Let’s go back to the good old American Heritage Dictionary.

common sense
NOUN: Sound judgment not based on specialized knowledge; native good judgment.

I’ll stand by that.

Is it, for example, possible to have a final and complete system of mathematics? Can all questions really be answered so long as enough mind power can be marshalled? Or did you just make that up and close your eyes to controverting evidence?

I can’t possibly do a better job defending myself against this than Aaron and skinnydwarf have already done. All I can say is, please present this controverting evidence.

As for your preternatural religion-bashing: If the “destruction of these philosophies [Islamic Fundamentalism and Xian Reconstructionism] is the highest priority”, then why are you running around bashing all religion, including those that have rejected an almighty Creator?

I can walk and chew gum at the same time. While I feel those two are the most dangerous, I would like to erase religion entirely. And yes, that includes those faiths without gods. All religions ask their followers to believe things for which there is no evidence. I think you’re referring to my attack on Buddhism. If so, please point me to the study that produced evidence of reincarnation?

Get focused, like any well-run business that hopes to remain independent.

This is not a business, unless you count the $5 I’ve made from Google ads in the last month. And what does that mean? Am I going to be invaded? That’s it. I’m putting an alarm on the blog.

For starters, change your motto to “Helping Mankind Overcome God”.

No.

P.S. Nice touch with the “I AM” moniker. Do Xians get it?

I don’t know. I’m not sure what you are.

If the “destruction of these philosophies [Islamic Fundamentalism and Xian Reconstructionism] is the highest priority”, then why are you running around bashing all religion, including those that have rejected an almighty Creator? Get focused, like any well-run business that hopes to remain independent. For starters, change your motto to “Helping Mankind Overcome God”.

First off, as I AM said, religion bashing is simply fun. If you don’t enjoy it, perhaps you are a closet theist or scared agnostic, after all. Second, perhaps you missed this post about Buddhism, where he cites an example of why he feels strongly that there simply can be no “good religion” because there will always be extremists. It’s not about gods, it’s about ideaologies. I don’t think he’s been beating around the bush in making that point crystal clear from the word go. Perhaps next time you decide to be picky and fussy you should go back and do a refresher on I AM’s posts.

Don’t be too eager to invoke common sense in the name of being independent-minded.

Common sense isn’t.

Since you have “a firm grasp of logic”, you should know that an appeal to common sense is a logical fallacy.

How can it be a *logical* fallacy? It might not be wise to appeal to common sense (since it isn’t all that common, and it is horribly imprecise). I just don’t see where logically somehow it is a fallacy to appeal to common sense. I might just be ignorant as to why, however, so please explain.

Speaking of logic, what is the basis for your blind faith that:

“There is nothing that cannot be fully understood given enough study, sufficient brainpower and a firm grasp of logic.” (Statement of (dis)Beliefs, #3.)

I don’t think it is because “blind faith” that I AM believes this. It is probably by induction that he does. He looks to history, and sees the long list of examples of things people thought to be unexplainable or merely God’s will that were explained by science or other methods. He infers that things that are currently unexplained will be in the future.

Also, I don’t know that it is even possible for something to be unexplainable. Surely there is something going on at a physical level that can be explained. Now, it might be that *humans* never fully understand the problem. Our brains were not designed to understand everything, they were not designed at all. So it would not be surprising that by evolutionary happenstance there were simply some things we cannot possibly understand. We are simply not equipped to do so. It would be like expecting a computer not programmed to cook to cook a gourmet meal.

Is it, for example, possible to have a final and complete system of mathematics? Can all questions really be answered so long as enough mind power can be marshalled? Or did you just make that up and close your eyes to controverting evidence?

I don’t know much about mathematics, so I’ll leave that question to those wiser in that area than myself. However, as was asked above, what controverting evidence is there that some things can’t be explained or understood? I mean evidence aside from, as mentioned above, the possibility that *we humans* cannot explain something.*

As for your preternatural religion-bashing: If the “destruction of these philosophies [Islamic Fundamentalism and Xian Reconstructionism] is the highest priority”, then why are you running around bashing all religion, including those that have rejected an almighty Creator? Get focused, like any well-run business that hopes to remain independent. For starters, change your motto to “Helping Mankind Overcome God”.

It is possible for someone to have a high priority while simultaneously doing other things that don’t directly lead to achieving that priority. Most Americans probably think it is a high priority for the US gov’t to defeat terrorism (if it is even possible) while at the same time they don’t think the government should stop sending social security checks or policing the streets.

*Now, it might be that there are just some things we can’t *know* but can still explain. Like in quantum physics, where you can’t tell the position of something because if you shine light on it, it alters the situation. We won’t be able to know where the particle is without the light shined on it, but we can explain the behavior (ie, light particles bouncing it around).

Note: I am not a quantum physicist, far less a quantum physicist, so please excuse me (or, better yet, correct me) if I have completely mangled the subject.

“Is it, for example, possible to have a final and complete system of mathematics?”

Sure! The future holds all kinds of unlocked mysteries. For you to imply that we cant ever acheive this, reminds me of the naysayers of 100 or 200 years ago that said man will never fly.

“Can all questions really be answered so long as enough mind power can be marshalled?”

Again, sure! If history and progress have taught us anything, its that hard work and sound thinking can accomplish amazing things and take us to new levels of understanding never dreamed of before. Eventually, we very well could answer all questions. In theory, if you were to give a thinking life form enough time to develop, they could learn to create their own universes.

“Or did you just make that up and close your eyes to controverting evidence?”

I think youre a theist. Id love for you to present this alleged evidence of not being able to learn and progress and answer questions. Id love for you to present evidence that shows that some questions could not ever be answered. Id love for you to prove a negative. But for a guy who loves to point out fallacies, you should already have known that one.

I AM’s motto is fine. His focus is fine. This blog is pretty new, and already has alot of hits and lots of positive comments. Seems like he’s got his formula down.

Seems like you know alot about making successful blogs, Allan. Which popular blog do you run?