I Don't Know

[grovestreet]

What is Sam Harris getting at?

Is he saying that because of the kind of letters that he received from many Christians in response to his books it follows that all Christians are intolerant, that Christianity is an intolerant religion, that the Bible can't be misused, that the New Testament is unreliable, or that Christianity is false?

Nope, he clearly stated that human nature has something to do with this intolerant attitude. Therefore I believe he was not only referring to christians but to the dominant culture during his time.
There was a time when majority of the people believed that the earth was flat. They were very sincere with this belief, and it was also considered "common sense" during that time. So It's not sincerity or faith towards a particular belief that humans need.

It is humility and skepticism. "Doubt is humble."

That is why learning to say "i don't know." is the first step towards growth and knowledge. hehe.

[bcasabee]

^^^Contrary to the thread starters suggestion. According to him, we should just say "I don't know, end of the story" and not "I don't know, so lets find out, discuss, argue, debate about it, show some intellectual proof of your reasoning" kind of stuff. The problem I see with "I don't know, end of the story", is that it is too naive, passive and there is lack of interest. It is even better really to say "I don't know and I don't care".

[chad_tukes]

^^^Contrary to the thread starters suggestion. According to him, we should just say "I don't know, end of the story" and not "I don't know, so lets find out, discuss, argue, debate about it, show some intellectual proof of your reasoning" kind of stuff. The problem I see with "I don't know, end of the story", is that it is too naive, passive and there is lack of interest. It is even better really to say "I don't know and I don't care".

lol. you misunderstood my statement. i didn't say "I don't know, end of story" as if to imply that that is the end of the inquiry process. to say "end of story" is as if saying "cut off the BS---just say i don't know". dude, please don't twist the story. common sense would tell you that it is better to continue to debate, reason, or argue about a topic than concluding about something we are not certain of.

[fingolfin]

^^^Contrary to the thread starters suggestion. According to him, we should just say "I don't know, end of the story" and not "I don't know, so lets find out, discuss, argue, debate about it, show some intellectual proof of your reasoning" kind of stuff. The problem I see with "I don't know, end of the story", is that it is too naive, passive and there is lack of interest. It is even better really to say "I don't know and I don't care".

.. yes, that would be the ideal scenerio when being confronted by something you don't know. But, that is only limited to "earthbound" matters. The question the TS has been referring to are the questions about the intangible and about God. Having said that, the phrase " i dont know " is very much applicable.

[maddox_pitt]

chad, don't worry, im studying for the priesthood. i will remember your questions and find out the answers for myself, then give them to you.

may you one day find the answers prototype guess everyone here wants to know too..

[[PROTOTYPE]]

may you one day find the answers prototype guess everyone here wants to know too..

you can go to your priests. make sure they were good back in the seminary days. haha

thanks.

[bcasabee]

Aw kung mao na, unsa diay issue? I'm not trying to be a pain in the ass in here, but you see, I really don't see a legitimate issue based on your comments. Kung mangutana ka ug pari about purgatory, alangan man sad ug motubag ang pari ug "I don't know, its still under discussion". Of course ang tubag sa pari, "Sa purgatory ta padulong" kay ang mga karaan nga mga pari sa unang panahon, nag "discussed, debated, argued, concluded and CANONIZED" nga purgatory ta padulong. The keyword there is CANONIZED, please look it up if you don't know what it is or the process of canonization. Of course, if it is already CANONIZED, it will not prevent you from discussing this things over and over again and it doesn't mean that CANONIZED laws will not change. Even today, issues like purgatory are still being discussed in the professional level. It so happens that we know nothing about it because we are outside the philosophical and theological circle at the professional level, but here we are, pretending to know more than them even if we barely manage to pass the 1 semester philosophy elective class.

lol. you misunderstood my statement. i didn't say "I don't know, end of story" as if to imply that that is the end of the inquiry process. to say "end of story" is as if saying "cut off the BS---just say i don't know". dude, please don't twist the story. common sense would tell you that it is better to continue to debate, reason, or argue about a topic than concluding about something we are not certain of.

.. yes, that would be the ideal scenerio when being confronted by something you don't know. But, that is only limited to "earthbound" matters. The question the TS has been referring to are the questions about the intangible and about God. Having said that, the phrase " i dont know " is very much applicable.

[Tirong-say]

So many things is still unknown to some, then what if a unified equation would reveal itself and reconcile what is really unknown?, we could not always conclude that we do not know for so many things are left unexplained.

[miyay]

ot: wouldn't it be great to be comfortable with not knowing?

[chad_tukes]

Aw kung mao na, unsa diay issue?

you can re-read the first post to see what the issue really is.

I'm not trying to be a pain in the ass in here

sorry, but you are on the verge of actually being one already.

I really don't see a legitimate issue based on your comments.

then please, good sir, what is considered "legitimate"? as far as i know, there is no right or wrong answers here. please lecture me.

Kung mangutana ka ug pari about purgatory, alangan man sad ug motubag ang pari ug "I don't know, its still under discussion". Of course ang tubag sa pari, "Sa purgatory ta padulong" kay ang mga karaan nga mga pari sa unang panahon, nag "discussed, debated, argued, concluded and CANONIZED" nga purgatory ta padulong.

that's exactly the point! how hard is it to criticize a priest because a priest is known to make conclusive statements? oh that's right, because he's a priest and we have to have so much RESPECT for them. call them whatever you want, just don't criticize them because it's considered SIN. sa purgatory ta padulong? ok fine. but would you be contented with that answer? my point is that it's better to say "I DON'T KNOW" than to say "heck yes! sa purgatory ta padulong! pag andam-andam namo ha. pag binuotan mo kay kung dili gani, sa IMPYERNO mo padulong!" like they're so sure of themselves. LMFAO.

The keyword there is CANONIZED, please look it up if you don't know what it is or the process of canonization.

sir, you're slowly becoming borderline funny to me.

Of course, if it is already CANONIZED, it will not prevent you from discussing this things over and over again and it doesn't mean that CANONIZED laws will not change. Even today, issues like purgatory are still being discussed in the professional level.

maybe i'd direct the question to you --- so then what's your issue?

It so happens that we know nothing about it because we are outside the philosophical and theological circle at the professional level, but here we are, pretending to know more than them even if we barely manage to pass the 1 semester philosophy elective class.

this is even funnier. pretending to know more than them? "I DON'T KNOW" gani... hahaha.