What are the worst misconceptions you know of?
- Thread starter Dark Knifer
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I may have been ninjaed on this, but...Double A said:
Wikipedia is the Most Accurate Encyclopdeia in the world as of 2008, when it surpassed the encyclopdeia Britianica. There are more experts contributing and fact-checking Wikipedia than any other encyclopdeia in the world.
Just wanted to jump in with the support on this one. I hate this particular misconception.
Actually, no. THAT was added in the year 500 or so. The same with Buddah - it was popular to stick a miracle onto the prophet's birth in that time period.Imat said:
In the original text, it says "first born" - the greek word for first born is "virgin birth" - Rome used the greek word to come up with the immaculate conception thing.
Here's another one - that Mary Magdaline was a prostitute. She was a PRINCESS (or at least a jewish noble woman). The prostitute thing was added WAY later, in like 1100 AD or so. Mary Magdaline was Jesus's wife, because a good jewish boy would have been married (and had children) by the time he was 35.
"There is no such thing as bisexuality, only straight men/women or gay men/women who were confused about themselves originally."
[sub]Don't ask where I got that from, it's really not okay to ask that from me. [/sub]
"If a guy has sex with another guy then he's gay permanently, and any sexual feelings he has toward women ever again are just God's way of torturing him by showing him something he will never be able to have or enjoy."
[sub]Again, do not ask.[/sub]
Seriously, these two are both the most wrong things I've ever heard.
[sub]Also I am aware there is a contradiction between the two statements, please do not let me know about it. They're wrong enough on their own.[/sub]
Atheism is the absence of belief in god(s), NOT the belief in the absence of god(s). Those are two different things.Zeeky_Santos said:
So, if somebody could go either way on the subject then they lack a belief in any god(s).
They therefore are an athiest.
Agnosticism is the lack of knowledge of whether or not god(s) exist.
So, if somebody could go either way on the subject then they claim to lack knowledge.
They therefore an agnostic as well.
Recreating the circumstances of evolution on earth would be a three billion year long experiment.garmaniac said:
The genius of Darwin's theory is that its formation broke several rules governing philosophy of science, yet still ended up being quite good in the end. Imagine it like an incredibly lucky guess, though it it more like an incredibly good insight. It managed to retain its primary form regardless of the scientific advances thrown at it. Genetics, one of the youngest sciences, is its primary source of evidence. We have been able to generate scenarios that would potentially falsify evolution, but such things simply do not exist.
Okay if what you mean by meaning not being "inherent" is that meaning is not etched into the very fabric of the universe waiting to be found by sentient beings, then yes of course I agree. Meaning is a cognitive construct. No cognition, no meaning. I think most everybody would take that as a given.
However, I don't think that is what many (if any people) mean when they say that. When it is said that meaning is inherent in something, that is a short hand for saying that there is a widely held consensus within a specific cultural context on the meaning of something.
For example, when a playwrite writes a scene without "inherent meaning", that is just a short hand way of saying something to the effective of, "This scene was written in a way that makes it very difficult for the audience to reach a consensus on its meaning or decipher what I (the playwrite) wished to communicate based on their common cultural references."
To take your example of a crucifix, it has inherent meaning, in that the culture in which it exists has come to a broad consensus that it symbolizes Christianity.
However, I don't think that is what many (if any people) mean when they say that. When it is said that meaning is inherent in something, that is a short hand for saying that there is a widely held consensus within a specific cultural context on the meaning of something.
For example, when a playwrite writes a scene without "inherent meaning", that is just a short hand way of saying something to the effective of, "This scene was written in a way that makes it very difficult for the audience to reach a consensus on its meaning or decipher what I (the playwrite) wished to communicate based on their common cultural references."
To take your example of a crucifix, it has inherent meaning, in that the culture in which it exists has come to a broad consensus that it symbolizes Christianity.
An attraction in the sense that they are willing to entertain the idea, not exactly being a preferred sexual partner.Island said:
Why? It's the truth. People use Pedophile and Child Molester interchangeably as if they are the same, I'm just pointing out the difference.
Eh, one that annoys me, do to the fact that the more it is used, the more people think it is so, is that sex = gender.
sex and gender are two different things.
They may have links, but they are very different things.
And too many people are ignorant of that >.>
sex and gender are two different things.
They may have links, but they are very different things.
And too many people are ignorant of that >.>
Incorrect.Island said:
It means that they are desperate enough to use a child as a sexual outlet.
Pedophiles, are described as someone with a Primary or Exclusive attraction, not slight. By your logic, a fair amount of US citizens are Pedophiles, Hebephiles or Ephebophiles.
Global warming.
Did I just make you rage?
You're welcome.
In all seriousness, the whole "afirmative action" thing helps minorities. It's still descrimination, and it gets unqualified minories into jobs/schools they shouldn't be. Why it exists is unknown to me.
Did I just make you rage?
You're welcome.
In all seriousness, the whole "afirmative action" thing helps minorities. It's still descrimination, and it gets unqualified minories into jobs/schools they shouldn't be. Why it exists is unknown to me.
