Marcos, I think he gets too caught up in nonsense like that 8-circuit model of consciousness to be really interesting.

However, the phrase “irrational rationality” appeals to me very much. After all, a raging hard-on for skepticism is unhealthy if it lasts for more than four hours.

Marcos El Malo Posted:

[ooc] Nana, you seem like the sort of person who would be aware of the writings of R.A.W.. Have you ever checked out any of his stuff on agnosticism, irrational rationality, and probabilities? [/ooc]

SMASH BLAK WHOLES11111111

i’ve heard his name a few times, though I’ve never read any of his stuff.

anything you recommend?

Marcos El Malo Posted:

The Illuminatus! Trilogy (with Robert Shea)

1) The Eye in the Pyramid

2) The Golden Apple

3) Leviathan

Is a good start. You could probably plow thru it in a weekend pretty easily.

Oh lol, I actually have that book. I just never got around to reading it. Log in to see images!

BUT NOW I WILL

MizMoon Posted:

I mean, c’mon, the man is an absolute genius

huh i thought he was just some guy that had a really boring voice

This thread reminded me of how stupid L2 is.

MizMoon Posted:

Ben Stein has lost a lot of cool points for making this movie – I mean, c’mon, the man is an absolute genius but, unfortunately, science and -any- religion should be kept distinctly separate. When I was Pre-Med, if my teacher had tried to tell me that God created the atom, and that the Earth is only 5,000 years old, and, on top of that, was created in a literal “Seven-Day Genesis Week” I’d have walked out of that University and never returned.

Ben Stein had some good points in the film, but he ruins it by running his own credibility through the dirt, numerous times in the film. He only interviews Darwinists to humiliate them, and the way he treats the pro-ID scientists as martyrs trying to either open a dialog or bridge ID and evolution together, on the back of the Darwinist interviews, makes it obvious he’s trying to demonize one group and glorify the other.

Then, of course, the section on eugenics is complete bull****. He treats the philosophy as a legitimate, current science (anyone with a brain will tell you that eugenics was based on a very poor understanding of hereditary science), and he butchers the Darwin quote he uses, very intentionally, to make it seem like a pro-eugenics argument. Not to mention, the entire section on the Nazis relies on the instant, negative reaction Nazism invokes.

Some of the arguments Stein makes are legitimate, but his appeal to ethos is so horrible that it’ll ultimately have a negative impact on his goals in making the film.

Ben Stein isn’t a genius. Why would he let people win his money all of the time?

Because letting people win his money makes him even more money.

I have a question for those of you who have expressed the sentiment that the movie in question was “propaganda”.

I myself have not seen the movie, so I will refrain from commenting, it may very well be pure propaganda, I have no idea.

But my question is this, did you guys also, label the Michael Moore movies “propaganda”?

BirdofPrey Posted:

of course michael moore movies are propaganda

i don’t understand your question

I was just curious…that was all, no point being made, just curious.

fenk the evil midnight stabber Posted:

I was just curious…that was all, no point being made, just curious.

to clarify, when i say michael moore movies are propaganda i’m not saying it’s all untrue. What i’m saying is you have to realize that it’s very likely you’re not getting the full picture and take it with a degree of salt.

1338h4x Posted:

Don’t teach religion in my science clbum and I won’t go into your church and point out every single contradiction in the bible, all statements in there that have been disproven, etc etc.

And no, ID cannot be studied. There’s no way of disproving it since no matter what we do or what scientific advancements are made in the field of observing stuff, Christfabulous persons will simply put their fingers in their ears and bumert that God is invisible/intangible/undetectable and nothing we do disproves that. If it cannot be proven/disproven, it’s not science.

I agree that ID and Creationism should be kept out of the science clbumroom; that’s one of the reasons we should teach introductory level culture/religions clbumes in high-school, or even middle-school, levels.

However, it’s narrow-sighted to say that it’s impossible to study ID. At the moment, it certainly is, but in the same scope, we haven’t DISPROVED ID either.

It’s not science’s place to say “We can’t study this, so we’ll ignore it.” Good science constantly searches for a way to study or measure something, then proves or disproves it from the results.