Unlimited Translation Works

Chuunibyou demo Koi ga Shitai! Ren – 11

Do you think Death could possibly be a boat?
Or perhaps Death isn’t.
Maybe Death is the ultimate negative,
not-being, and you can’t not-be on a boat.
Though I’ve frequently not been on boats.
Or rather, been not on boats.

DOWNLOAD HD: [FTW]_Chuunibyou_demo_Koi_ga_Shitai!_Ren_-_11_[720p][CF50756D].mkv

Edit: v2 for missing fonts and chapters. Patch.

Edit 2: Patch missing patch. Patch v2.

The Causes and Effects of Eighth-Grade Syndrome Throughout History

fotc (Mazui Subs, Unlimited Translation Works)

10  The Origins of Religion

Religion has drastically shaped the whole of human psychology, culture, and history. Its uses are endless, from providing an all-purpose answer to the questions of life, to relieving the fear of death, to justifying murder and war. The whole of human experience is shaped by religion, if not by a personal faith in some dogma, then by interactions with individuals who do have faith in some dogma. Thus, by virtue of cause and effect, if religion is a symptom of eighth-grade syndrome, then the effects of eighth-grade syndrome throughout history are immeasurable. This is precisely the case, and so eighth-grade syndrome stands as one of the most powerful forces which has shaped human history.

A  Basis

As discussed in previous sections, cases of eighth-grade syndrome typically evolve by way of triggers, with the sufferer assimilating each new trigger into his or her case. For supernatural power-type cases, these triggers tend to be of a magical, spiritual, mythological, cosmological, or religious nature. Typical examples include Wiccan practices, Norse mythology and cosmology, the teachings of Aleister Crowley, the teachings of Silver Birch, and Abrahamic celestial hierarchy. Some triggers are exceedingly common, that is, they hold strong influence over and often dominate the imaginary worlds of most supernatural power-type cases. The commonness of such triggers indicates that something about the world described by these triggers are attractive to all sufferers.

Many cases of supernatural power-type cases create their own imaginary worlds which are unlike those of other cases. Often, these worlds and the laws which govern them are extremely elaborate, including the creation of new languages. The Voynich Manuscript, discussed in section 6, is a prominent example of such an occurrence.

It is only a small logical step, then, to state that all religions originated from strong cases of supernatural power-type eighth-grade syndrome. The originators of these religions imagined their own worlds, took on the peculiar yet common behaviors of such a case, and spread their ideas to their communities, which eventually came to regard these ideas as fact.

B  Example: The Abrahamic Religions

The Abrahamic religions provide a plethora of examples of eighth-grade syndrome as the origin of religion. In this section, three will be discussed.

The first Abrahamic religion, Judaism, is said to originate from a decision by a man named Abraham (for whom this family of religions is named) to worship a mountain god, rather than the moon god Nanna Sin, likely caused by a desire to be different from others. It later adopted a monotheistic and dualistic perspective, that there exists only one supreme and transcendent god, after its interactions with Zoroastrianism, the earliest known dualistic religion. In these interactions, Judaism also adopted other elements of Zoroastrianism, such as its angelic hierarchy, in a case of nearly complete trigger assimilation.

The birth of Christianity revolves around the birth, teaching, and death of a man named Jesus who called himself the son of a god and a messiah sent to free an entire people. (Historians believe that this man is actually an amalgamation of many people who claimed to be such messiahs around the same time, showing the commonness of this trigger, particularly in the aforementioned people during the aforementioned time.) The idea that one is a supernatural being or descended from a supernatural being is a common conception among supernatural power-type cases, and so this man was (or men were) suffering from a popular case of eighth-grade syndrome. Christianity carries over many things from Judaism, including monotheism, dualism, and the angelic hierarchy, but adds on the concept of infinite universal love and forgiveness, which is also a common conception in eighth-grade syndrome cases.

Islam was founded by a man named Mohammed, based on the previous Abrahamic religions of Judaism and Christianity, and includes all concepts of both, but adds on an extensive system of political governance and demands strict adherence to the code of religious law. The founding event of this religion is a purported visit of Mohammed by an angel, which revealed to him the words of the Abrahamic god. Needless to say, the delivery of sacred messages from supernatural beings is a typical eighth-grade syndrome conception.

