Thread: I believe in science...

I am a religious and a logical person. Does this mean I am disqualified? j/k :P

As stated earlier, moderation and margin for error should be taken into account regarding intake of food that is bad for you. It is assumed this is on a regular basis. Kicking your self for having a second helping of cake on your 14th birthday is irrelevant.
Unless you like to lick the polls in the subway after you raid the bottom of the seats for any gum that's still moist. Then you would be pretty weird and most would consider that to be consumption of things that are bad for you. Others might argue that the preparation of fast food would yield the same amount of "germs" and spit + a whole load of cholesterol and other nasty things.

Paragraph summation: Solely logical people shouldn't be so obtuse.

wow finally the civilwarts got to his brain.

It looks more like this thread is proving that you don't bother reading or responding to most of the replies with valid counterpoints, Civil.

Interesting question for me, I eat junk food occasionally, but my doctor and coach both said I was a bit to skinny, and I needed to put some more meat on my bones. So I'm eating bad food - but it's good for me.

Don't do any of the other above

Civil,

I love to feed my soul: I do eat decadent food on occasion, and with moderation love a good micro brew. But to say that because I do those things I am not being scientific? Please!

We do all kinds of "bad" things to make ourselves feel good. There is a lot of neurology involved in that. Like Erik said previously, it is really quite interesting. I love to feed my soul (not meaning an intangible force that animates my physical being) with endorphins, leptin, oxytocin, and all kinds of hormones induced by various behaviors: Usually food, sex and drugs (like alcohol).

BUT, I use empirically gathered evidence to help me make better decisions. I know that certain dietary choices can have deletrious health effects or that random unprotected sex with multiple partners can too.

For the record:

I used to smoke (age 12 to 24) a pack or so a day; unfiltered. I quit almost 10 years ago.

I used to drink a fifth and a half a night and get in bar fights. Now I drink a brew on occasion. But.. I have never driven a car, sober or otherwise! (I bike and walk or use mass-transit)

I used to only eat meat and make fun of vegetarians. Now I only consume plant products and occasionally dairy or eggs.

What changed? I went to school and started researching things... Applying facts to behavior can make a change: I still feed my soul, but now it is more meaningful, more rewarding and I am healthier both in mind and body.

But by all means, never stop feding your soul, just make informed decisions about moderation.

Science be with you!

Originally Posted by CivilWars

......Now, if your decisions are based on logic, studies, and fact then why are you ignoring the very science you claim to base your life on? So are we ready to get honest here, or keep spewing the "I'm smarter than you" BS?

Go.

Since I have been an antagonist as of late I will go ahead and point somethings out. Specifically about me.

I am a huge hypocrite, you got me on that. I smoke a pack a day. I run 3 miles every other day. I have no wish or need to make others smoke, I have no wish or need to force others to run for exercise. My reasons for doing these things are my own.

However when it comes to thing that I vote on, or for things that I would like to see changed in our society I am open and willing to not only defend my positions, but to change them when shown they are not the best for us.

The best example for why this is important is gay marriage. This is something that is cut down in our society by religion. People who oppose it rarely make an attempt at posing a reason or purpose behind their dislike, they attack it however with religion. Then when asked to justify their position they shield themselves with religion. If I were to say, studies show that Americans who live in houses that are painted red should not be allowed to have children. You would challenge me on it, and I would have to concede. People who oppose gay marriage are not willing to concede, we actually do not challenge the base of their argument, the bible, because as a collective we currently draw the line of argument there. The bible card is a brick wall. Is that right Civil? I need to justify, but if I believed in a god I would not need to?

I use science and rational thought for any opinion I make or hold that has to do with any kind of public policy. I use my own wants to direct my own life. I like to smoke my pack of newports a day, I like zombie movies, I think Dave Matthews Band is a good band. Religious Americans want us to think that the things they argue for are rational, abstinence, opposing gay marriage, opposing stem cell research, posting religious icons/writings in public. These are personal beliefs that they project into public. Any opinion when used in voting, or arguing on public policy, should not have this safety. None. Not mine not yours, it makes us poor fellow citizens. Yes I will post things for discussion, I will be abrasive I will be sarcastic. My purpose is to open up the flood gates on things that should be discussed by adults with big people hats on, not people who don't want their invisible friend to be insulted. My purpose is not to make you feel like an idiot, it is not to burn you at the stake. Your ideas how ever, when used in a way that affects everyone else, will feel some flame. One of two things will happen, you will figure out for your self if those opinions are good, or if they might need to be rethought. Either way you win by arguing your position as an American.

As an end point one thing in favor of science is science is not telling children they will goto hell if they don't listen. Science is not an entity that is at war with religion, science is at war with ignorance. Religion just happened to pick the wrong side.


PoB

I eat plenty of food that is bad for me.
I am about 15 pounds overweight, but it used to be worse. I am heading in the right direction on the scale these days.

I know that the foods I eat that I should not eat are bad, but I make an emotional decision to eat them because I like them.
Lately I have started eating much less of the bad for me stuff because I know that the older I get, the worse that stuff is for me.
This is not easy to do in the land of bier and schnitzel.

But none of that changes my belief in science and logic.
I know that some of my favorite foods are bad for me. I choose to eat them anyway.

