Jump to content
Can't remember your login details? Read more... ×

Kensey

Atømican
  • Content Count

    176
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Serf

About Kensey

  • Rank
    Journeyman
  1. Kensey

    Vote below the line on August 21st

    There is also... https://www.belowtheline.org.au/ which allows you to take a particular parties ticket as a starting point for your customisation.
  2. Kensey

    $29 HP printer, DSE Superstore, Canberra Centre

    The list of stores seems to be growing... and now includes QLD and TAS. I might take a drive down to springwood and pick one up...
  3. Kensey

    Farewell index680i

    That was one thing that always struck me about him... his courage in dreaming out loud. Something that we all can learn from. Condolences to you and your family, and to all of index's friends.
  4. My view on this is that most religions by default would be incompatible with modern science. Look at something like Christianity where much has changed due to advances made in our knowledge. At the same time people slowly start taking beliefs less literally so as they don't contradict science. Back in the day people believed, literally, that the earth was created in six days. Now we have people saying six days is a metaphor, or was a relative measurement and six days to god is not the same as six days for a human. Any current incarnation of religion will be incompatible with science, until that religion then adapts to reflect any advances made. Basically while(science++){religion+1} Sorry, but your history is backwards. It was really only around the time of the Reformation (ca. C16th) that a literal six day creation started to gain popularity. "Back in the day" (way, way back in the day, i.e., the first few centuries AD), church fathers such as Origen, Augustine and Clement certainly did not take 'day' to mean a 24 hour period. Granted their view as to the age of the earth was much, much less than what we now perceive it to be, but that has to be seen in light of the pre-scientific consensus.
  5. Yea so you like to keep Atheism strictly a concise definition of "Belief in no god " or "lack of belief in god " anything more requires a different word or becomes a reasoning for why you are atheist? Hmmm... I don't know it is so much that I like to keep the definition of atheism concise, more that I have a problem with those who seem to chop and change their definition depending on what is most likely to win an argument. As a quick example, though perhaps not one that best illustrates what I am getting at... Why is it that Richard Dawkins claims that there is no logical connection between atheism and persecution/torture/murder/&c. (as he did during his appearance on Q&A recently), and often has denied that atheism is any form of ideological system, yet at the back of The God Delusion he presents the 10 atheist commandments (which are really just secular humanist ideals)? Surely by defining "atheistic commandments" he is in fact creating a logical connection between atheism and persecution/torture/murder/&c. by giving people something which can be abused a la religion.
  6. @Bundy... We can keep going until we find a point of disagreement if you like :) I guess what was in the back of my mind was the way in which many people declare atheism to not be a religion/ideology/world-veiw, or claim that no one has ever been murdered/persecuted/tortured/&c. in the name of atheism (two points I basically agree with, and would argue that they are both true also in terms of pure theism), yet when they start to define atheism it does indeed become more than just a simple statement about the existence of god(s). Instead what they are describing as atheism is essentially a form of secularism or empirical rationalism, or some other broader world-view, which then can indeed be considered an ideology, and can possibly be used in "bad" ways. Similar to the way in most theists hold much broader views than just a mere statement about the existence of god(s). It isn't their theism that leads to persecution and the like, it is what gets added to that, i.e., religion, that is open to being abused.
  7. lol... I entered this in relation to your atheist/rationalist comment, but having explored it a bit, it would seem that we do essentially agree :)
  8. Exactly... and my point is that atheism is not a way of thinking. It is simply a statement about the existence, or not, of god(s). Well, I think that is open to debate, but accepting for the moment that it is true, it certainly doesn't follow that all atheists are therefore rationalists. That seems a strange position to take... why assume that if suddenly everyone were to accept the notion of God that progress and science would suddenly disappear? As you said, we are naturally curious. It seems as though you are taking the small minority of "believers" who are in a sense anti-science to be the norm, and to be correctly following the teaching of their religion.
  9. A large part of the problem with using a term like "rationalist" is that it isn't synonymous with atheism. That while many come to atheism through a rational approach, there are many who don't, there are many who simply "believe" no god(s) exist, without ever having given it much thought. The other problem with the term rationalist is that it is moving away from simple atheism and starting down the path of a more encompassing world view or ideology. For instance, it is quite possible to be an atheist yet accept reincarnation or astrology, as they are completely independent from the issue of the existence of god(s). But I would assume that for most, if not all rationalists, those two examples would not be acceptable, and would be indeed rejected. Yea I totally agree that's rationalist on it's own isn't enough information. But what more would you have to add to make it more acceptable or more synonymous? As I say, once you start adding more on top of simple atheism you are turning it into an ideology, and therefore open to charges of becoming yet another world-view or indeed "religion".
  10. A large part of the problem with using a term like "rationalist" is that it isn't synonymous with atheism. That while many come to atheism through a rational approach, there are many who don't, there are many who simply "believe" no god(s) exist, without ever having given it much thought. The other problem with the term rationalist is that it is moving away from simple atheism and starting down the path of a more encompassing world view or ideology. For instance, it is quite possible to be an atheist yet accept reincarnation or astrology, as they are completely independent from the issue of the existence of god(s). But I would assume that for most, if not all rationalists, those two examples would not be acceptable, and would be indeed rejected.
  11. It's more that the cables can be unplugged from the PSU... meaning that you don't have the hassle of all those extra power cables that you don't need cluttering up the insides of your case.
  12. Kensey

    What are over riders?

    Part of the bumper bar... those bits that sit over the actual bar in a vertical fashion (if that makes sense). Just to the inside of the tail lights on that Bentley.
  13. As well travelled as Lucky Starr? Tullamore, Seymour, Lismore, Mooloolaba, Nambour, Maroochydore, Kilmore, Murwillumbah, Birdsville, Emmaville, Wallaville, Cunnamulla, Condamine, Strathpine, Proserpine, Ulladulla, Darwin, Gin Gin, Deniliquin, Muckadilla, Wallumbilla, Boggabilla, Kumbarilla...
  14. Kensey

    Atari free Arcade games

    That's bringing back some memories... thanks :)
  15. Kensey

    Royal Military College

    Yes, but what does the army celebrate? I thought the cake and candles comments might have given you a clue :)
×