Thus, it is clear that all of the the Abrahamic religions have originated from cases of eighth-grade syndrome. Because these three religions make up about two-thirds of the world population and have caused many of the greatest upheavals in history, such as wars and outbreaks of disease, eighth-grade syndrome is likely one of the most powerful forces which has shaped history.

Creative Commons License
The Causes and Effects of Eighth-Grade Syndrome Throughout History by fotc is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Research was funded in part by FFF Fansubs.

87 Thoughts on “Chuunibyou demo Koi ga Shitai! Ren – 11

  1. @Kiyoso, even if you are ‘religionless’ or do not believe in religion is that a reason to trample or insult on other peoples believe (religion)?? Please respect others and their believe.. Besides, this issue is major, and you know this, right?

    @skylion, yeah.. as I stated above I seriously hope he was joking about it. ‘a very clumsy half assed attempt at humor’ as you stated above not all can interpret it that way, because it is ‘sentence’ which can really mean anything..

  2. Just in case anyone gets the wrong idea, most religious folks aren’t as stroppy as the few whiners in this thread, and most atheists and agnostics aren’t as snobbish.

  3. VSxERLolitaku428 on March 25, 2014 at 12:24 am said:

    @Nik and all of the “whiners”: I don’t see where it is disrespectful. He is stating a thesis and somewhat proofing it with logical reasoning. It’s not waterproof or anything, but, hey, since were at the subject: How many so-called christians have read the bible or even follow the 10 commandments? It’s way more disrespectful towards the religion, if you haven’t even read the bible and claim yourself to be a christian…I grew up in a christian family and am one of very few I know that have read at least half of it, I almost read the whole thing, save for a few books…I know what I’m talking about, so don’t give someone that shit about disrespect if there is no visible disrespect, nor does he insult anything even less trample over the beliefs. HELL, Chuu2 is all about beliefs, same as religion, so that’s the first viewpoint you need to get in your head, and try to read it w/o always thinking that any opinion that doesn’t agree with main-stream-christanity is disrespectful and such… (exaggerated there at the end, SRY ’bout that)

  4. RedShadoww on March 25, 2014 at 12:36 am said:

    Of course the people that can laugh this off have nothing to do with it or are atheists because you can say whatever the crap you want with no consequences behind a computer screen. You know what’s wrong with you people? You fail to look at other people’s perspectives. You don’t care about being respectful because there’s no consequences in what you say. There’s only a matter of your morals, which is apparently very low. Heck, fotc hasn’t even clearly stated this is a joke, we can only assume he is.

  5. skylion on March 25, 2014 at 2:02 am said:

    @RedShadoww. Are you seriously claiming religion makes one immune the guilt of Internet Disassociation? Shall I pull the other finger now?

    And painting all atheists with the same brush is just the same as an atheist throwing the dead corpse and living legacy of Fred Phelps and the WBC around a Christian’s neck.

  6. Wow! This thing’s already messing with a lot of true believers out there…
    A more wise decision would be to just stay out of such a topic… And fotc should have done the same…
    But then again… Most humans that made a breakthrough in history ’bout such conventions were always the brave and persistent ones. Rather than the truly wise… 🙂

  7. Sooooo……

    SYD?

  8. @VSxERL I don’t have a problem with differences in value and opinion, each to his own.. but you need to know, this page is not only visit by atheist or ‘I don’t care’ type like you.. There are many people visit this site including me, the so-called whiners and many more, just because we value our religion more than you, doesn’t mean we didn’t respect others opinion, Heck, until now I never once argue with fotc post as I respect (not exactly agree) to his opinion.. religion had been known as the most major moving force of human life throughout history of mankind even sometimes lead to war because of differences in belief.. So, this one is an exception because as I said before it is major..

    So, in conclusion the opinion is the least problem in my book, it is because of the insensitivity to post it in the fansubber blog that visited by anime enthusiast that have various background and religion that I have a problem with. If this site is an establish atheist site posting atheist ‘thing’ that’s another matter..

