A theological question...
-
Some good points, however... "...you can live your life logically, and also have faith that the deity of your choice exists and knows what he's doing..." Having Faith in something with NO evidence, and NO hard truths is illogical. Surely?:confused: When it comes to maths and me, the wheel's going but the hamster's dead.
Ben Ashley wrote: Having Faith in something with NO evidence, and NO hard truths is illogical. What are hard truths? I may have ample truths to believe, but you may not find those good enough. Answer me this: What does it prove to God that we will only believe in him if we can prove he exists?
"It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt." - Abraham Lincoln
-
Ben Ashley wrote: Having Faith in something with NO evidence, and NO hard truths is illogical. Why are you assuming that having faith in a deity is without evidence? There is tons of evidence you could use. Of course, it does depend on how you interpret that evidence. If your nose runs and your feet smell, then you're built upside down.
Heh, well this is where it gets really theological, I guess :-) You're right, there is tons of "evidence". But nothing that can be verified. If you want to talk about verifiable evidence, lets make a button with an onclick event... it'll happen unless you screw it up. Scientifically you can call in to question the concept of a higher being. Superficially, looking at the way things go on this planet you can ask the same questions. At the end of the day, the answer is written on the unread minds of man, but that's not what this thread is about... it's about the ILLOGICAL thought process doing completely LOGICAL activities. :cool: When it comes to maths and me, the wheel's going but the hamster's dead.
-
Continuing in my attempt to bring "intellectually challenging thoughts and ideas" (Bonus pint of beer for those who can name the origin of that quote... clue, it started with "a veritable encyclopeadia of..."), I have a mental dilemma... How does a fundamentally religious person become a good engineer? Believing in a religion requires that you have faith. Faith being you believe in something you have been told, and/or have circumstantial evidence for. It's God's will. The Way of Allah. It's what the prophecy says. Little or no evidence... I digress, this post is not about discussing religion and it's pros and cons. A good software engineer (let's call them a cybernetic architect to bring the role in parallel with worshipper)... Knows his trade, everything is logical. Nothing is circumstantial unless it is a bug. It can only happen because of reason and of prior code. So how does a good engineer believe so profoundly in something illogical? Answers on a postcard and yes I will post that article on ISAPI/ATL/Managed C++... I just have no time except to write pointless posts. (Oh, and Paul... God did not invent the M5.... some German did... Was he religious?! :-)) :-O When it comes to maths and me, the wheel's going but the hamster's dead.
You have a few questions to answer first. What makes a "good" software engineer ("cybernetic architect", whatever)? Is it someone who engineers good software? What is good software? Is it software that meets the user's needs? Who shot JR?
Shog9 --
Exchanging a walk-on part in the War
for the lead role in a Cage
-
Reasoned thinking is better than illogical, because it says that although you don't know all the facts you're going to perform a best-guess thought. When it comes to maths and me, the wheel's going but the hamster's dead.
-
Continuing in my attempt to bring "intellectually challenging thoughts and ideas" (Bonus pint of beer for those who can name the origin of that quote... clue, it started with "a veritable encyclopeadia of..."), I have a mental dilemma... How does a fundamentally religious person become a good engineer? Believing in a religion requires that you have faith. Faith being you believe in something you have been told, and/or have circumstantial evidence for. It's God's will. The Way of Allah. It's what the prophecy says. Little or no evidence... I digress, this post is not about discussing religion and it's pros and cons. A good software engineer (let's call them a cybernetic architect to bring the role in parallel with worshipper)... Knows his trade, everything is logical. Nothing is circumstantial unless it is a bug. It can only happen because of reason and of prior code. So how does a good engineer believe so profoundly in something illogical? Answers on a postcard and yes I will post that article on ISAPI/ATL/Managed C++... I just have no time except to write pointless posts. (Oh, and Paul... God did not invent the M5.... some German did... Was he religious?! :-)) :-O When it comes to maths and me, the wheel's going but the hamster's dead.
Generally people do not have faith in things they find illogical. Why would they? People who have faith in God, find a solid logic to their belief even though they may not be able to give concrete proof. Also, fundamentally religious people is a meaningless phrase. (just to nitpick) A persons religion is their way of viewing the world. This is by definition fundamental to their makeup. You might have simply said "How does a person become a good engineer?"
"The beat goes on.. da-da-dum dadum dum"
BW
-
yes, I know them. That's what I am trying to figure out. When it comes to maths and me, the wheel's going but the hamster's dead.
