Computer \"reads\" memories... (Humans)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Tuesday, March 23, 2010, 23:01 (5166 days ago) @ David Turell


> > If atheists have faith that the machine can be built, and theists have faith that it can't, good for them. I prefer to wait for the evidence before I make a decision.
> 
> It is going to be a very, very, very long wait. George took his leap of faith, I've taken mine. There is no other way. God is concealed, will always be, and His presence will always be inferred, with stronger and stronger inference as biologic science continues to demonstrate an ever increasing complexity that underlies life. Join George, Pascal, and me!-Of course, you omit that inferences are always weak by nature. The only "good" inference is the one that can actually be verified; which by your own definition is something that can be never done. So it is useless. -An alternate point of view will be had by atheists for the same evidence: not useful either, but it's an easier proposition to live by. Both positions ultimately begin from a pre-rendered viewpoint: So why then, should we accept such a weak proposition? The ultimate question that I've probed at before that you've never ventured to answer, is *why* should I believe in this deity? God(s) only serve a purpose for those people that have an inclination to believe in the first place. Your view gives a *weak* justification for those people, but serves nothing more than those few. -I can't speak for dhw, but there is NO belief I hold based on such weakness. Why should he or I accept an unprovable position?

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"