  9. *not exactly* -> *not necessarily*

  10. I agree with Nik’s post. I would like to not be labelled as a “whiner” or “stroppy” thanks. Demanding an apology is nothing out of the blue. This being their site or not is irrelevant. This is for anime, fans from all over the world download their releases, of different religious beliefs and treat them with high respect. The least they can do is show common courtesy and be respectful to those fans the same way they have been to them. Need I say how many people aren’t even aware of this because they don’t visit this page yet?

    Yet, there are even people that would go out of their way and donate money to them on a regular basis, because that’s just how much love they hold for this group and respect for their high quality releases over the years. Surely, an obnoxious joke post by a newcomer translator from another group isn’t worth the effort at all, is it?

  11. VSxERLolitaku428 on March 25, 2014 at 9:11 am said:

    @Nik: So…since you take your religion so seriously, have you read the whole bible? Can you tell someone about the order of the angels, which has been taken out of the bible for I don’t know how long by the Vatican? If you’ve done the first, then respect to you, if not then don’t talk about taking a religion seriously, because you aren
    ‘t. And SRY, if I misinterpreted this whole thing and you aren’t a christian just don’t like this stuff. Hell, I’m the last person to be an “I don’t care”-type, if I was, then I wouldn’t even have bothered psoting a comment. Actually, through I’m not a christian anymore, I still believe that the god of the christians does exist, same for the angels and fallen angels. But I don’t see him as the one and only god, also HE ISN’T FORGIVING OR VERY LOVING AND NOT EVEN KIND IN THE SLIGHTEST ACCORDING TO THE BIBLE, and I also believe that other religions hold true as well, like norse mythology or shintoism for example. But that’s just me, I guess. At any rate, I still don’t see where this post is disrespectful to any type of belief. He has stated, that there is a similarity between Jesus, Abraham and Mohammed compared to the super-power-type of Chuunibyou, and that similarity at the very least is an undeniable fact. Wether it holds true or not is the simple core of opinion. As I believe in a multidude of religions at once, I don’t think it holds true either, but the fact of the similarity is still there and undeniable.

    @all the “whiners”: I, at the very least, don’t actually mean to call anyone a whiner, heck, you should get the hint when I put the “” around it, if not, welp, SRY, if I insulted anyone…

    @Jaden: Demanding an apology for an opinion is out of place, but nothing new, since christians, judes and islamists rarely respect other opinions, at least according to my experience and the history…I mean, demanding it, if he had insulted or trampled over those beliefs WITHOUT A BASE, then all the power to demanding it. BUT he hasn’t done that, he had a logical reasoning in comparing these 3 with Chuu2’s and in then has stated his opinion, that it’s a fact. Like said, I don’t think so, but the similarity is undeniable.

  12. Kiyoso on March 25, 2014 at 2:37 pm said:

    In fact, if there isn’t any religion – just a moral – the number of wars or/and conflicts was lower. Just look at the Muslim selfblows in Moscow and think about question of beliefs from a critical point of view. There was a line ‘Kill all the another-religion-believers in the city but women and children’ in the earliest edits of HOLY BIBLE.
    Think about the religions put some moral on the mankind but leads to unnecessary disrespect of those who doesn’t share the same religion with you. If we could wipe the belief from any religion and leave moral – a GOOD moral – untouched, it would be much better for security. But it would be somewhat wrong for culture (and would leave us without Uka-sama and any other Shinto God) that is obviously bad.
    So the main problem is to wipe agression to the angry between different religions which is not to do in the whole time mankind have and it’s creeping me out, so it’s better for me to act agnosticly cause I don’t ever angry when someone talks bad about any religion. I don’t wear cross. I haven’t read a Bible. I laugh at most of the religions in a kind way. I think it’s time to post this wall of text cause I haven’t got anything in mind on topic in hand.

  13. Shutup yall on March 25, 2014 at 4:44 pm said:

    So any updates regarding the Shinsekai yori BDs? LIKE PLS. SERIOUSLY. Y HAVENT U FINISHED IT?

  14. If your religion was so important to you in the first place, a random post done by someone you have never met in real life and only through the web wouldn’t cause such a great disturbance in your psyche. Stop whining and ppl will stop calling you all whiners, its utterly pathetic how hypocritically you “buybull” believers can be.

