The Black Vault

at1with0 wrote:

humphreys wrote:Is dreaming proof of a dream world?

Yes.

No.

Now what?

greeney2 wrote:

humphreys wrote:

greeney2 wrote:You used gambling to make a point and failed to consider, exactly what I said is built into that example. Winning is real, it exists, it is not a fairytale.

You're stretching the example too far.

The point I was trying to make, I made. When someone tells you they *just know*, there is a good chance they are wrong.

Isn't that a bit like picking a passage out of an entire chapter and book, and trying to make a point by ignoring the entirety of it? the perspective seeing its entirity, all has a different intrupetation. In your case with the gambling example, you expected the point taken, would be made by only considering the parts you wanted onlly, but the other parts show a differnt possibilty. YOu can not deny your use was to show Faith is a futile effort, only if you could not win, but forgot in a game of gambling, the prizes are real.

I didn't forget that, it just doesn't refute the point I was trying to make.

greeney2 wrote:My point in gambling is that jackpots are real, other payouts are real, it is not impossible to win. Therefore the gambling example was a poor choice and not very logical from my perspective.

How does that refute my point, though? If I was making an analogy, you could suggest that it wasn't a perfect one, but no analogies are going to be perfect, you'll always be able to nitpick at something different in the two examples, but that doesn't automatically mean the analogy is invalid, or worthless.

It's like the common example of the Universe's expansion, where we are told to imagine a balloon being blown up to picture how the Universe expands. Some people then ask "well, that's not the same, because balloons burst if you put too much air in them", and that would be an example of what you're doing, which is nitpicking. The example is valid even though it is imperfect - because the point is made.

Why does it matter if the jackpot is real or not? Faith is faith, and the point still stands that the person has complete faith in something that turns out to be wrong.

I get your point, I just don't think it makes any difference to the point I was trying to make.

You are a hard nut to crack Humphreys. LIke it or not you were making an analogy, the gambler had Faith because he knows winning the Jackpot is real, not imagined.

How can there be dreams without a dreamworld?

The dreamer may just be dreaming, not entering another world.

greeney2 wrote:You are a hard nut to crack Humphreys. LIke it or not you were making an analogy, the gambler had Faith because he knows winning the Jackpot is real, not imagined.

His point, I think, was simply that strength of conviction alone isn't evidence, and shouldn't be relied on as a substitute for real evidence. Just because you really reeealllly feel you're right, that alone doesn't mean anything. What matters is what you have to support your claims/beliefs.

People have false intuition and certainty all the time. How strongly you feel it must be so just doesn't matter. There are other non-christian religious people who feel just as strongly as you do about their beliefs. Their certainty doesn't make them right, does it?

Some people really really believe in fairies, or Grey aliens, or Bigfeet, or Allah, or vampires. How very sure the believer is that these are real means nothing by itself. Reasonable people shouldn't expect others to believe anything extraordinary as if it were obvious.

DIss0n80r wrote:The dreamer may just be dreaming, not entering another world.

Dreamworld is the "place" the dreamer is in when s/he is dreaming.

at1with0 wrote:

DIss0n80r wrote:The dreamer may just be dreaming, not entering another world.

Dreamworld is the "place" the dreamer is in when s/he is dreaming.

No it isn't.

at1with0 wrote:How can there be dreams without a dreamworld?

They are imaginary, this is not South Park, Imagination Land is not real.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKCwTTfPr9k

If you believe in imaginary things, I think that might explain your theistic tendencies.