But I think your logic is flawed on this theory of yours, Civil. No one makes all their decisions on either logic or emotion. Humans make almost every decision with a bit of both. If humans did always make decisions based on logic, we will no longer be humans, we will be robots.

Originally Posted by Pint

Originally Posted by CivilWars

......Now, if your decisions are based on logic, studies, and fact then why are you ignoring the very science you claim to base your life on? So are we ready to get honest here, or keep spewing the "I'm smarter than you" BS?

Go.

Since I have been an antagonist as of late I will go ahead and point somethings out. Specifically about me.

I am a huge hypocrite, you got me on that. I smoke a pack a day. I run 3 miles every other day. I have no wish or need to make others smoke, I have no wish or need to force others to run for exercise. My reasons for doing these things are my own.

However when it comes to thing that I vote on, or for things that I would like to see changed in our society I am open and willing to not only defend my positions, but to change them when shown they are not the best for us.

The best example for why this is important is gay marriage. This is something that is cut down in our society by religion. People who oppose it rarely make an attempt at posing a reason or purpose behind their dislike, they attack it however with religion. Then when asked to justify their position they shield themselves with religion. If I were to say, studies show that Americans who live in houses that are painted red should not be allowed to have children. You would challenge me on it, and I would have to concede. People who oppose gay marriage are not willing to concede, we actually do not challenge the base of their argument, the bible, because as a collective we currently draw the line of argument there. The bible card is a brick wall. Is that right Civil? I need to justify, but if I believed in a god I would not need to?

I use science and rational thought for any opinion I make or hold that has to do with any kind of public policy. I use my own wants to direct my own life. I like to smoke my pack of newports a day, I like zombie movies, I think Dave Matthews Band is a good band. Religious Americans want us to think that the things they argue for are rational, abstinence, opposing gay marriage, opposing stem cell research, posting religious icons/writings in public. These are personal beliefs that they project into public. Any opinion when used in voting, or arguing on public policy, should not have this safety. None. Not mine not yours, it makes us poor fellow citizens. Yes I will post things for discussion, I will be abrasive I will be sarcastic. My purpose is to open up the flood gates on things that should be discussed by adults with big people hats on, not people who don't want their invisible friend to be insulted. My purpose is not to make you feel like an idiot, it is not to burn you at the stake. Your ideas how ever, when used in a way that affects everyone else, will feel some flame. One of two things will happen, you will figure out for your self if those opinions are good, or if they might need to be rethought. Either way you win by arguing your position as an American.

As an end point one thing in favor of science is science is not telling children they will goto hell if they don't listen. Science is not an entity that is at war with religion, science is at war with ignorance. Religion just happened to pick the wrong side.


PoB

At least you are honest. As for justification, as I said in other topics abstinence is virtually 100% effective, I could care less about gay marriage, and I don't really care where the name God or the ten commandments are displayed as long as you don't infringe on my right to believe what I want. I take logic, science, education, and many other factors into my decisions, just like you. Some things in life aren't 100% scientific, like does he/she love you or not. Unless you plan to do brain studies on a person then you have to just base it on your emotions, like anyone else.

On one hand you say you don't care what others believe, but then on the other you bash anyone who doesn't believe what you do. On one hand you say you hate it when people try to press their beliefs on you, but last I checked you have started the most pro-beliefs, those beliefs just happen to be non-belief, on the forums. Show me a topic where I, or any other "Christian" on TTP, said you need to believe what I believe.

Bottom line for me is if you, or anyone else other than Soy , want to believe you are the smartest person in the room feel free, just keep it to yourself, like you ask others to do about what they believe.

Oh, and as for why the poll, if we truly based our life and decisions on science then all of you would be just as hard core about outlawing smoking and obesity as you are about removing "In God we trust" from the currency. Imagine how much better our health and environment would be if we just removed all cigarettes from America, or the world. Now that is science, but where are your protests on that?

Peace out.

Originally Posted by CivilWars

Oh, and as for why the poll, if we truly based our life and decisions on science then all of you would be just as hard core about outlawing smoking and obesity as you are about removing "In God we trust" from the currency. Imagine how much better our health and environment would be if we just removed all cigarettes from America, or the world. Now that is science, but where are your protests on that?

Peace out.

I will respond to the rest of your post later (I have to go to work in five minutes).

I honestly can't see the line you're drawing here. I don't know if you didn't read a lot of the post in this thread fully, but we've already explained how knowing doesn't constitute doing. Just because we know smoking is bad for us (And we DO KNOW IT), doesn't mean we'll all decide not to smoke.

I'll tell you right now I don't just not think I'm the smartest in the room, I damn well know I'm not. Its not an issue of smart or not, its an issue of true or not. Believing in God is a belief, based on faith. Believing that shooting yourself in the head will cause death is not. Having In God We Trust on our currency is an issue to some, because it is an infringement of religion on government, something our COTUS prohibits. Banning "obesity" (How do you ban a condition?) or smoking is wrong because those are personal choices that people should be allowed to make for themselves. We know smoking is bad for us, we know fatty foods are bad for us, but we allow people to decide whether they wish to partake anyway.

Anyway, gotta run, I wish I could take more time on this, but I will later.