    You have your opinion and fotc has his, respect HIS and maybe ppl would respect YOURS.

  15. TheThing on March 25, 2014 at 5:46 pm said:

    [citation needed]

  16. Soo, SYD* 12 just came out. How about that double release?

  17. yuukyuu on March 25, 2014 at 6:52 pm said:

    I swear, the internet has to be the only medium in which an amateur (id est non-professional; not intended as an insult) writer “publishing” controversial statements/opinions can spawn a heated debate… usually, one would simply ignore such things…

    Some of you seem to be taking fotc’s post a little too seriously. Whether or not he intended the post as a joke is irrelevant; his writing cannot be taken seriously for several reasons:

    1. “Eighth-grade syndrome,” or 中二病 (Middle school Second year Disease), is not an actual disease or mental illness in the field of pathology (the study of disease). It is simply a product of the Japanese entertainment industry (originating from a radio show) that has become a slang term for people who become a certain way, so any attempts to analyze “eighth-grade syndrome” as a medical condition instead of a specific mindset or set of behavior patterns should be taken with a grain – or perhaps a whole shaker – of salt: it is not possible to analyze the historical significance of a condition that does not exist.

    2. As anyone who has even a bit of experience with statistics should know, “correlation does not imply causation.” The so-called “eighth-grade syndrome” may have many cases of those “affected” (as much as anyone can be “affected” by a “condition” that doesn’t exist) claiming to be descended of deities or to have received messages from supernatural entities. It is also true that religions often make such claims (I am not going to debate whether or not they are true; debate over topics that are simultaneously unverifiable and unfalsifiable are wastes of time) of oneself or of others. This does not mean, however, that “eighth-grade syndrome” correlates to the founding of religions (especially when one considers that the condition in question does not exist, and is merely a behavioral pattern). In logical terms: just because a (“eighth-grade syndrome”) implies c (claims of involvement with the supernatural) and b (religion) implies c (claims of involvement with the supernatural) does not mean a (“eighth-grade syndrome”) implies b (religion), nor does it mean b (religion) implies a (“eighth-grade syndrome”). Or for the more logic-minded: given a→c, b→c are true, we do not have enough information to conclude that a→b or b→a.

    3. What fotc has published is not even wrong. Refrain from picking up your torches and pitchforks for a second and hear me out: I am not saying that fotc is right, but that what he has written is neither verifiable (capable of being proven true) nor falsifiable (capable of being proven false). He has made two observations (“people with ‘eighth-grade syndrome’ tend to make connections between themselves and supernatural entities” and “religions began with people who have made connections between themselves and supernatural entities”) and drawn a conclusion (“people with ‘eighth-grade syndrome’ began religions”) without sufficient evidence. Namely, he is missing the step where he shows that “all people who make connections between themselves and supernatural entities have ‘eighth grade syndrome.'” More specifically, he CANNOT show that the above is true, seeing as “eighth-grade syndrome” does not have a definition; it is simply a slang umbrella term for a group of people. In any logical argument, the burden of proof (verification) falls on the one who makes an unfalsifiable claim. Should the one who makes the claim fail to verify it, then the claim must held to be irrelevant (because it cannot be shown to be true, and also cannot be shown to be false).

    At best, what fotc has written thus far has been an attempt (not necessarily successful but not necessarily unsuccessful; remember that tragedy is universal but comedy is not) at humor. At worst, fotc is trying to pass off pseudoscience as science. I prefer to believe it is the former, given that a fansub group’s site does not seem the ideal place to publish scientific or pseudoscientific “findings.” Either way, he has not shown anything that needs to be taken seriously.

    (TLDR for those who are allergic to logic)
    So there you have it: what you wish to believe (or not believe) is up to you so long as it does not affect me; I am not a proponent of forcing one’s beliefs (or lack thereof, as it happens to be in my case) onto others. One should not take what fotc has written in this post too seriously, however, seeing as he has not made any logically sound arguments in his writings on “eighth-grade syndrome” (and it is impossible for a writing on such a topic to be logically sound in the first place, since there is no logical definition of “eighth-grade syndrome”).

