steveorino 7 #351 August 17, 2007 What would convince there isn't a God? That would equally hard, so I will to pick on whether or not JC was God's son. I could die, and be before God and he would say, "Why did you keep calling me Father? My name is Allah! You worshipped a lesser prophet and failed to pray 5 times a day facing Mecca, and my records show you didn't journey there once, but you did have enough money to go to Cancun six times. No virgins for you!" steveOrino Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JackC 0 #352 August 17, 2007 Yeah, that would do it for me too! Although, I'd probably want to apply for the job as Gods PR rep. The one he's got sucks. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #353 August 17, 2007 QuoteQuoteI just hope it doesn't turn into the "I'm a Christian...and proud of it" thread all over again. Let's not be bashing "THE THREAD" - it was one of the most fun we've seen here. ... Yes, but we can't have two threads as "THE THREAD", can we? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shotgun 1 #354 August 17, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuote What would it take for you to stop believing in god Good question. Many things may change my perception of God, but I think it would be very hard for me to believe there isn't one (of some sort) ... back to that core belief thing. So logic and evidence won't cut it then? . . . What evidence is there that proves that god does not exist? (Not evidence disproving the bible, but evidence disproving the existence of any sort of god.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #355 August 17, 2007 QuoteYes, but we can't have two threads as "THE THREAD", can we? all things are possible with the Omni-bene-presci-roque-neo-THREAD ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shotgun 1 #356 August 17, 2007 QuoteWhat would convince there isn't a God? That would equally hard, so I will to pick on whether or not JC was God's son. I could die, and be before God and he would say, "Why did you keep calling me Father? My name is Allah! You worshipped a lesser prophet and failed to pray 5 times a day facing Mecca, and my records show you didn't journey there once, but you did have enough money to go to Cancun six times. No virgins for you!" That would convince you that there isn't a god? Or just that you had the wrong idea about it? My understanding is that to Muslims, Allah is the same god that the Christians worship, so I'm not sure why people often refer to them as if they are two different gods. (Perhaps to Christians they are?) But then I'm not a Muslim, so maybe a Muslim could correct me if I am wrong... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,593 #357 August 17, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote What would it take for you to stop believing in god Good question. Many things may change my perception of God, but I think it would be very hard for me to believe there isn't one (of some sort) ... back to that core belief thing. So logic and evidence won't cut it then? . . . What evidence is there that proves that god does not exist? (Not evidence disproving the bible, but evidence disproving the existence of any sort of god.) That's not how the game works though, which is the reason why the FSM is actually a real philosophical argument (no matter how well disguised it is).Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JackC 0 #358 August 17, 2007 QuoteWhat evidence is there that proves that god does not exist? (Not evidence disproving the bible, but evidence disproving the existence of any sort of god.) Well it goes something like this. Theory predicts that X should happen under Y and Z circumstances. Engineer Y and Z circumstances and see if X happens. If it doesn't, hey presto, evidence that theory is wrong. Alternatively you could have a god with property X and property Y where X and Y are mutually exclusive. Like a square circle. Also evidence that your god theory is wrong. Of course if you haven't got a theory to test, you're stuffed but equally you have nothing to believe either. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
steveorino 7 #359 August 17, 2007 QuoteQuoteWhat would convince there isn't a God? That would equally hard, so I will to pick on whether or not JC was God's son. I could die, and be before God and he would say, "Why did you keep calling me Father? My name is Allah! You worshipped a lesser prophet and failed to pray 5 times a day facing Mecca, and my records show you didn't journey there once, but you did have enough money to go to Cancun six times. No virgins for you!" That would convince you that there isn't a god? Or just that you had the wrong idea about it? ... The latter. That would convince me that JC wasn't God. As I said, I can't imagine a scenario where there would be evidence to convince me there wasn't "a" God. steveOrino Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,593 #360 August 17, 2007 QuoteQuoteWhat would convince there isn't a God? That would equally hard, so I will to pick on whether or not JC was God's son. I could die, and be before God and he would say, "Why did you keep calling me Father? My name is Allah! You worshipped a lesser prophet and failed to pray 5 times a day facing Mecca, and my records show you didn't journey there once, but you did have enough money to go to Cancun six times. No virgins for you!" That would convince you that there isn't a god? Or just that you had the wrong idea about it? My understanding is that to Muslims, Allah is the same god that the Christians worship, so I'm not sure why people often refer to them as if they are two different gods. (Perhaps to Christians they are?) But then I'm not a Muslim, so maybe a Muslim could correct me if I am wrong... The genesis of the two entities is with the Jewish god, but they are different entities. If you come across a fork in the road where going left takes you to Colorado and going right takes you to New York then the two paths are no longer the same road.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shotgun 1 #361 August 17, 2007 Are you a Muslim? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,593 #362 August 17, 2007 QuoteAre you a Muslim? Just an armchair philosopher. But you see my point, right?Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shotgun 1 #363 August 17, 2007 QuoteQuoteWhat evidence is there that proves that god does not exist? (Not evidence disproving the bible, but evidence disproving the existence of any sort of god.) Well it goes something like this. Theory predicts that X should happen under Y and Z circumstances. Engineer Y and Z circumstances and see if X happens. If it doesn't, hey presto, evidence that theory is wrong. Alternatively you could have a god with property X and property Y where X and Y are mutually exclusive. Like a square circle. Also evidence that your god theory is wrong. Of course if you haven't got a theory to test, you're stuffed but equally you have nothing to believe either. So you have no beliefs regarding how or when the universe (all matter and energy) began? Before the big bang, or anything else that we have theories for? I don't believe in god either, but I don't claim that my belief is based on evidence, because there isn't any. And my logic leads me to believe that there is no god, but I can see how others' logic leads them to believe that there is one. It would be rather arrogant of me to claim that my logic is better, when there is no evidence to prove either side. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shotgun 1 #364 August 17, 2007 QuoteQuoteAre you a Muslim? Just an armchair philosopher. But you see my point, right? I understand the point about different paths, but I don't think that Muslims believe that they are two separate entities. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #365 August 17, 2007 QuoteIf you come across a fork in the road where going left takes you to Colorado and going right takes you to New York then the two paths are no longer the same road. what if they make a great big loop? (This is either very shallow and glib, or almost zen monk-like in it's philosophical depth and delivery and bevity, cutting through to an enlightened view of the finality of religious need inherent in humankind and it's culmination in the attainment and joining of all the world's religions into a single, simple personal realization of how divinity may reside in each of us as an awareness of the universe and our place in it. Consider the lonely grasshopper..... Depends on how you take it. It was issued as the shallow/glib version.) ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
philh 0 #366 August 17, 2007 There is no evidence for god and there is no evidence there is not a god , so the two propositions should be treated equally right? WRONG WRONG WRONG Any imaginary being; be it god, Thor, Zeus, the flying spaghetti monster whatever has no evidence that they exist or do not exist. Repeat the above sentence with any imaginary being replacing god: There is no evidence for the flying spaghetti monster and there is no evidence there is not a flying spaghetti monster , so the two propositions should be treated equally right? WRONG WRONG WRONG Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JackC 0 #367 August 17, 2007 QuoteSo you have no beliefs regarding how or when the universe (all matter and energy) began? Before the big bang, or anything else that we have theories for? Nope. As I see it what happened before the big bang is a meaningless question since time is thought to have began with the big bang. If that's true there can be no before. Either way, the universe contains all that we can know. Even if there was a before, there is no way we can ever know about it because all the information, started with the big bang. Like a cosmic reformat. All previous information is wiped. That is if big bang cosmology is correct and it might not be, which is why it's good to test a theory. It's quite easy to test a theory and prove it wrong but virtually impossible to test a theory and prove it right. There are some scientists that think we can never know the true facts. They think that any theory we come up with is just a toy model of the real thing. And in that it is a simplified representation of reality that we can put a handle on, it will inevitably miss out some detail and will always be incomplete. I'd say that scientific knowledge probably has an asymptotic limit. Our understanding gets better and approaches some "perfect" understanding but it will never actually reach it. QuoteI don't believe in god either, but I don't claim that my belief is based on evidence, because there isn't any. And my logic leads me to believe that there is no god, but I can see how others' logic leads them to believe that there is one. It would be rather arrogant of me to claim that my logic is better, when there is no evidence to prove either side. Well, I'm a strong atheist about some gods and agnostic/ignorant about others. It depends on the god but if god A has properties X & Y that are mutually exclusive then I'd say that was pretty good evidence that atheism for god A is justified. A certian amount of openmindedness is a good thing but sooner or later you always jump off the fence. Just be prepared to hop over it again later if need be. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shotgun 1 #368 August 17, 2007 Until I can explain how and when all matter and energy began, I'll let others hold their own beliefs about that without telling them that they are wrong. I may disagree with them, but it is silly to insist that I am right when I offer no explanation to contradict their beliefs. I can claim that matter and energy have simply always existed in one form or another (which is what I tend to believe), but for now that requires as much faith as believing that some sort of supernatural god/creator has always existed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #369 August 17, 2007 QuoteUntil I can explain how and when all matter and energy began, I'll let others hold their own beliefs about that without telling them that they are wrong. I may disagree with them, but it is silly to insist that I am right when I offer no explanation to contradict their beliefs. but, where's the smugness and self righteousness in that position? Honestly, K, how can one wallow about in their own crapulence without casting a bit of harsh judgement now and then on subjective, meaningless issues? ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pirana 0 #370 August 17, 2007 Quote Quote >Prove it. Prove what? .. . yeah, that one got me too... Royd, what's your perspective on the short response? What are you disputing? Of course, the "before or since" bit confuses me. How do we know the "since" part?..... C'mon, Don, you know you got in a typing flow and just slipped that one in.... Well, there are those that will deny anything that does not take place right before there own eyes; but I think it is pretty well established that the fossil record is relatively complete. Yes, there are gaps, but nothing big enough to cast doubt on our understanding of the tree of life. (Especially with the ability we have to do DNA sequencing). There do not appear to be any creatures that have had anywhere near our cognitive ability; which would be a prerequisite for manipulation of the environment at the level we have achieved. Results speak pretty loudly on that one too. I think you could make a good supporting arguement, though it would not be proof, that the lack of manipulation by other creatures indicates limited ability. I suppose some cetacean might have developed the ability to dominate but decided not too, then went extinct. Kinda far fetched; but possible. Anyway, there certianly aren't any around today. And stop giving away my secret identity." . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #371 August 17, 2007 I read the "before or since" and saw "in the past or in the future" kind of statement. So I was mocking the crystal ball aspect of the post. As for the secret identity, everybody knows you are really Batman. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pirana 0 #372 August 17, 2007 Quote>Prove it. Prove what? .. . -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- yeah, that one got me too... QuoteRoyd, what's your perspective on the short response? What are you disputing? He was saying that we have developed a spiritual, albeit, twisted view on life because, over time, we have developed large frontal lobes. There is no way that he can prove any part of that statement, therefore he is taking his own statement totally on faith, which the scientific types claim to be a wasted part of the human psyche. Who said it was wasted. Happy vibes, good times, orgasmic thoughts, etc are not wasted. They are hardly the tools of scientific investigation; but they are not outright wasted. Emotions can be very frutiful, just don't mix them up with reliable means for discovering the truth about anything. Emotional needs are what drive us to enjoy the company of friends. They are completely worthless when attempting to assemble a history of the natural world. And you are correct that it is strictly my opinion that our twisted psyches are the unfortunate result (or side effect) of developing the cognitive power evident in our big brain thingy. I thought that was clear, but good to make sure. Obviously those side effects are not overly dangerous (to our survival) or they would be selected against; and they probably do have positive effects on survival (as is evidenced by most people's reactions whenever rehmwa reminds us to think of the children); but they are not a requirement for survival. Planaria seem to have made it a long time without them." . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,107 #373 August 17, 2007 >As I see it what happened before the big bang is a meaningless question > since time is thought to have began with the big bang. It is most definitely not a meaningless question, any more than "what's beyond the dome of the sky?" was a meaningless question back when we thought such things. Attempts to learn such things led us to our modern understanding of the universe. >Either way, the universe contains all that we can know. That's not supportable either. The "many-worlds interpretation" (relative state formulation) indicates there can be much, much more than we can observe in our universe. (I mean, you can play semantic games and say "I define the universe to be all we can know" but that's sort of self-limiting.) >Even if there was a before, there is no way we can ever know about it >because all the information, started with the big bang. Like a cosmic >reformat. All previous information is wiped. Ah, but there are those interesting broken symmetry questions, which indicates that perhaps it was not that perfect symmetric spherical-space event we consider it to be. > I'd say that scientific knowledge probably has an asymptotic limit. Our >understanding gets better and approaches some "perfect" understanding >but it will never actually reach it. I'd say that's true as well. However, we're still in the shallow part of the asymptote when it comes to understanding how our universe came to be. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,593 #374 August 17, 2007 QuoteI don't believe in god either, but I don't claim that my belief is based on evidence, because there isn't any. And my logic leads me to believe that there is no god, but I can see how others' logic leads them to believe that there is one. It would be rather arrogant of me to claim that my logic is better, when there is no evidence to prove either side. But that's where you'd be wrong. God is the proposition, there is absolutely no tangible evidence to support the proposition, therefore it is more logical to say the proposition is more likely false than true.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pirana 0 #375 August 17, 2007 QuoteQuoteThe large frontal lobes (LBL's) evolved as the result of, and in a tricky twist, as part of, the 3-way feedback system of the genes, the brain, and the environment. They gave us the power to dominate and manipulate our world like no other creature before or since. Prove it. Not sure exactly what you are asking me to prove; but if you are questioning all parts of the statement; as well as the whole - this would be a difficult place to do that. Don't take this wrong, but I do not know your knowledge level on the topics involved, so I'm not trying to belittle. Good primers on genetics and cellular biology, (especially the development of sex as a gene mixing tool), evolution & selection, and an understanding of the timeline of hominid history built up from archaeological evidence all need to be in place in order for the whole to make sense. Actually, I think the whole ascension of the mammals gives it an even better context. If you follow the extreme fundamentalist beliefs on the age of the Earth and Creationism and that like then don't bother. The research and findings will all fly in the face of the what you believe, and you will obviously deny the science. Now if you do have all that as a foundation, (the science part - not the fundamentalist part) or were to acquire it; then had a team of experts in each field lay out all the evidence and logical arguement - I suppose you could still claim that it was not proven because you did not see it happening right before your eyes. That would be beyond healthy skepticism. Heck, it would be beyond maniacal skepticism and just short of, if not outright denial. For a person demanding that level of certainty, the only thing that can be certain is the here and now." . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
