Using Ontology to Attack Theistic Errors

I love attacking people on the grounds of ontology like my battering ram, I am here to force you to think and remove thinking errors. Ontology (Greek meaning ontos, “being; that which is”; and logos meaning “discourse, study, ratio, calculation, reason”) Ontology is the philosophical study of the nature of being, becoming, existence, or reality, as well as the basic categories of being and their relations. *Ontology (thingness of things) questions to define or compare and contrast thingness. Ontology “Reality” questions/assertion: Witness gives evidence about the claim. *Ontology, (understanding the thingness of things; like what is or can be real, like not god)-What is your claim?-What aspects must be there for your claim?-What makes your claim different than other similar claims? Take for instance how Religion supporters try the evaluation tactic of saying “there are peaceful Religions.” I may respond, what do you mean by Religion and what do you mean by painful or good” (asking to find the truth or as usual expose the lack of a good Ontology) Then, I may respond, “how do you know that, what is your sources and how reliable they are” (asking to find the truth or as usual expose the lack of a good Epistemology) Then, I may respond, “what value do you think what you are saying has and to what level of proof do you feel truth needs as well as how do you insure Accuracy” (asking to find the truth or as usual expose the lack of a good Axiology) Take for instance how Religion supporters try the evaluation tactic of saying “there are peaceful Religions.”   I may respond, what do you mean by...

Moral Judgment and Value Theorizing?

Lawrence Kohlberg and the Six Levels of Moral Judgment? Snippet 1 Traditionally, psychology has avoided studying anything that is loaded with value judgments. There is a degree of difficulty involved in trying to be unbiased about things that involve terms like “good” and “bad!” So, one of the most significant aspects of human life—morality—has had to wait quite a while before anyone in psychology dared to touch it! But Lawrence Kohlberg wanted to study morality, and did so using a most interesting (if controversial) technique. Basically, he would ask children and adults to try to solve moral dilemmas contained in little stories, and to do so outloud so he could follow their reasoning. It wasn’t the specific answers to the dilemmas that interested him, but rather how the person got to his or her answer. Heinz’s Dilemma One of the most famous of these stories concerned a man named Heinz. His wife was dying of a disease that could be cured if he could get a certain medicine. When he asked the pharmacist, he was told that he could get the medicine, but only at a very high price—one that Heinz could not possibly afford. So the next evening, Heinz broke into the pharmacy and stole the drug to save his wife’s life. Was Heinz right or wrong to steal the drug? (Source: The above passages of both Kohlberg’s work and the Heinz dilemma were taken from Dr. C. George Boeree’s terriffic web site.) Snippet 2 The psychologist Lawrence Kohlberg (1927-1987) didn’t think moral behavior should be thought of as a grab bag of virtues, e.g. that being a moral...

No there is No gods and No we are not a Brain in a Vat

No there is No gods and No we are not a Brain in a Vat, please get real humanity needs you…   I want to clarify that I am an an Ignostic, Axiological Atheist and Rationalist who uses methodological skepticism. I hold that there is valid and reliable reason and evidence to warrant justified true belief in the knowledge of the reality of external world and even if some think we don’t we do have axiological and ethical reasons to believe or act as if so. Thinking is occurring and it is both accessible as well as guided by what feels like me; thus, it is rational to assume I have a thinking mind, so, I exist. But, some skeptics challenge reality or certainty (although are themselves appealing to reason or rationality that it self they seem to accept almost a priori themselves to me). Brain in a vat or jar, Evil Demon in your mind, Matrix world as your mind, & Hologram world as your reality are some arguments in the denial or challenge of reality or certainty. The use of “Brain in a vat” type thought experiment scenarios are common as an argument for philosophical skepticism and solipsism, against rationalism and empiricism or any belief in the external world’s existence. Such thought experiment arguments do have a value are with the positive intent to draw out certain features or remove unreasoned certainty in our ideas of knowledge, reality, truth, mind, and meaning. However, these are only valuable as though challenges to remember the need to employ Disciplined-Rationality and the ethics of belief, not to take these thought...

My Atheistic (socialist-anarchist) Humanism?

My Atheistic (socialist-anarchist) Humanism? Axiological Atheist: Facebook Page Want to understand my internal motivation in many if not most of what I do? Well, it can be summed up as “I get that we rise by helping each other” and do you really think a life of silence​ to injustice harms no one? What is the power of the heart? When we can stop believing the validity of many of our fears and are not just strong in our hope and will to succeed followed with determined as well as focused actions even against great odds, it is then that one achieves self-mastery. And blind hate is just as disgusting as blind faith. Science facts should make religious Faith-Belief impossible. Ontology, Epistemology, & Axiology OEA (The Hammer of Truth) OEA “Hammer of Truth” Questions: Ontology, Epistemology, & Axiology questioning tools in inquiry, disagreements, arguments, or debates. *Ontology (thingness of things) questions to define or compare and contrast thingness. *Epistemology (knowledge of things) questions to explode or establish and confirm knowledge. *Axiology (value/worth/goodness of things) questions to valueize (value judge) or establish and confirm value or disvalue, worth or dis-worth, as well as goodness or un-good. (OEA challenge protocol; is part of my, Methodological Rationalism approach) Expressed in its simplest form, The Hammer of Truth: Ontology, Epistemology and Axiology. We and credible thinkers should adopt rationality assumptions, as necessary constraints on interpretation, as well as practical issues in addressing methodological problems faced by: gatherers: “Ontology”, inquisitors: “Epistemology”, & judgers: “Axiology.”   “The Hammer of Truth: Ontology, Epistemology and Axiology”   Mock Debate court using the “Hammer of Truth” Ontology “Reality” questions/assertion: Witness gives evidence about the claim. Epistemology “Truth” questions/assertion: Lawyer searches for warrant or justification for the claim. Axiology “Goodness-for” questions/assertion: Judge assesses and value...

Sky Burials: Animism, Totemism, Shamanism, and Paganism

Sky burials:  Animism, Totemism, Shamanism, and Paganism Sky burial (Tibetan: བྱ་གཏོར་, Wylie: bya gtor, lit. “bird-scattered”) is a funeral practice in which a human corpse is placed on a mountaintop to decompose while exposed to the elements or to be eaten by scavenging animals, especially carrion birds. It is a specific type of the general practice of excarnation. It is practiced in the Chinese provinces and autonomous regions of Tibet, Qinghai, Sichuan and Inner Mongolia, as well as in Mongolia, Bhutan, Nepal, and parts of India such as Sikkim and Zanskar. The Tibetan sky-burials appear to have evolved from ancient practices of defleshing corpses as discovered in archeological finds in the region. These practices most likely came out of practical considerations, but they could also be related to more ceremonial practices similar to the suspected sky burial evidence found at Göbekli Tepe (11,500 years before present) and Stonehenge (4,500 years BP). Most of Tibet is above the tree line, and the scarcity of timber makes cremation economically unfeasible. Additionally, subsurface interment is difficult since the active layer is not more than a few centimeters deep, with solid rock or permafrost beneath the surface. For Tibetan Buddhists, sky burial and cremation are templates of instructional teaching on the impermanence of life. Jhator is considered an act of generosity on the part of the deceased, since the deceased and his/her surviving relatives are providing food to sustain living beings. Such generosity and compassion for all beings are important virtues in Buddhism. Although some observers have suggested that jhator is also meant to unite the deceased person with the sky or sacred realm, this does not seem consistent with most of the knowledgeable commentary and eyewitness reports, which indicate that Tibetans believe that at this point life has completely left the body and the body contains nothing more than simple flesh. Only people who directly know the deceased usually observe it, when the excarnation happens at...