  18. @Kiyoso is your moral include hurt others because you think they deserve it from some random generalization of all religious people the same? and does it also include hurt others because you think it’s okay to do so and because of some random hypothesis? if it is so, well, we just have different values than one another, I will just leave it at that..

    @Goro Yeah, maybe so but “So, in conclusion HIS opinion is the least problem in my book, it is because of the insensitivity to post it in the fansubber blog that visited by anime enthusiast that have various background and religion that I have a problem with. If this site is an establish atheist site posting atheist ‘thing’ that’s another matter..”

    @VSxER you clearly misunderstand my point, let me give you an example then, how smokers show respect toward a patient? By not smoking in front of them, no? not to mention it is prohibited and dangerous to them.. Same as this, clearly this is not forum discussing about religion, out of respect of its fan who have different religions and beliefs and as a fansubbing group blog this is not an appropriate place to post something like that.. that’s what I mean by respect..

    Let me state my conclusion once again, my problem is more towards the ‘action’ of posting it here rather than some opinion which I can clearly say seriously lacking in research..

  19. Let me rephrase my last sentences back in order to avoid misunderstanding “Let me state my conclusion once again, my problem is more towards the ‘action’ of posting it here rather than his (fotc) opinion (sorry to say) which I can clearly say seriously lacking in research..”

  20. skylion on March 25, 2014 at 8:40 pm said:

    Richard Dawkins, Christopher Kitchens, fotc. Yeah fotc is just like that. I think Nik has a future at Fox News…

  21. Well skylion, don’t make me look bad here, I’m not even good at english.. I don’t know what you are implying either sarcasm or compliment which I strongly believe the former but back to the topic, you know why my argument started in the first place?? I don’t want to tell you that because you can just brush off my statement like what I ASSUME you did there, but your eyes cannot deceive you right? -no sarcasm intended btw

    yuukyuu sums it up actually pretty well, although there are some parts I disagree like what he said about fotc’s statement is true because I know my knowledge about my religion is at least higher than fotc’s and his opinion clearly resulting from lacking in research anyway.. but ENOUGH of that (about statement is true or not), that’s clearly not the point here..

    Actually, if you read my first comment “I seriously hope he was joking about this” in this post, you clearly know that my stand is almost the same as yuukyuu.. but why things get dragged further? because some people actually thought about this post and take his opinion seriously (whether agree or disagree) that lead me to voicing out my opinion as a counterargument too..

    Now you know what my stand is, either fotc joking about it or whether he is serious

    p/s: After all this time, sorry for my english.. as you can see I’m clearly not a native..

  22. VSxERLolitaku428 on March 25, 2014 at 9:22 pm said:

    @Nik: Ok, I misunderstood your point, I guess, still (at least to the experience of almost everyone I know) barely any christians have reade the bible and most spew the nonesense of the “forgiving god”, which isn’t a part of christanity. At any rate, the smoker-example was bad or I misunderstand it, but many, if not most, smokers don’t give a fuck about others, otherwise they wouldn’t even smoke on the street. But I think I get your point. BUT at the same time this isn’t a place made solely for the religious people. Now, I will say, you definitely ARE right, that this is not a place suited to post something like this, or more precisely, I find it a bit inapproriate to post that whole thing here…but you keep up with the religious standpoint, what about Nr. 9 or 8, I don’t remember, where Fansub-watching Animefans were insulted as a whole? NOW THAT was disrespectful towards the Animefans/Otaku/Animewatchers that actually should be the only ones that are looking at this site, while I believe that really religious christians are very rare to even be on a site like this…I mean, more than enough Anime would be in coflict with their believes, and the “it’s just entertaniment”-argument fails, because a really religious christian would have to react the same way, that muslims reacted to a certain french caricature of Mohammed…the wanted war on the country…ok, maybe not as extreme if we take the modern bible, but they still shouldn’t watch them and somewhat curse them, because it would be hersey in their opinion…
    At any rate, the point will stay, that saying: “Be respectful to the religious people and don’t post something like that here.” is actually less respectful, than posting said thing, because you are actually trying to strip him of his right on speech on a blog he’s directly involved in, so to say, partly his site… yeah, rly respectful. Anyway, that it clearly lacks research like yuukyuu stated, is undeniable, but if you use the thought-jump(for lack of a better word in my vocabulary) fotc used, you could at least say it would be logical, if the the conditions a→c and b→c are both true, then a→b automatically holds true as well…but that’s beside the point, ‘cuz opinions often lack research, therfore they are opinions and not facts. But that stays beside the point too, ‘cuz he can post whatever he wants here(as long as the other people involved, iow UTW-Members, aren’t in complete disagreement with him posting it), and you can’t stop him, nor do you have any right to do so, also to even demand it is really disrespectful towards his rights.

