How should we interpret the evidence?

View the entire episode here...

[TheSeenman]

Well, i dont know the exact terms in english as i am from Denmark, but the scientific method basically covers three parts: regular science (called "nature science" in Denmark), social sciences and humanistic sciences.
The last of these focuses on text, painting and cultural stuff and its purpose is to understand the author behind it.
The second is about quantitative and qualitative research.
The "natural" (natural as in: nature) science is all about finding the objective truth, thats it!

[Silent]

"interpret the evidence"
That made me lol :P

[lenlangevin]

How can I love something that I don't believe exists?

I treat people as I hope to be treated. I don't drink, smoke, do drugs, gamble, steal, cheat, kill, etc etc....

If you still think I'm in sin because I don't share your belief, then so be it. I really don't care what you think of me.

[lenlangevin]

I don't believe hell exists, therefore I don't believe I - or anyone else - is going there.

[Vajrabrother]

I treat people as I hope to be treated. I don't drink, smoke, do drugs, gamble, steal, cheat, kill, etc etc....

If you have no double standards in yourself, I believe you will not be going to hell. Sin is believing yourself to be more special or important than others.

I do not think that smoking, drinking, doing drugs is actually sin(in classical sense). Gambling starts to get tricky, but you may investigate that point in your own leisure or importance.

[TheSeenman]

My point is:
Yes, we are not completely neutral, one can never be, but we do NOT have the presupposition that God does not exist, that is something we Conclude, and if you took the same steps through science as we did, you would conclude the same thing.
But you refuse to do that! Instead you simply have a presupposition that God exists.
It would be wrong to question science at this point, i mean look at all it has given us! Everything we know and have build comes from science. EVERYTHING!

[Vajrabrother]

Was it ever possible for any human being to ever interpret anything without preconditioning ? Was it ever possible for humans to question their own preconditioning ? What could be the possible interpretation without one's own preconditioning and without full kowledge or information ? Who will be first ?
Who will be first to explain their findings and how rigid or fixed will it be ??
Don't be stubborn or shy. Come on. Let's have it.

[droptozro]

Ever heard the story of the man who believed he was dead? They tried everything to convince him he was't... finally the doctor thought to ask the man, do you believe dead men bleed? The man thought to himself and said "No, dead men don't bleed." So the doctor grabbed a pin and pricked him, blood came out---the 'dead' man said, "What do you know? dead men do bleed!"

You operate on a presupposition God does not exist, we operate the opposite... it's honest, be consistent. You're not neutral

[Vajrabrother]

I think God watches, if someone is able to love others the same way as they love themselves. I think God allows two humans to find goodness in each other, and gives the opportunity for this to happen. I think God gave the ten commandments as a base, whereby humans may give each other even more, or may uplift each other to the possible highest attainments or goals.
I think every human being is part of this process and has some part in, of, with, under, about God also connected with the other.

[Vajrabrother]

I would like you to explain to me, what the three scientific methods are in a nutshell. Would you say that the "natural" scientific method should be called the regular or normal scientific method ? Scientists, for me, usually have a hyped or exaggerated wording, whereby i find it could be more down to Earth or normal, but many scientists have never discovered or tackled their egos. Do you think that Bohr and Einstein possibly found their egos before death?
Positivism, negativism, neutral

[lenlangevin]

When you talk evidence, the believers lose....there is no way Sye or Eric can win the argument on evidence and that's why they shy away from evidence. They rely on the parlor trick of presupposition and then say god exists because i say he exists. They can't even debate honestly.

[droptozro]

I really don't understand what you're getting at... care to explain further?

[Vajrabrother]

Objective truth is not easy to find when the examiner is subjective and not objective him(her)self.Do you think that humans should focus more on social and humanistic science? I think they should.Do you know roughly how many percent of humans study in these 3 fields? If all aspects of quantitative or qualitative could be used for all groups, what would we find, ?(then?)Thanks for helping, and you are kinder than the last Dane i communicated with on youtube.PS:Danish pastry is some of the best..

[Vajrabrother]

Is God neutral ? What happens when a human being becomes neutral? Does a neutral person lose drive? Does a neutral person become sexless or unattractive for others ? Is being neutral believing in science and God or negating both? Is being neutral, just using science and not bothering about why an electron has a spin around the core? Is being neutral just saying, that it is there? Who is the perceiver that bothered to look. Is looking neutral? Did a clay hut come from science?What about a roof?

[droptozro]

So, you saw it and still said "Dead men do bleed!"---good job still proving the point.

I don't know your personal sin--but can generally figure it out based on greatest two commandments, are you telling me you love God with all your heart, mind, soul and strength and your neighbor as yourself perfectly?

If you don't, then you're in sin.

[droptozro]

Exactly, so 1 sin, unbelief is a sin means you deserve condemnation. YHWH created you, gave you life, and you'd rather serve and/or worship other things... things man created, or possibly yourself or another person. This is idolatry.

So, you've never lied to someone? Never stolen anything(even downloaded music illegally)? Taken God's name in vain(which is kind of odd, to blaspheme God or His Son Jesus and not believe in Him)? Ever had unjust hatred for someone? Lusted after someone?

[TheSeenman]

Pay attention? Yeah i pay a lot of attention, but to what exactly are you asking??

[lenlangevin]

Wrong...I saw your "evidence" long before you recommended it.
So tell me....what sin do I love?

[Vajrabrother]

No, I would not, you seem to know lots and you like bashing. I like explaining some things, but not to get stabbed in the back for being open. Some kids like to talk of respect, but i like to include dignity and integrity. These three together could help humans find some normality, but sometimes i find the bashing here at youtube worse, than when humans openly admit that they hate each others guts and honestly kill each other. Especially when humans do not show their real face.

[TheSeenman]

Yeah, clearly, you don't know anything about positivism.
You don't even know what a presupposition, or a scientific method is, do you?
A scientific method can be three things, but let's focus on the natural scientific method. We use deductive methods to make a theory (of proofs). Then we test if the theory holds true.
Yes, we make some basic assumptions, such that the world exists and so on, but those are NOT presuppositions, they are ASSUMPTIONS, with which we always say that we cant prove it!