Jump to content


Check out our Community Blogs

Register and join over 40,000 other developers!


Recent Status Updates

View All Updates

Photo
- - - - -

Strange Request: Need A Naturalist Programmer to Talk

religion programming interview

  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

#13 BlackRabbit

BlackRabbit

    CodeCall Legend

  • Expert Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3871 posts
  • Location:Argentina
  • Programming Language:C, C++, C#, PHP, JavaScript, Transact-SQL, Bash, Others
  • Learning:Java, Others

Posted 01 November 2013 - 06:57 AM

1. Name

Abel

2. Occupation

Programmer / Writer

3. Experience (years)

More than 10

4. Do you believe in the super-natural (something beyond nature)?  Why or why not?

There's no reason too, and the question is poorly phrased because in the case of something of such nature is proven to be real it becomes part of the natural realm, in other words, super-natural is always about you can't prove that exists, either in faith or quantum physics. But once you do, it becomes natural, it happened all along human history, take viruses and microbes as an example.

5. Would you do your work any differently if the super-natural was known to be real?

Hmm, if I were to get a previously known as unnatural ability I for sure would do things differently :P  It's better definition of which specific unnatural are we talking about to measure its impact on my life.

6. Do you believe your field as a whole would be different if naturalism was known to be false?

As said, it can't be false, since as explained, if super natural reveals itself, then it starts being real and hence natural, and mostly the top subject of study ever, guaranteee

7. What type of evidence would be necessary to change your belief on naturalism? (for example, internal inconsistencies, logical fallacies, real-world application issues, evidentiary proof, experiential proof, etc.)

Evidence kills the concept of fairy tale, I mean of super natural.

8. If there was one point you would want those Christian apologists to know, it would be:

Nah, they do alright, I mean whatever that makes people to be together in peace is a good cause. In that aspect, it doesn't matter if whatever they believe or think is right if the resulting actions are beneficiary for the group.


  • 1

#14 bumperk

bumperk

    CC Lurker

  • New Member
  • Pip
  • 6 posts

Posted 01 November 2013 - 07:14 AM

Thanks LKP and Blackrabbit.  I have read through and will study these more closely.  Blackrabbit - as you can imagine - I don't fully agree with something proven must be natural.  For example, logic is not, in itself, provable or testable without using logic to do it.  I would not say logic is natural.  Nor is the scientific method knowable through the scientific method (you can't test the testing method with the test itself).  The idea of the scientific method is not natural either (although I imagine you don't agree :) ).  Conscientious, thoughts, beliefs, imagination, and desires are not testable or knowable except through introspection - and this is not "proof" for most naturalists.  It is why some philosophers have tried to say that these things are not really there and our introspection of these things is only a trick of the natural chemical state of our mind.  Anyway, I appreciate your feedback and will use the information in formulating the program.  I will send a link your way when you are done - but I don't think you will like it :)

 

Yannbane - I think in such a situation not much programming would get done.


  • 0

#15 BlackRabbit

BlackRabbit

    CodeCall Legend

  • Expert Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3871 posts
  • Location:Argentina
  • Programming Language:C, C++, C#, PHP, JavaScript, Transact-SQL, Bash, Others
  • Learning:Java, Others

Posted 01 November 2013 - 07:41 AM

Bumperk, I agree in the concept but I must point you are mixing planes with tomatoes.  Natural are actual things, while scientific method and logic are concepts, two different realms.    We could say concepts are means to represent or explain facts. You can't compare a dog with the concept of what a dog is. Dog barfs and pees on trees, concepts doesn't.


  • 0

#16 bumperk

bumperk

    CC Lurker

  • New Member
  • Pip
  • 6 posts

Posted 01 November 2013 - 07:51 AM

The key is using the word "things".  Both of them are things, one is a physical thing, the other is a non-physical thing.  One is natural, the other is ontologically different, but they both exist.  The concepts exist outside of the concept of naturalism, which is why many naturalist philosophers work very hard to either redefine them as non-existent (e.g. - consciousness does not exist) or they try to reduce thoughts and concepts to nothing except organized matter.

 

All that said, I am not as smart as 99% of the naturalist philosophers who would hand me my head on a platter if I was to debate them.  They have answers to the objections of thoughts, consciousness, imagination and more, but I have looked at many of the arguments and don't agree with their methods of decision.  Their conclusions are presupposed by their belief in naturalism.  In other words, they exclude any belief in things that are natural because they believe all things are natural.  This makes their conclusions predictable and inevitable - not reasonable and exact.


  • 0

#17 BlackRabbit

BlackRabbit

    CodeCall Legend

  • Expert Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3871 posts
  • Location:Argentina
  • Programming Language:C, C++, C#, PHP, JavaScript, Transact-SQL, Bash, Others
  • Learning:Java, Others

Posted 01 November 2013 - 08:05 AM

It has nothing to do with smartness, philosopy or wining an argument. The dog is a dog and has its own existence, what resides in mind has is existence in the mind. The dog interacts with world, while the idea of the dog is confined to each singular mind that represents it. And you can change your idea of the dog, but the dog itself, except for aging and accidents, will remain always the same.

 

In other words, the dog doesn't need to be proven, because its existence is ostensible and evident. Ideas in the other hand are a different matter.


  • 0

#18 Sundance

Sundance

    CC Devotee

  • Validating
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 572 posts
  • Programming Language:C, Java, PHP, Python, JavaScript, Perl, PL/SQL, Transact-SQL, Bash, Others

Posted 03 November 2013 - 02:47 AM

I appreciate your feedback and will use the information in formulating the program.  I will send a link your way when you are done - but I don't think you will like it :)

 

I find that particular statement rather ignorant, just because I may not agree with you or I may not agree with your results does not mean I will dislike any information you have on the particular subject, a true scientist is objective and not subjective, so any evidence is both informative and likeable and not something I would dislike, just because I have particular methods of processing information doesn't mean you're wrong or I'm wrong, it means we view the world in different ways, but no one should ever tell another person they will not like something without knowing them well.

 

Further more just because you "think" you are right and in your opinion you may well be right does not mean that we are wrong by default.

 

in Russia the word for "Dog" is pronounced So-ba-ka, in England it is pronounced D-og both are the same thing just different names for them and what I'm trying to say with this example is that just because one person calls it something and describes it in a certain way does not mean that the second person who calls it something else is any less wrong, they just see it in a different light and call it different names.

 

What you may call a "Tomatoe" I may call a "Parsnip", does not mean either of us are wrong.


  • 0

Please read the

FaQ & Guidelines


#19 bumperk

bumperk

    CC Lurker

  • New Member
  • Pip
  • 6 posts

Posted 03 November 2013 - 10:19 AM

So, I probably should have said, "I don't think you will like when I say that I don't think you will like it."  :)


  • 1





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: religion, programming, interview

Recommended from our users: Dynamic Network Monitoring from WhatsUp Gold from IPSwitch. Free Download