Here's for you to think about
-
If you had a box... now this box you can't open but you are told there may or may not be a RED ball inside. Now some people lets call them group A would have faith that there was indeed a RED ball inside and that it was as simple as that.
Now you would have another group of people that would try to measure the box , weigh it , pick it up and shake it, analyse what the box is made from, perhaps even pick at the tape holding the box together. Lets call them Group B.
A would declare that the mere attempt of scientifically studying the box would undermine the "teachings" and very idea of the ball in the box, and say that it shouldn't be done. B would of course disagree and claim that only scientific knowledge can answer the question of is there a ball in the box.
So why would both groups disagree with each other, after all you can't open the box so it is very hard to proove whats inside, which means nobody loses...... or do they. what happens if group B prooves that there is nothing in the box using what ever manner... what then?? does A simply ignore the evidence and carry on believing or do they pack up and go find a wardrobe that may or may not have a coat in it.
So you have the believers A and the non believers B you also have another group that do believe there is somthing in the box but the think it is a blue pyramid. group C shall we say.
What I am trying to say is until it is proved that that there is or not somthing in the box whats the point in arguing and fighting.
but maybe we already know why we fight and argue about a subject such as religion... the only group with somthing to lose are those that believe.
PS. if there is nothing in the box....Who made the box??? -
If nobody made that box, would anything have been inside?
Now you think. -
-
i go eat chocolate and watch tv is of a better use of my time...
-
Ashiene is back.
With his atheist views. -
Air is in the box.
-
Hence we always mention these few words - "lets agreee... to disagree."Originally posted by SixSentinels:If you had a box... now this box you can't open but you are told there may or may not be a RED ball inside. Now some people lets call them group A would have faith that there was indeed a RED ball inside and that it was as simple as that.
Now you would have another group of people that would try to measure the box , weigh it , pick it up and shake it, analyse what the box is made from, perhaps even pick at the tape holding the box together. Lets call them Group B.
A would declare that the mere attempt of scientifically studying the box would undermine the "teachings" and very idea of the ball in the box, and say that it shouldn't be done. B would of course disagree and claim that only scientific knowledge can answer the question of is there a ball in the box.
So why would both groups disagree with each other, after all you can't open the box so it is very hard to proove whats inside, which means nobody loses...... or do they. what happens if group B prooves that there is nothing in the box using what ever manner... what then?? does A simply ignore the evidence and carry on believing or do they pack up and go find a wardrobe that may or may not have a coat in it.
So you have the believers A and the non believers B you also have another group that do believe there is somthing in the box but the think it is a blue pyramid. group C shall we say.
What I am trying to say is until it is proved that that there is or not somthing in the box whats the point in arguing and fighting.
but maybe we already know why we fight and argue about a subject such as religion... the only group with somthing to lose are those that believe.
PS. if there is nothing in the box....Who made the box??? -
-
I didn't even bother to read it... too long
-
no one knows everything =)Originally posted by nullifi3d:Hence we always mention these few words - "lets agreee... to disagree." -
Don't wish to read such a long post.
By the way, +1.
-
i dont want my thread to become a +1 thread
here for people to give constructive feedback and comments.. -
the purpose of scientific explanations is to substantiate the prescence or existence of something.
if it's within our means, why not?
touchy issues like religion has too many controversies, just leave it to the individuals to put their faith in it. -
I would choose to believe that it's empty unless I get to see the red ball inside.
Seeing is believing. No point arguing.
If A sees nothing inside and still believe it's there, then it's his wish, not my prob. I dun see it, I dun believe it, so dun come preach me. To each his own. -
not gonna believe till i see it...
i read abit nia lols...too bored to read everything... -
-
It reminds me of the Schrodinger's Cat, not the forum member but the thought experiment. The red ball is same time in the box and is not in the box untill we open the box and see.
Why to analyse the box when we can simply shake it or put it under the X ray? -
And there's a Group C who thinks the box doesn't exists and Group A and B are just dis-illusioned ...
-
you can believe what you want...
and you can dont believe what others believe...
as long as you are happy, why bother what others believe?
-
SixSentinel is not happy..thats y he is bothering others belives....
Seriously...that attitude is the reason y singapore cant give free speech...this country will go down in flames with people of his attitude fighting each other over religion and race. -
]Originally posted by thinkdifferent:It reminds me of the Schrodinger's Cat, not the forum member but the thought experiment. The red ball is same time in the box and is not in the box untill we open the box and see.
Why to analyse the box when we can simply shake it or put it under the X ray?
Oh yeah, I was trying trick my friends using that experiment. But failed to.
By the way, are you better? Recovered?
-
Very interesting. Hey at least give credits to Sixsentinels for posting something intellectual instead of judging him from his previous lousy posts.
-
instead of asking what is inside the box, it is worthwhile o ask why the box was made in the first place. for what purpose?
-
Group A will then bomb group B's embassies and give a reward of USD1MIL to anyone who can bring the head of a member of group B to them.
Group C will log into sgforums and post banal hypothetical questions while A and B kill each other.