you respond to it.
Sovereign
 
Posts: 2989
Male

United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: For the Atheists by youtuber JohananRaatz

#223  Postby Shrunk » Mar 03, 2013 6:37 pm

Thomas Eshuis wrote:
Shrunk wrote:You can just feel Matt Dillahunty's pain in that video.

Johanan really put that up himself? :lol:

Yep, as well as the one from the week before where he called the first time:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5g5v36J7i4[/youtube]


Which would suggest he is actually proud of his performances there. That's really funny. Almost as funny as Matt's rejoinder at 1:06.
"A community is infinitely more brutalised by the habitual employment of punishment than it is by the occasional occurrence of crime." -Oscar Wilde
User avatar
Shrunk
 
Posts: 26170
Age: 56
Male

Country: Canada
Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: For the Atheists by youtuber JohananRaatz

#224  Postby iamthereforeithink » Mar 04, 2013 1:58 pm

Is it too late to put a bookmark in this thread? I somehow always seem to miss the interesting ones. :coffee:
“The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.” ― Sun Tzu, The Art of War
User avatar
iamthereforeithink
 
Posts: 3332
Age: 11
Male

Country: USA/ EU
European Union (eur)
Print view this post

Re: For the Atheists by youtuber JohananRaatz

#225  Postby Sovereign » Mar 04, 2013 3:21 pm

iamthereforeithink wrote:Is it too late to put a bookmark in this thread? I somehow always seem to miss the interesting ones. :coffee:


Well I think all the action will be in the other thread now.

http://www.rationalskepticism.org/gener ... 38020.html
Sovereign
 
Posts: 2989
Male

United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: For the Atheists by youtuber JohananRaatz

#226  Postby BKSo » Mar 06, 2013 5:31 am

jfraatz wrote:
BKSo wrote:
You did not really answer my question. How do you know you are self aware? Indeed, if you really understand the hard problem, you would see it is impossible to tell.

Because I'm self-aware of it. If I was not, I would never be self-aware so as to contemplate the question in the first place.

This proves you don't really understand what a p-zombie really is. By definition a zombie does not z-know it is a p-zombie. It can z-contemplate the question and arrive at the conclusion that it is self-aware.


Saying that you do not know if you are self-aware is akin to saying that you do not know if objective truth is objectively true, or that you know that knowledge is impossible. In these cases, we can tell these ideas are wrong because they entail internal self-contradictions.

The difference is precisely that 'self aware' is by definition not objective so there is no way to test between true self awareness and zombie 'self awareness' delusion.


When you say "I doubt that I exist", you are implicitly assuming some singular object, the first 'I' is needed to initiate the doubt. In fact one only needs to PRETEND such existence. Therefore you are indeed begging the question.


Which is why eliminativism is self-refuting. It needs to implicitly assume an "I" to doubt and "I." (I am assuming that Dennett or the Churchlands would say "I came to this conclusion," yes?)

The quote already says _pretend_ i.e. the existence of the first 'I' is fictional rather than ontological. The whole 'self contradiction' is nothing but your deliberate twisting of definitions.


If they didn't then, eliminativism is not an actual position as it is not held by anyone. ;)

Why zombies cannot hold a position?


The B-theory of time still assumes a block spacetime. In other words 'object realism', therefore fails your own quantum challenge :Naughty


Well I don't see B-theory and block spacetime as necessarily related to objective realism or lack of objective realism. The block space-time could exist as an additional illusion in its own right. B-theory and block space-time are really more about the nature of the flow of time, rather than the reality of time.

BTW, I want to say that this is an actually interesting line of questioning here. The positivism elsewhere on this board is driving me nuts.

What does 'additional illusion in its own right' mean? That is even worse than the eliminative materialist 'contradiction' you are complaining.
BKSo
 
Posts: 205

Print view this post

Re: For the Atheists by youtuber JohananRaatz

#227  Postby iamthereforeithink » Mar 06, 2013 9:26 pm

jfraatz wrote:
-snip-

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHgi6E1ECgo[/youtube]

-snip-


Finally finished watching this. Excellent explanation of the holographic principle.
“The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.” ― Sun Tzu, The Art of War
User avatar
iamthereforeithink
 
Posts: 3332
Age: 11
Male

Country: USA/ EU
European Union (eur)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: For the Atheists by youtuber JohananRaatz

