Comments for Indian Infidel a.k.a Dilip Mantripragada http://dilipm.wordpress.com Free thought, Humanism, Materialism, Objectivism, Rationalism, Skepticism and Reason Thu, 22 Oct 2009 14:38:32 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 Comment on Pic of the Day: Freedom? by Dilip http://dilipm.wordpress.com/2007/07/13/pic-of-the-day-freedom/#comment-64 Dilip Thu, 22 Oct 2009 14:38:32 +0000 http://dilipm.wordpress.com/2007/07/13/pic-of-the-day-freedom/#comment-64 Sir, can u not see a "question mark" after freedom. I am not saying its freedom.. I am pondering whether its freedom. I also did not pose a question "Freedom from religion?" or Freedom of romance?....All i said was "Freedom?". Coming to the next point on personal choice, when u say "public show" what do you exactly mean. This comment is called a non-sequitir in the debate world. You missed premise here and have assumed,translated(imaginatively exaggerated) to a couple cuddling/kissing each other to various kinds of vile act affecting the society. Look at the picture, it obvious both the couple are from different cultures. Kissing and cuddling in public is not an adverse affect, in the west. It could be an immediate head turner in India but definitely not an adverse effect to the social structure!!!. Having sex in public suddenly is an adverse effect in both the eastern and western worlds I guess. Well coming to last point I kind of agree with you not entirely but partly. Let me say what I agree about, yes religions some times make us do some things without thinking. We just do it because it makes us feel good. I am not against that unless it harms me. Coming to choice, we have always preferred choice, whether a person religious or non religious. We very easily ignore the bad messages and embrace the good points in the religious scriptures. The final point I am trying to make is, good or bad whatever morality, they coming from us not from the religious scriptures. Sir, can u not see a “question mark” after freedom. I am not saying its freedom.. I am pondering whether its freedom. I also did not pose a question “Freedom from religion?” or Freedom of romance?….All i said was “Freedom?”. Coming to the next point on personal choice, when u say “public show” what do you exactly mean. This comment is called a non-sequitir in the debate world. You missed premise here and have assumed,translated(imaginatively exaggerated) to a couple cuddling/kissing each other to various kinds of vile act affecting the society. Look at the picture, it obvious both the couple are from different cultures. Kissing and cuddling in public is not an adverse affect, in the west. It could be an immediate head turner in India but definitely not an adverse effect to the social structure!!!. Having sex in public suddenly is an adverse effect in both the eastern and western worlds I guess. Well coming to last point I kind of agree with you not entirely but partly.
Let me say what I agree about, yes religions some times make us do some things without thinking. We just do it because it makes us feel good. I am not against that unless it harms me.
Coming to choice, we have always preferred choice, whether a person religious or non religious. We very easily ignore the bad messages and embrace the good points in the religious scriptures. The final point I am trying to make is, good or bad whatever morality, they coming from us not from the religious scriptures.

]]> Comment on Pic of the Day: Freedom? by yarla http://dilipm.wordpress.com/2007/07/13/pic-of-the-day-freedom/#comment-63 yarla Wed, 21 Oct 2009 15:39:23 +0000 http://dilipm.wordpress.com/2007/07/13/pic-of-the-day-freedom/#comment-63 The pic looks appealing but the meaning of freedom is twisted in this pic. Freedom to love is always there with all. Freedom to show in public is a choice either personnel or religious. If it is a personal choice then the % of public show will be more thereby having adverse effect on social behaviour. If it is religious then there is no choice for that event (love in public) because the choice is already made (by choosing religion). ~y The pic looks appealing but the meaning of freedom is twisted in this pic.

Freedom to love is always there with all. Freedom to show in public is a choice either personnel or religious. If it is a personal choice then the % of public show will be more thereby having adverse effect on social behaviour. If it is religious then there is no choice for that event (love in public) because the choice is already made (by choosing religion).

~y

]]> Comment on My intro by Ashwin http://dilipm.wordpress.com/2006/11/12/my-intro/#comment-61 Ashwin Tue, 01 Jan 2008 19:22:27 +0000 http://dilipm.wordpress.com/2006/11/12/my-intro/#comment-61 Whoa... I am a voracious reader..and I couldn't read the entire thing. If I think this is the Dilip I know, There is much more to him than just writing skills. I love this blog, man.... Whoa…
I am a voracious reader..and I couldn’t read the entire thing.