  23. skylion on March 25, 2014 at 11:16 pm said:

    FOX News is a conservative news station her the US. Just google Fox and War on Christmas. I’m saying that you are sounding very much like a semi profession taker of offense that that news station features every single time they smell a hint of secular thought competing with religious thought. It was sarcasm, and it was barbed sarcasm at that. Frankly you’ve made a mountain out of a mole hill here, and it has gotten tedious.

    For the record, I don’t care one bit about people taking religious offense and I have not one bit of respect for religion itself. I tolerate it, and I will defend the rights of people to subscribe to it. But whatever offense you take, is your business, and not mine.

    If is very clear that fotc’s post is intended as a joke wrapped in an “academic paper” and it is also very clear some five days since the post hit, that fotc has no intention of apologizing, for a host of reasons disused.

    As for your English language skills, they are considerably better than many native writers.

  24. skylion on March 25, 2014 at 11:29 pm said:

    The above comment is directed @Nik, as is this one. I was very very unfair to you in the above comment, and offhandedly disrespectful. I want to say that I am very sorry for that.

    I find the thought of direct attack to deprive anyone of religious expression to be a horrifying one. But it is also quite horrifying to me to consider the idea that no one would be able to express how they feel religion is wrong specifically to them, and in general.

  25. @Nik
    I think people aren’t able to not hurt one another so if we exclude one of the reasons for it (religion as I say) we decrease the ways to hurt
    Also, one-God-religions (I’m not a native too) are a way to manupulate people, this thing is worth to remember.

  26. @skylion I do admit somewhat I’m being too invested in this argument, but I am by no means exaggerating it if that is what you mean by the idioms, I knew there are people who thinks little of religion, but you have to realize there are some people too who thinks of a religion as a part of their life and surprisingly there are many of them.. So, I think it’s not too weird for them to defend their ‘life’ right? To the topic, yeah, I already explain everything in my previous post.. And, nah it’s cool man..

    @All: All of my previous arguments are only stand if fotc’s really serious with his post, but if he’s only joking my stand is the same with Yuukyuu as I stated in my 1st comment in this post (if you really curious, you can search for it).. Sorry for the trouble, and please pardon some harsh words of mine

    Last but not least, I don’t have anything against fotc or other UTW staff in any way at all.. but I don’t know about them, though and I have great respect for their work in providing anime to us. So, that’s all, hoping that will wrap things up..

  27. yuukyuu on March 26, 2014 at 2:18 am said:

    @VSxERLolitaku428:
    That is a common mistake in logic known as “affirming the consequent,” a non sequitur fallacy (I am told that I often seem a little harsh while discussing logic, but I would like to assure you that I mean no offense to you and apologize if you feel that is my intention). Simply speaking, a→c does not mean c→a (to say that a being true makes c true and c being true makes a true, one would use the if and only if arrow ↔ instead of the implies arrow →).

    I realize that most people do not try to break everything down into propositional logic (which is why I tend to use a/b/c instead of p/q/r when not in logic boards), so allow me to demonstrate what the above means:
    Assume that the statement “if you are an elementary school student in Japan, then you wear a backpack” is true.
    Cause: You are an elementary school student in Japan (a) → Effect: You wear a backpack (c).
    Let us assume your grandfather is backpacking the world (b), so he wears a backpack (c).
    We know that, if you are an elementary school student in Japan, then you wear a backpack (a→c).
    Your grandfather is wearing a backpack (c).
    The conclusion that your grandfather is an elementary school student in Japan (a)… would be a fallacious conclusion drawn by affirming the consequent.
    Likewise, even if we know that “Someone who is backpacking the world wears a backpack” (b→c), we do not have enough information to draw the conclusion that “Someone who is backpacking the world is an elementary school student in Japan” (b→a).

