Wednesday, July 29, 2009

A Skeptic On Infidels Forum

I ain't going to mention who his name is but he made a comment that i will summarize here:

"He said that i am committed to my own worldview and ain't interested in what the evidence shows"

Couldn't be more wrong in that statement, i just happen to not think that the evidence points toward physicalism over any other worldview. The evidence that i have looked at from neuroscience, quantum physics, classical physics, biology, parapsycology, psychology etc.] Can be accounted for on a dualistic worldview. That doesn't mean dualism is right and i never said it is the absolute truth. There are many good reasons why i think physicalism is wrong, i have mentioned those many times on here.Anyways,

I was banned from there apparently because of plagiarism and copyright violations not being "ideologically inspired." The person then said the same thing about Adamwho which i do agree with him being ideologically inspired. The reason why is because of saying well the evidence is poor or very weak, he says the evidence is non existent. Big difference there, i remember a skeptic on skeptiko recently, saying that any skeptic who says their is no evidence is just as closed minded as saying their is very strong evidence. I totally agree on the first, the reason obviously is they don't look at the evidence in the first place. The second i disagree on because the evidence is very strong but of course it ain't a fact. But science doesn't deal with facts only the preponderance of evidence.

Adamwho mentions

It amazes me that they can only argue about philosophical stances without ever actually getting to the point: There is no evidence for their position.

But i have many times presenting tons of links, i ain't going to be there to summarize every single piece of evidence that supports psi and life after death. That would take a very long time to do. Then after that what would be the point? he would simply say the evidence is nonexistent.

No comments: