AgnosticBoy wrote:
I'll go ahead and say because of this the agnostic would be more reasonable than an atheist, in the same way atheists think they are more reasonable than Christians. The reason for this is not because of agnostics being all-knowing or arrogant, but rather it's because the PRINCIPLE that agnostics live by. Again, the principle of applying logic and evidence standard to ALL areas would mean that we use REASON more than the atheists that only applies it to matters of religion.
For debate:
Are agnostics more reasonable than atheists?
Maybe it is not meant to be taken literally as "music" -
It is to be taken as 'Metaphorically true', then, like metaphorically true in the Bible, it means 'not true at all'.
However I need to retrace the analogy as we seem to have lost the point.Yes, this:
"Observing people I see the Mind of the Cosmos struggling to be heard above the fray...it appears to want to be heard through that Human medium, but that medium resists hearing, except what it wants to hear for its own individual agenda, rather than recognizing the overall."
I compared this to the 'music of the spheres' belief. It raises an imaginary hypothesis of a Cosmic mind for which there is no scrap of decent evidence and substitutes for the human imagination an unheard voice of an invisible entity.
"Observing people I see the Mind of the Cosmos struggling to be heard above the fray...it appears to want to be heard through that Human medium, but that medium resists hearing, except what it wants to hear for its own individual agenda, rather than recognizing the overall."
I compared this to the 'music of the spheres' belief. It raises an imaginary hypothesis of a Cosmic mind for which there is no scrap of decent evidence and substitutes for the human imagination an unheard voice of an invisible entity.
Music of the spheres.
Music of the spheres: an ethereal [extremely delicate and light in a way that seems not to be of this world.] harmony thought by the Pythagoreans to be produced by the vibration of the celestial spheres.
What I find fascinating is that folk of ancient times imagined such a thing about the planets.
Can a planet make a sound? It's an interesting question that gives us insight into the nature of sound waves. In a sense, planets do emit radiation which can be used to make sounds we can hear. How does that work?
The Physics of Sound Waves
Everything in the universe gives off radiation that — if our ears or eyes were sensitive to it — we could "hear" or "see". The spectrum of light that we actually perceive is very small, compared to the very large spectrum of available light, ranging from gamma-rays to radio waves. Signals that can be converted to sound make up only one part of that spectrum. {SOURCE}
...there is no scrap of decent evidence...
There are indeed many scraps of decent evidence. However, what I may refer to as 'decent evidence' may not been seen the same way by others.
Princess Sparkles: Everyone: In space nobody can hear you scream
Saturn: Hold my beer
_________________
From the link;
The Cassini spacecraft has been detecting intense radio emissions from the planet Saturn. They come from the planet's aurorae, where magnetic field lines thread the polar regions. These signals have been shifted into the range of human hearing and compressed in time. For more information about how NASA produced this track, go to...
Cosmic Mind?
An imaginary hypothesis of a Cosmic mind for which there is no scrap of decent evidence?
Such expression can only come from someone who wants to believe we do not exist within a creation.
The Earth is abundant with decent evidence supporting the notion of mindful, intelligent creation, performing its tasks through what we loosely refer to as 'evolution'.
William: "Observing people I see the Mind of the Cosmos struggling to be heard above the fray...it appears to want to be heard through that Human medium, but that medium resists hearing, except what it wants to hear for its own individual agenda, rather than recognizing the overall."
The above is pointing out the human dilemma of social inequity and its consequences on the natural environment.
I see no solution to said problem coming from either theist or atheist positions.
That is a nice example of fiddling the evidence to fit the belief. Radio emissions by any planet or star does not validate the actuality of music of the spheres, let along the philosophy behind it. No more than you looking at normal human activity and 'detecting' some kind of cosmic Mind behind it.
Look, I know and you (deep down) know you have nothing but a belief in that stuff. You claim a Cosmic Mind and try to find evidence for it that in unknowns at best and better explained by physical processes otherwise. So this is all just ...I tried to find another way of putting it, but it's just playing rhetorical tricks to see if the skeptics can be stumped.
Here's one:
'The above is pointing out the human dilemma of social inequity and its consequences on the natural environment.
I see no solution to said problem coming from either theist or atheist positions."
What is that supposed to do? I can hardly believe that you hope that we will panic at not being able to usher in a human Utopia, and even worse, you sweep away all the religious promises of divine saving without a scrap of explanation, and you apparently hope that somehow we'll all all start to believe in a Cosmic Mind that (for all anyone knows) isn't going to do a thing for us?
Just what was that pointless piece of rhetoric supposed to do other than make us feel that nothing can be relied on? You haven't even got a Loving Jesusgod to pop in there top make us all feel safer.