#228  Postby iamthereforeithink » Mar 06, 2013 9:29 pm

Sovereign wrote:
iamthereforeithink wrote:Is it too late to put a bookmark in this thread? I somehow always seem to miss the interesting ones. :coffee:


Well I think all the action will be in the other thread now.

http://www.rationalskepticism.org/gener ... 38020.html


That kind of free-wheeling philosophical hot air is not really my cup of tea, but thanks.
“The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.” ― Sun Tzu, The Art of War
User avatar
iamthereforeithink
 
Posts: 3332
Age: 11
Male

Country: USA/ EU
European Union (eur)
Print view this post

Re: For the Atheists by youtuber JohananRaatz

#229  Postby LucidFlight » Apr 15, 2014 5:10 am

Hey, jfraatz mentioned his visit here on The Atheist Experience. For anyone who's interested:



Also, thanks to YouTube user, TheZooCrew, for the link to this thread via the comments.
OFFICIAL MEMBER: QUANTUM CONSTRUCTOR CONSCIOUSNESS QUALIA KOALA COLLECTIVE.
User avatar
LucidFlight
RS Donator
 
Name: Kento
Posts: 10801
Male

Country: UK/US/AU/SG
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: For the Atheists by youtuber JohananRaatz

#230  Postby hackenslash » Apr 15, 2014 10:34 am

I note that he says we couldn't refute it. I've e-mailed a link to this thread to Tracie Harris.
User avatar
hackenslash
 
Name: The Other Sweary One
Posts: 21444
Age: 51
Male

Country: Republic of Mancunia
Print view this post

Re: For the Atheists by youtuber JohananRaatz

#231  Postby Scar » Apr 15, 2014 10:59 am

I watched that episode when it aired and was quite amused. Maybe mail Matt too?
Image
User avatar
Scar
 
Name: Michael
Posts: 3967
Age: 34
Male

Country: Germany
Germany (de)
Print view this post

Re: For the Atheists by youtuber JohananRaatz

#232  Postby Thommo » Apr 15, 2014 11:16 am

LucidFlight wrote:Hey, jfraatz mentioned his visit here on The Atheist Experience. For anyone who's interested:



Also, thanks to YouTube user, TheZooCrew, for the link to this thread via the comments.


I hadn't seen that before, so I'll join in with this necromancy.

I love that he claimed his argument hadn't been refuted (it took me some minutes to realise it's not the one in this thread but the one in http://www.rationalskepticism.org/gener ... 38020.html ). Am I allowed to call that delusion? The argument isn't even logically valid*. :lol:

*For example:-

Johanan claims that since you cannot refute solipsism therefore there is a "possible world" which is solipsist. Since in this solipsist world the only substance is mental, the only substance in the real world is mental.

However it's readily apparent that the same form applies to a reductive materialist world - since you cannot refute reductive materialism therefore there is a "possible world" which is reductive materialist. Since in this reductive materialist world the only substance is physical, the only substance in the real world is physical.

But that's a contradiction. The reasoning is obviously severely faulty.
User avatar
Thommo
 
Posts: 27175

Print view this post

Re: For the Atheists by youtuber JohananRaatz

#233  Postby trubble76 » Apr 15, 2014 12:10 pm

LucidFlight wrote:Hey, jfraatz mentioned his visit here on The Atheist Experience. For anyone who's interested:



Also, thanks to YouTube user, TheZooCrew, for the link to this thread via the comments.


I'm glad it's not just me that glazes over when this sort of philowanking takes place.
Freedom's just another word for nothin' left to lose,
And nothin' ain't worth nothin' but it's free.

"Suck me off and I'll turn the voltage down"
User avatar
trubble76
RS Donator
 
Posts: 11205
Age: 44
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: For the Atheists by youtuber JohananRaatz

#234  Postby Thomas Eshuis » Apr 15, 2014 12:17 pm

LucidFlight wrote:Hey, jfraatz mentioned his visit here on The Atheist Experience. For anyone who's interested:



Also, thanks to YouTube user, TheZooCrew, for the link to this thread via the comments.