    Back to the logic in fotc’s post:
    “If you have a specific type of ‘eighth-grade syndrome,’ then you claim you have some connection to supernatural entities.” (a→c)
    “If you are a founder of a rel2igion, then you claim you have some connection to supernatural entities.” (b→c)
    However, claiming one has some connection to supernatural entities (c) does not necessarily mean one has a specific type of ‘eighth-grade syndrome’ (a), just like how, in the above example, wearing a backpack (c) does not necessarily mean one is an elementary school student in Japan (a).
    So given that a→c and b→c, we cannot conclude that c→a or that c→b. Therefore, we do not have enough evidence to conclude that a→b or that b→a. Strictly speaking, there is not enough information to verify or falsify that b (being the founder of a religion) → (implies) a (being someone with “eighth-grade syndrome”), especially since “eighth-grade syndrome” itself is a slang term with no logical definition.

    In conclusion, fotc’s paper tries to SEEM logical but is NOT logical.

    @Nik:
    I do not believe I have said that fotc’s statement was true (unless there was a typo I didn’t catch since I consider myself decent enough at proofreading as I type that I don’t bother to run casual writings through spell check. If there happened to be a typo and I said something other than what I had intended, I apologize for offending you and assure you I did not mean to). I said that his statement is not even wrong. Since you have said you are not a native speaker and this is a term used in science and academics, please alllow me to clarify on what it means to be “not even wrong”:
    “Not even wrong” is an term that describes something as not only not right (unverifiable), but not even wrong (unfalsifiable). The term originated from the English translation of physicist Wolfgang Ernst Pauli’s criticism of a certain scientific paper (a quick search for ‘not even wrong’ on Google tells me that the original German was “das ist nicht nur nicht richtig, es ist nicht einmal falsch!” I do not speak German and therefore do not know how much of the meaning was preserved). In a sense, “not even wrong” would describe most religions, seeing as most religious beliefs are neither verifiable (proven to be true) nor falsifiable (proven to be false), and when it comes to beliefs, this is okay! It wouldn’t be much of a ‘belief’ if it could be proven true or false, now would it? I have no problem with religious beliefs (or lack thereof) being neither verifiable nor falsifiable, as long as people do not attempt to make others believe they are right because, remember, you can BELIEVE anything is right, but believing something does not necessarily mean you can SHOW that it is right… I do not attempt to prove atheism to others, and I appreciate that (most) others do not attempt to prove their religions to me.

    When it comes to science or logical debate, however, something that is not even wrong (i.e. neither verifiable nor falsifiable) is irrelevant: it is pointless to debate or consider something that is neither verifiable nor falsifiable, since using it while constructing a proof is the same as making an assumption, and debating something that cannot be true or false will result in zero logical conclusions. So what I meant when I said that “fotc’s statement is not even wrong” is that “there is no point in arguing about the veracity or falsity of fotc’s statement, because it cannot be shown to be true or false through logical means.”

    I wish to avoid any fallacious argumentum ab auctoritate/argumentum ad hominem so I will not cite fotc’s (nor any other person’s) credentials (or lack thereof), but instead simply point to the fact that this paper is pseudoacademic (tries to pass itself off as academic even though it is not) but does not fulfill the conditions for being an academic paper (for the reasons listed above and in my previous post), so nothing fotc writes or has written in it should be taken seriously.

    @skylion:
    A little off-topic here, but the logician in me says that people are free to express how they feel (or don’t feel) about religion, but we should draw a line between “expressing one’s opinion and feelings for what they are” and “expressing one’s beliefs as fact.” The following is my response when people ask about my religious beliefs: “I am not religious and do not believe in any religion.” Every once in a while, somebody will ask me to “prove there is no God,” and my response to that is quite simple: “I cannot prove it to you; I believe what I choose to believe, and I believe there is no God, much like you choose to believe there is a God.”

