Prince Myshkin

I think the study into God and human nature is biased because it's looking at children already believing in God (or if they don't understand, have probably been told that God knows everything and is the creator). These aren't children who have never had the concept of God explained to them or are totally unaware that some people believe in a God), so I don't know how it can be fully legitimate. It only applies to those who already believe in God (and those who have Mothers for that fact). Interesting all the same.

Exactly. From the first article I gathered that it is children's nature to believe in a God, but that you can develop past it in certain areas (like organised religion) and that this is just as natural and for a great deal of people, the only logical progression. As for the second I agree that philosophical thinking and searching within oneself could indeed help, but it just isn't being offered by the looks of things.

I have too much of a conscience. I'd start to make changes whilst continuing to support them.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13424843 Bin Laden killing 'may set precedent' MPs are told

I don't think too specifically about them. I either like them or I don't.

It wasn't what was intended, I was more looking for songs by bands whose music you usually dislike, but yes, these contributions are fine and can be interesting. It was down to my inability to explain that this came about haha. An ambiguous thread, on reflection. I agree with Kanye btw.

But this is the current system, and until it is reformed simply stopping all funds isn't the answer. I wouldn't stop supporting simply out of resent. Pulling out could do more damage as it stands. Entering was questionable but it's happened now. In both of the scenarios, things need changing, but simply stopping aid or pulling out are far too reactionary and brutal to do, without there being severe consequences.

Even if only 20% got through I'd pay it. The same way I'd rather support a system that allows quite a few people to scrounge (as bad as it is) but then keeps a small percentage over the poverty line, rather than cutting funding to all of them and letting that small percentage sink. If David Cameron is willing to pay it then we can afford it.

I guess I presumed that since you had entered the debate and made a point, you would follow it through and further back up your points that bin Laden looking at porn is what makes him a hypocrite and that the ifs in the human rights discussion and the porn discussion are the same, given what others have said since, but I guess you don't have to. It just makes it pointless trying to have a proper debate with you if you aren't going to acknowledge the majority of what was said.

I'll refrain from suggesting it when you refrain from doing it. It's not against board rules to point out when you do it, even if like you claim, you aren't doing it. Providing I believe you are I'm entitled to suggest it. Do you have nothing to say to some of the posts on the last page? And my point about moving was the difference between your post on 'ifs' and your post where you attempted to claim we were arguing the same point, almost. Given the posts made by others between those incredibly insightful posts of yours, other points had been raised which you conveniently ignored.

So not 0.0% then? I believe that we have a duty to provide for others. Regardless of the current situation we are still privileged. The avenues on which these funds go down to get to those in need may indeed need reviewing, but that doesn't mean it should stop altogether.

Being a caring human being, I wouldn't do that. As has been mentioned in several threads around the board recently, many of our problems come from other countries lack of wealth, and therefore their anger.

Quit writhing around Mark. You said that it could be argued that this was no different to the 'ifs' of the human rights debate. I said why it was different. Of course, they may both be lies or the may both be true, but if you can't see the difference after having it spelled out for you, then there is no hope. You've already moved away from your original point, which is what we were talking about. You can't just bring something else up randomly to argue a point. Back up what you say instead of your constant twitching. You made a point, some people disagreed and made some of their own points. You ignored them and simply adjusted the way you worded one tiny part of it, then acted as though that was sufficient a reply, instead of actually either backing up your point properly, or admitting what you said wasn't entirely true.

*Attempts to deflect attention off own clubs manager* http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/may/17/west-ham-hotel-brawl Police called as trouble flares at West Ham United dinner West Ham striker Demba Ba allegedly refused to sign an autograph for a supporter, after which trouble broke out.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/may/17/liam-fox-challenge-pm-overseas-aid-targets Defence secretary says statutory requirement to spend 0.7% of national income on aid will lead to legal challenges I find this quite interesting. I know very little about how this works and the complexities of our economy so I'm up for listening to others opinions on this, but it seems to me that if he's for spending 0.7%, why would he rather continually produce reports to see if they are managing it but not actually necessarily doing anything about these reports? Seems like a waste of money for a party cutting down on bureaucracy and pointless expenditure etc. I reckon Cameron should stick to his plans.

I think she means she dislikes them as people but likes their music.

I like them. Think they should be cheaper though, and don't think they should be classed as an album as such. Just a side release for the fans. As for live releases I like off the top of my head: The Fall's Live at the Witch Trials Radiohead's I Might Be Wrong EP Flaming Lips' UFO's at the Zoo

I'm just gonna keep posting links in this thread, and if anyone wants to discuss go ahead. I think the one in the post above is particularly interesting. http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/may/16/atheism-religion

I read it all! And some day I will indeed look into Satre and Kant. I also agree. I think I might have mentioned (if not I should have done) how everything is subjective, and in the same way that words may mean different things to different people, even if you both have the same Mother tongue (simply because they may conjure up different images in your head and you may have different reference points to another person for that word), you also have different ways of perceiving people, not including language. So I fully agree with you there. I also agree that people see many different sides to an event. Some people might not consider one side, which others would find important. Like when you are discussing an event, and then somebody adds their opinion and says what they found interesting about it, and it's something you'd never even considered. Added to this, as you said, people may only see one side of things, because that is how much they are allowed to see. I myself a different around different people. I'm able to mix with lots of different types of people. If all of my friends were to be in one place I think I'd struggle to handle all of them at once haha. And yes, you can always find a poor debater when they have to resort to arguing on semantics as opposed to the actual point that was first raised (unless that first point was indeed semantics).

He'll no doubt be planning his next one. I wish I had headphones. Just talk about his tattoo and listen to his 'spiritual' reasons behind it and why it's different to all the other tribal tattoos.

Silly Billy. I blame Ferguson, naturally.

Sounds good to me. Apart from the tattoo. But as long as you are aware that that is lame then alls good. He's allowed some faults. He has my approval. Just be sure he cleans his ears if you're gonna let him listen to your iPod :p

Well obviously it can only tell you your potential. But it's a massive breakthrough. I'd be interested to know, if I had the money. That's said casually, I could back out when it came down to it.

Where did you meet this young stud? What does he look like? Details!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/8510711/Belief-in-God-is-part-of-human-nature-Oxford-study.html