-
Ben Ashley wrote: Apologies, but I don't see the flaw. My question states that: A great engineer verifies his work, and the process is logical. A fundamentalist (Insert religion), believes in something illogical but cannot verify. My opinion is that the flaw is two-fold: 1. People have both logical and illogical sides. Just because a person is logical in one area does not mean they have to be logical in all areas. 2. Believing in a religion does not make one illogical. Being very general, one can find logic in a religion. For the most part, when you dig down deep enough there is a point where you find a very unstable foundation and the whole thing falls apart. For the most part, they end up being a moral code based upon something flimsy. But above that point you will find people who have very logical, religious beliefs (disregarding whether there is good evidence for those beliefs). But you most likely know all of this, are bored, and looking for a good fight. Sean Winstead
To answer..: 1) I agree a persons viewpoints may differ between subjects. But I think that religion and the very nature of an engineer's work are such that the underlaying brain processes of logic and illogic must intertwine. 2) Religion has various grounds that we can point at and say "yes, that's cool, I can live by that". All religions tend to teach a passive, loveable attitude which is great and something I can deal with. The lesser among us need that kind of help to get out of their Tesco-bag-packing job. But the heaven/hell etherel award/fire and brimstone crap is a bit out-dated... Perhaps I didn't make it clear... this engineer was a fire-and-brimstone guy. No fight being looked for... just a conversation starter/stopper. When it comes to maths and me, the wheel's going but the hamster's dead.
-
yes, I know them. That's what I am trying to figure out. When it comes to maths and me, the wheel's going but the hamster's dead.
why don't you ask one of them. Josef Wainz Software Developer
-
Ben Ashley wrote: Having Faith in something with NO evidence, and NO hard truths is illogical. Why are you assuming that having faith in a deity is without evidence? There is tons of evidence you could use. Of course, it does depend on how you interpret that evidence. If your nose runs and your feet smell, then you're built upside down.
Navin wrote: There is tons of evidence you could use Sorry for being blunt but, ... like what? When it comes to maths and me, the wheel's going but the hamster's dead.
-
Reasoned thinking is better than illogical, because it says that although you don't know all the facts you're going to perform a best-guess thought. When it comes to maths and me, the wheel's going but the hamster's dead.
Ben Ashley wrote: Reasoned thinking is better than illogical, because it says that although you don't know all the facts you're going to perform a best-guess thought. I don't know all the facts about our universe, therefore a best-guess thought I have (based on the evidence and truths I know) is that God does exist. So why don't you just come right out and call me an illogical bafoon?
"It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt." - Abraham Lincoln
-
Some good points, however... "...you can live your life logically, and also have faith that the deity of your choice exists and knows what he's doing..." Having Faith in something with NO evidence, and NO hard truths is illogical. Surely?:confused: When it comes to maths and me, the wheel's going but the hamster's dead.
Ben Ashley wrote: Having Faith in something with NO evidence, and NO hard truths is illogical. In a perfect world, perhaps. The truth here is, to get by day to day, we take a *lot* of things on faith. We're taught to do this from a young age. Mother tells us "don't put your fingers in the wall sockets, you'll get hurt". We've seen no evidence of that. Those wall sockets look pretty harmless to me... After the crying and shaking stops, we see the advantages of having a bit of faith in Mother's words. Obtaining hard evidence on the dangers of Draino milkshakes can wait.
Shog9 --
Exchanging a walk-on part in the War
for the lead role in a Cage
-
Ben Ashley wrote: Having Faith in something with NO evidence, and NO hard truths is illogical. What are hard truths? I may have ample truths to believe, but you may not find those good enough. Answer me this: What does it prove to God that we will only believe in him if we can prove he exists?
"It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt." - Abraham Lincoln
What does it prove to God that we will only believe in him if we can prove he exists? If God exists, it proves nothing as it is a pointless lesson. If he doesn't exist, it means even less. When it comes to maths and me, the wheel's going but the hamster's dead.
-
To answer..: 1) I agree a persons viewpoints may differ between subjects. But I think that religion and the very nature of an engineer's work are such that the underlaying brain processes of logic and illogic must intertwine. 2) Religion has various grounds that we can point at and say "yes, that's cool, I can live by that". All religions tend to teach a passive, loveable attitude which is great and something I can deal with. The lesser among us need that kind of help to get out of their Tesco-bag-packing job. But the heaven/hell etherel award/fire and brimstone crap is a bit out-dated... Perhaps I didn't make it clear... this engineer was a fire-and-brimstone guy. No fight being looked for... just a conversation starter/stopper. When it comes to maths and me, the wheel's going but the hamster's dead.