    Consider the theist/atheist argument. (For simplicity’s sake, I will be using this “theist” as an umbrella term for “person with religious beliefs” and “atheist” as an umbrella term for “person without religious beliefs,” though there are some religious beliefs that have no deities and therefore would fall under “religious atheism” instead of “theism”)
    There is often the question of “With whom does the burden of proof lie: the theists or the atheists?”
    While logicians hold that the burden of proof is with the one who makes an unfalsifiable claim, both theism (any religious belief) and atheism (lack of religious beliefs) are, at their core, unverifiable and unfalsifiable. Consequently, the burden of proof is with both theists and atheists… assuming they claim their beliefs are true.

    The problem is, most people fail to see the difference between “believing something” and “claiming something is true.”
    It’s actually quite simple, a spot the difference game that most two-year-olds should be able to score perfectly on: what’s the difference between “I do not believe God exists” and “God doesn’t exist”, or between “I believe God exists and those who believe in him will be saved” and “God exists and those who believe in him will be saved”?
    Exactly that: one is stating your belief for what it is, and the other is making an unfalsifiable claim.
    Consider the parallel: “I prefer the taste of pork over that of beef” vs. “Pork tastes better than beef.” The former is simply stating your opinion, while the latter formats your opinion as though it is a fact, turning it into an unfalsifiable claim.

    As long as we avoid unfalsifiable claims and remain courteous, we can easily express what religion means (or doesn’t mean) to us without causing too many people to be upset (because let’s face it: there are people who will get upset over anything).

  28. I pointed three of my Christian friends onto fotc’s post. Two of them laughed and said it was a good troll. The other didn’t think it was funny but wasn’t offended either.

    You hypersensitive complainers need to get a grip. If you’re this touchy about something that was *obviously* (and I really do mean *obviously*, it’s not even subtle) not being said seriously, you’ve got real problems with your psyche. And I mean you specifically as individual human beings, not religious people in general. Just you.

    I look forwards to fotc surpassing himself for the last episode and will be interested to see who he targets. Personally I think there are few groups more insane than fansubbers, who put hours of effort into a hobby that only rewards them with a little bit of e-cred and hundreds of “why is X late?” demands.

  29. it would be awesome if UTW too were to offer DDL’s like FFF, DDY does 🙂

  30. Fujiri on March 26, 2014 at 8:53 am said:

    Learn to use XDCC, it’s also DDL.

  31. VSxERLolitaku428 on March 26, 2014 at 9:09 am said:

    @yuukyuu: I got the thing with the logic the first time, and I know that stuff with the arrows, what I meant was, that if we add the clause: “a→b automatically holds true, if a→c and b→c are both true.”, then it WOULD be right, not that it actually is logically right(as, like you said, the proof is still lacking). On another note: a as literal as possible translation for “Das ist nicht nur nicht richtig, es ist nicht einmal falsch!” would be “That isn’t just not right, it is not even wrong!”, so, I think that all the meaning was perserved…I’m a natvie german speaker, btw, so, I might have expressed myself misunderstandable at some times or w/o perfect english, so, SRY, if either applied… 😡

  32. VSxERLolitaku428 on March 26, 2014 at 9:11 am said:

    P.S.: Wrong Smiley, I hate these blogs for that…was supposed to be one like this: http://puu.sh/7JYwI.png

  33. Wonder how history would remember this post…?

    BTW: I do not have ‘ 中二病 ‘
    My ‘ Personal Reality ‘ is just so very different than yours… :p

  34. knorssman on March 27, 2014 at 3:20 pm said:

    @yuukyuu

    excellent work there

  35. ( ニセ ) fotc on March 27, 2014 at 3:38 pm said:

    ’nuff said here already… :q

  36. Scholar on June 7, 2014 at 3:55 pm said:

    Seriously, this was a joke in bad taste.
    It was pretty damn offensive and just childish.

    There is a reason why theology exists if you want to talk about religion.

  37. There are many aspects of this article on which I concur with you. You have generated synapses in my brain not used often. Thank you for getting my neurons jumping.

Comment navigation

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Please use the [spoiler][/spoiler] tags to hide spoilers in your comments.
You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Post Navigation