View Single Post
  #19  
Old 11-07-2011, 04:52 AM
UnwittinglyPoly UnwittinglyPoly is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 20
Default

opalescent, thank you for your reply. I did eyeball a few threads (there are few with the mono vs. poly tag). And the fact that they aren't framed exactly as I framed it is why I started a new thread. If everyone would like, I will gladly move the discussion to an already-existing thread.

While I understand the focus of this forum isn't academic, I would say that it doesn't need to be. As mentioned earlier, the most effective, in-depth, informative discussions I've had regarding religion were on an automobile forum, of all places. Arguably less academic and certainly less philosophical than here, and orders of magnitude less pertinent to that subject matter than this forum is to the subject at hand.

I think I did at least rudimentarily address Ray's arguments by my discussion of how what she was saying is equally evolved may not be (but rather, based on arbitrary conditions).

And I don't think the use of logic is flawed, even in matters of religion and philosophy, especially since logic is fundamentally a discipline of philosophy. I do understand that some things are matters of the heart and aren't necessarily fully apprehended most effectively through logic. However, even in those matters, there are major parts surrounding them that are. For instance, in religion there are things such as whether a global flood has actually occurred, whether a certain holy book is accurate, whether a god who is described as X but is said to do Y makes any sense, etc. And the same goes with this discussion. If in fact a majority of monogamous people don't hold to monogamy out of some level of insecurity, that should be pretty easy to point out. The problem in these types of philosophical discussions is that most times people tap out using the "it's a matter of the heart/faith/human existence" card much sooner than is warranted, giving up on the logic well before it's run its course. In my experience of past discussions, this almost always occurs because people run out of arguments to support their position. I find it exceedingly strange that forums dealing specifically with a certain topic have been the least effective in finding people who won't tap out early regarding the subjects those forums are about. This one is appearing to be no exception. I've found that logic can in fact resolve much more than a lot of people will allow it to. And the fact that people are putting forth logical arguments in this thread indicates that logical arguments are in fact warranted. But apparently some are only willing to go so far as their notions aren't challenged. But that's what my purpose here is--to open up my ideas and have them directly challenged to the fullest degree possible. And it looks like I'm in the wrong place for that, because after less than a day, people are already playing the intellectual equivalent of the religious "you just have to have faith" card. Regardless of the fact that the forum isn't dedicated to academic ventures per se, I find it quite odd.

Last edited by UnwittinglyPoly; 11-07-2011 at 05:11 AM.
Reply With Quote