Ben Ashley wrote: The lesser among us need that kind of help to get out of their Tesco-bag-packing job. But the heaven/hell etherel award/fire and brimstone crap is a bit out-dated... This is your problem. Just because your friend has a different belief, you chastise him. You can't prove that he will be wrong. Therefore it is illogical for you to think Christians (fundamental or otherwise) are stupid (you said lesser among us).
"It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt." - Abraham Lincoln
-
Navin wrote: There is tons of evidence you could use Sorry for being blunt but, ... like what? When it comes to maths and me, the wheel's going but the hamster's dead.
-
You have to forgive me here. I'm not pointing fingers saying they can or can't do this. I'm sitting here pondering what the ramifications of it is. When it comes to maths and me, the wheel's going but the hamster's dead.
-
Ben Ashley wrote: Reasoned thinking is better than illogical, because it says that although you don't know all the facts you're going to perform a best-guess thought. I don't know all the facts about our universe, therefore a best-guess thought I have (based on the evidence and truths I know) is that God does exist. So why don't you just come right out and call me an illogical bafoon?
"It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt." - Abraham Lincoln
We could sit here for hours and talk about the facts you do know about the universe and, based on the evidence and truths you know, you believe in a God. It may seem to be illogical to me, but that does not mean you're a bafoon. When it comes to maths and me, the wheel's going but the hamster's dead.
-
Ben Ashley wrote: Having Faith in something with NO evidence, and NO hard truths is illogical. In a perfect world, perhaps. The truth here is, to get by day to day, we take a *lot* of things on faith. We're taught to do this from a young age. Mother tells us "don't put your fingers in the wall sockets, you'll get hurt". We've seen no evidence of that. Those wall sockets look pretty harmless to me... After the crying and shaking stops, we see the advantages of having a bit of faith in Mother's words. Obtaining hard evidence on the dangers of Draino milkshakes can wait.
Shog9 --
Exchanging a walk-on part in the War
for the lead role in a Cage
But alot of lessons were also learned the hard way. Yes, mother says "don't stick your hand in a boiling kettle"... some of us tried it, some of us got hurt and some of us did not do it again. That's hard facts for you. Then there are also some of us who never did do it because mom said not to. My mother has told me a lot of things, and not all of them have been correct so unfortunately I can't place her on the "defacto truth" panel. When it comes to maths and me, the wheel's going but the hamster's dead.
-
What does it prove to God that we will only believe in him if we can prove he exists? If God exists, it proves nothing as it is a pointless lesson. If he doesn't exist, it means even less. When it comes to maths and me, the wheel's going but the hamster's dead.
Ben Ashley wrote: If God exists, it proves nothing as it is a pointless lesson. Faith is fundamental to the free-will argument. If we knew for certain that God existed and that he was holding the whole fire and brimstone thing over our heads, then we would definitely be good even if we have the desire to be bad. Our life here may be training for the life to come. It could also be viewed as a sieve (sp?).
"It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt." - Abraham Lincoln
-
We could sit here for hours and talk about the facts you do know about the universe and, based on the evidence and truths you know, you believe in a God. It may seem to be illogical to me, but that does not mean you're a bafoon. When it comes to maths and me, the wheel's going but the hamster's dead.
Ben Ashley wrote: It may seem to be illogical to me, but that does not mean you're a bafoon. You came right out in another post that you thought the "lesser among us" used religion as a crutch.
"It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt." - Abraham Lincoln
-
Ben Ashley wrote: The lesser among us need that kind of help to get out of their Tesco-bag-packing job. But the heaven/hell etherel award/fire and brimstone crap is a bit out-dated... This is your problem. Just because your friend has a different belief, you chastise him. You can't prove that he will be wrong. Therefore it is illogical for you to think Christians (fundamental or otherwise) are stupid (you said lesser among us).
"It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt." - Abraham Lincoln
At no point did I say Christians were stupid, and more importantly I am not chastising a friend because he has different beliefs. My question was simple... it was to discuss the difference between what I called logical and what I called illogical... the temporary candidates for those two positions was an engineer and a christian. There is no malice or malcontent here. When it comes to maths and me, the wheel's going but the hamster's dead.