If I think this is the Dilip I know, There is much more to him than just writing skills.

I love this blog, man….

]]> Comment on My intro by bachodi http://dilipm.wordpress.com/2006/11/12/my-intro/#comment-42 bachodi Sun, 15 Jul 2007 16:17:39 +0000 http://dilipm.wordpress.com/2006/11/12/my-intro/#comment-42 Why my comments are not reflecting in your blog ? Why my comments are not reflecting in your blog ?

]]> Comment on He he………!!!!!!! by bachodi http://dilipm.wordpress.com/2007/02/03/he-he/#comment-41 bachodi Sun, 15 Jul 2007 16:16:44 +0000 http://dilipm.wordpress.com/2007/02/03/he-he/#comment-41 I seriously dint get it I seriously dint get it

]]> Comment on Misunderstandings by bachodi http://dilipm.wordpress.com/2007/06/08/misunderstandings/#comment-40 bachodi Sun, 15 Jul 2007 16:15:53 +0000 http://dilipm.wordpress.com/2007/06/08/misunderstandings/#comment-40 "a convenient means of feeling superior to others." LOL “a convenient means of feeling superior to others.” LOL

]]> Comment on Pic of the day by bachodi http://dilipm.wordpress.com/2007/06/19/pic-of-the-day/#comment-39 bachodi Sun, 15 Jul 2007 16:14:34 +0000 http://dilipm.wordpress.com/2007/06/19/pic-of-the-day/#comment-39 ha ha... god might have send those aliens to observe earth he he ha ha… god might have send those aliens to observe earth he he

]]> Comment on Pic of the Day: Science vs. Religion by bachodi http://dilipm.wordpress.com/2007/07/04/pic-of-the-day-science-vs-religion/#comment-38 bachodi Sun, 15 Jul 2007 16:12:53 +0000 http://dilipm.wordpress.com/2007/07/04/pic-of-the-day-science-vs-religion/#comment-38 Good find Good find

]]> Comment on Pic of the Day: Freedom? by bachodi http://dilipm.wordpress.com/2007/07/13/pic-of-the-day-freedom/#comment-37 bachodi Sun, 15 Jul 2007 16:12:15 +0000 http://dilipm.wordpress.com/2007/07/13/pic-of-the-day-freedom/#comment-37 Hmmm .. i ve seen this long back. Its good and funny. Thanks for making me recall it Hmmm .. i ve seen this long back. Its good and funny. Thanks for making me recall it

]]> Comment on Pic of the Day: Science vs. Religion by Credo http://dilipm.wordpress.com/2007/07/04/pic-of-the-day-science-vs-religion/#comment-36 Credo Wed, 11 Jul 2007 06:13:40 +0000 http://dilipm.wordpress.com/2007/07/04/pic-of-the-day-science-vs-religion/#comment-36 Sir, you queried me on my blog about how thoughtful I as a religious person (a Catholic) am- have I ever thought like an atheist; you ask, "did you ever think with respect to reason, free thought, and most importantly, evaluating evidence with respect to miracles, faith/religious issues or is it just blind faith?" I am not sure exactly what you might mean by "free thought" but I doubt you mean it strictly. All thought is bound by laws of logic which must be followed if we are to make any sense of anything we say to one another. So then, "free thought" would then be thought that is free of logical mistakes- that is, valid and sound reasoning. But I am thinking that maybe (more like quite likely) you mean thought that is free from religious bias. Is that fair? I will assume it is for now... please correct me if I am wrong. I do not think that the definition just mentioned can be actually held. I do not think that we can completely free ourselves of religious prejudices or biases. Maybe then we will modify the definition to say, "the attempt to free ourselves of religious biases in thought." That would be softer and closer (I think) to reality. But I do not think that we actually can do that. Evolution, stem cells... wow!! need a lot of time and space to write about these things! :-) Yes, I have wondered if God is for real, or just my imagination... I guess most folks do. Yes, I have checked out the arguments for and against. I have come to firmly believe that there is no evidence in the least against the existence of God and overwhelming evidence for the existence of God. It might be nice to hear from you the best evidence you know of that shows beyond reasonable doubt that there is no God, or (showing beyond reasonable doubt is an unfair requirement for an atheist) even that the preponderance of the data (more than 50%) would lead to the conclusion that one is at least more justified in a numbers game to be at least agnostic if not atheistic. I do not get to hear from "easterners" that are atheists too often- like never- and I am interested if your arguments are any different that those my fellow westerners make. I think I could cite a very long list of philosophers that are at the very tip top of any list of the greatest philosophers ever that believed in God. Plato, Aristotle, Sts. Augustine, Anslem, Thomas Aquinas, Bonaventure, etc. Also, Duns Scotus, Descartes, Locke, etc. I would recommend thinking hard about Anselm's ontological argument. Most people give it a hand wave... Don't do that! You will not be a free thinking, reasonable fellow who looks at the evidence and goes where the evidence leads if you do that. Bonaventure's expansion of Anselm's argument as Josef Seifert's exposition of Bonaventure are impregnable. Also, the "pic of the day" is quite demeaning since it presents an utterly false stereotype of what faith is and is all about. There is nothing free thinking, considering all the evidence, about promulgating a false idea. If it were true, I would be fine it. But since it is false and misleading I take issue with it. Please, no offense to you as I took no offense at you. I am sorry that some religious folks get angry with you for asking questions. Maybe your pic of the day is directed at them... for them it might be an accurate description. But it should not be universally applied to all people who profess faith. Thank you for your question and I look forward to your response! Credo Sir, you queried me on my blog about how thoughtful I as a religious person (a Catholic) am- have I ever thought like an atheist; you ask, “did you ever think with respect to reason, free thought, and most importantly, evaluating evidence with respect to miracles, faith/religious issues or is it just blind faith?”

I am not sure exactly what you might mean by “free thought” but I doubt you mean it strictly. All thought is bound by laws of logic which must be followed if we are to make any sense of anything we say to one another. So then, “free thought” would then be thought that is free of logical mistakes- that is, valid and sound reasoning. But I am thinking that maybe (more like quite likely) you mean thought that is free from religious bias. Is that fair? I will assume it is for now… please correct me if I am wrong. I do not think that the definition just mentioned can be actually held. I do not think that we can completely free ourselves of religious prejudices or biases. Maybe then we will modify the definition to say, “the attempt to free ourselves of religious biases in thought.” That would be softer and closer (I think) to reality. But I do not think that we actually can do that. Evolution, stem cells… wow!! need a lot of time and space to write about these things! :-)

Yes, I have wondered if God is for real, or just my imagination… I guess most folks do. Yes, I have checked out the arguments for and against. I have come to firmly believe that there is no evidence in the least against the existence of God and overwhelming evidence for the existence of God. It might be nice to hear from you the best evidence you know of that shows beyond reasonable doubt that there is no God, or (showing beyond reasonable doubt is an unfair requirement for an atheist) even that the preponderance of the data (more than 50%) would lead to the conclusion that one is at least more justified in a numbers game to be at least agnostic if not atheistic. I do not get to hear from “easterners” that are atheists too often- like never- and I am interested if your arguments are any different that those my fellow westerners make.

I think I could cite a very long list of philosophers that are at the very tip top of any list of the greatest philosophers ever that believed in God. Plato, Aristotle, Sts. Augustine, Anslem, Thomas Aquinas, Bonaventure, etc. Also, Duns Scotus, Descartes, Locke, etc. I would recommend thinking hard about Anselm’s ontological argument. Most people give it a hand wave… Don’t do that! You will not be a free thinking, reasonable fellow who looks at the evidence and goes where the evidence leads if you do that. Bonaventure’s expansion of Anselm’s argument as Josef Seifert’s exposition of Bonaventure are impregnable.

Also, the “pic of the day” is quite demeaning since it presents an utterly false stereotype of what faith is and is all about. There is nothing free thinking, considering all the evidence, about promulgating a false idea. If it were true, I would be fine it. But since it is false and misleading I take issue with it. Please, no offense to you as I took no offense at you. I am sorry that some religious folks get angry with you for asking questions. Maybe your pic of the day is directed at them… for them it might be an accurate description. But it should not be universally applied to all people who profess faith.

Thank you for your question and I look forward to your response!
Credo

]]>