Ahem. :naughty:

Thomas Eshuis wrote:We got mentioned in the Atheist Experience show
He's (Johanan) actually calling in, again, so I'll post the ep, watch from 35:12
"Respect for personal beliefs = "I am going to tell you all what I think of YOU, but don't dare retort and tell what you think of ME because...it's my personal belief". Hmm. A bully's charter and no mistake."
User avatar
Thomas Eshuis
 
Name: Thomas Eshuis
Posts: 31088
Age: 31
Male

Country: Netherlands
European Union (eur)
Print view this post

Re: For the Atheists by youtuber JohananRaatz

#235  Postby LucidFlight » Apr 15, 2014 12:23 pm

Hey now! Well, would you look at that. Sorry, Thomas. I didn't mean to steal your thunder.

:hugs:
OFFICIAL MEMBER: QUANTUM CONSTRUCTOR CONSCIOUSNESS QUALIA KOALA COLLECTIVE.
User avatar
LucidFlight
RS Donator
 
Name: Kento
Posts: 10801
Male

Country: UK/US/AU/SG
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: For the Atheists by youtuber JohananRaatz

#236  Postby Thomas Eshuis » Apr 15, 2014 12:30 pm

LucidFlight wrote:Hey now! Well, would you look at that. Sorry, Thomas. I didn't mean to steal your thunder.

:hugs:

;) No problem. As you can see, the original link from my post doesn't work anymore and your post has rebooted this discussion, somewhat.
"Respect for personal beliefs = "I am going to tell you all what I think of YOU, but don't dare retort and tell what you think of ME because...it's my personal belief". Hmm. A bully's charter and no mistake."
User avatar
Thomas Eshuis
 
Name: Thomas Eshuis
Posts: 31088
Age: 31
Male

Country: Netherlands
European Union (eur)
Print view this post

Re: For the Atheists by youtuber JohananRaatz

#237  Postby Lope » Jan 05, 2015 8:54 pm

Re: For the Atheists by youtuber JohananRaatz


Dear JohananRaatz:

If you are still around, please for the reading public, put into propositions what you want readers to know and to accept as facts and/or truth; that will be most informative to us readers,
User avatar
Lope
Banned Sockpuppet
 
Posts: 4

Philippines (ph)
Print view this post

Re: For the Atheists by youtuber JohananRaatz

#238  Postby campermon » Jan 05, 2015 9:50 pm

Lope wrote:Re: For the Atheists by youtuber JohananRaatz


Dear JohananRaatz:

If you are still around, please for the reading public, put into propositions what you want readers to know and to accept as facts and/or truth; that will be most informative to us readers,


Welcome to the forum!

:beer:

It appears that jraatz hasn't been around here for a while, but I'm sure that you'll find many others who will help you with your questions.

:thumbup:
Scarlett and Ironclad wrote:Campermon,...a middle aged, middle class, Guardian reading, dad of four, knackered hippy, woolly jumper wearing wino and science teacher.
User avatar
campermon
RS Donator
 
Posts: 17437
Age: 51
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: For the Atheists by youtuber JohananRaatz

#239  Postby Lope » Jan 06, 2015 3:05 am

Thanks for your welcome.

I looked up the profile of jfraatz.

    Viewing profile - jfraatz
    http://www.rationalskepticism.org/member/jfraatz/

    Joined:
    Jul 03, 2012 6:48 am
    Last visited:
    Mar 04, 2013 5:52 am
    Total posts:
    98 | Search user’s posts
    (0.00% of all posts / 0.11 posts per day)
    Most active forum:
    General Debunking
    (97 Posts / 98.98% of user’s posts)
    Most active topic:
    For the Atheists by youtuber JohananRaatz
    (67 Posts / 68.37% of user’s posts)

I guess jfraatz would not be returning to this thread at this late date.

So, I will just start my own thread on the topic of "God's existence from concepts of the totality of existence and the parts of the totality."

I will now proceed to start that thread as soon as I find which board is the most appropriate.
User avatar
Lope
Banned Sockpuppet
 
Posts: 4

Philippines (ph)
Print view this post

Re: For the Atheists by youtuber JohananRaatz

#240  Postby Thomas Eshuis » Jan 25, 2016 8:40 am

Johanan tries the Atheist Experience, again.
Starts from about 35:00
"Respect for personal beliefs = "I am going to tell you all what I think of YOU, but don't dare retort and tell what you think of ME because...it's my personal belief". Hmm. A bully's charter and no mistake."
User avatar
Thomas Eshuis
 
Name: Thomas Eshuis
Posts: 31088
Age: 31
Male

Country: Netherlands
European Union (eur)
Print view this post

PreviousNext

Return to General Debunking

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest