Muenkel 0 #76 September 20, 2008 How do I know if you were dropping acid when you came up with 'your' reality? You cannot prove what you claim is reality. It is an opinion that you believe is reality. You are just a microscopic dot in history and humanity, as am I. In other words, this topic is too big for you or I to declare anything. _________________________________________ Chris Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
deibido 0 #77 September 20, 2008 Reality isn't so tough a thing to grasp friend. All you need is a healthy dose of doubt and a lack of internal fiction. Reality is all around us. Check it out sometime. You might like it."User assumes all risk" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JackC 0 #78 September 20, 2008 QuoteYou cannot prove what you claim is reality. It is an opinion that you believe is reality. The laws of physics are the same for all observers. Reality does not depend on opinion. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Muenkel 0 #79 September 20, 2008 I refer you to the many posts that Billvon made in this thread. He made this point much better than I could. _________________________________________ Chris Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
deibido 0 #80 September 20, 2008 His point about building god? ok."User assumes all risk" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
christelsabine 1 #81 September 20, 2008 Quote His point about building god? ok. What? Where? dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Muenkel 0 #82 September 21, 2008 QuoteHis point about building god? That is not what Bill did. Anyway, Bill made my point very well. I'm done here. _________________________________________ Chris Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
deibido 0 #83 September 21, 2008 Yeah, we can never know anything and its pointless to even try so why bother . . . we are so insignificant that our puny minds cannot possibly understand reality. That's the spirit."User assumes all risk" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tbrown 26 #84 September 21, 2008 QuoteCan you show that your religious beliefs amount to something more than complete delusion? All religions bring your A-game and show that your truth is THE truth, not just insane ramblings. It's easy to take a cheap shot at any religion, or all of them. But what do you have to offer as an alternative, other than being a confrontational nihilist ? It's easy to point out the flaws of anything or anybody, because truthfully, we all have them, and some of them are really serious. My own religious belief in God is based on a not entirely rational belief that things actually could be better and that we don't have to surrender to hopelessness. Can your bitter doctrine of "reality" offer anything better than despair ? Your humble servant.....Professor Gravity ! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
deibido 0 #85 September 21, 2008 >It's easy to take a cheap shot at any religion, or all of them. But what do you have to offer as an alternative, other than being a confrontational nihilist ? I don't have anything to offer. That's the problem with reality you know. No glamorous eternal life, No spiritual ATM machine granting wishes, not even an anthropomorphic father figure in the sky. No fictions of any sort. Reality does seem rather bland in comparison. The thing is, if you actually look at it, really look, reality is an amazing thing. Incredible really. You may even find, after much searching and thought, that you don't need any fictions. You don't need me to offer anything because everything you could ever need is right here, in the real world. >My own religious belief in God is based on a not entirely rational belief that things actually could be better and that we don't have to surrender to hopelessness. You don't need fictional characters to make things better. In fact, they do the opposite. These fictions hurt us as a species. You can put down the stories and see that the world isn't so bad just like it is, it's not hopeless at all. It's friggin' amazing out there, and believing in fictional characters as literally real does nothing to move us forward in a positive way. Just ask yourself one simple question. If there is a "God", however you choose to define it, why would things need to be made better? Can we do better than "God" did? >Can your bitter doctrine of "reality" offer anything better than despair ? Reality isn't a doctrine. It's the real world. Doctrine is fiction pretending to be truth. I want to ask you to do something right now. It's very simple but it will illustrate my point well. Stand up, walk outside, look up into the sky and take a deep breath of fresh air. Smell that? That's reality. Make a point of doing this once or twice a day, to remind yourself of what's real. Reality may not be problem free but it's all we have, and avoiding it with fictions isn't going to solve anything. Choose Reality. It's the only honest choice."User assumes all risk" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
deibido 0 #86 September 21, 2008 >Can your bitter doctrine of "reality" offer anything better than despair ? I just wanted to comment on this one line again. It is at the crux of the issue. People turn to all kinds of escapist things in attempts to ward off despair. They do this because for whatever reason they feel that they cannot handle reality. The problem is you can't actually escape reality, and the problems are still there, usually getting worse, every time they look back at the real world. This just pushes them further into escapism and avoidance in a vicious circle. It gets to the point where reality itself is looked at as the enemy, an agent of despair. We prefer our dreams and stories to living here and now, in the real world. It can be hard but when you are ready, reality will be here waiting for you."User assumes all risk" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jclalor 12 #87 September 21, 2008 This was one of the best written I have seen on these threads. The fact is reality still exist even if you dont believe in it anymore. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jclalor 12 #88 September 21, 2008 The best definition I have heard for Skeptics or Athiest: Some people believe that skepticism is the rejection of new ideas, or worse, they confuse “skeptic” with “cynic” and think that skeptics are a bunch of grumpy curmudgeons unwilling to accept any claim that challenges the status quo. This is wrong. Skepticism is a provisional approach to claims. It is the application of reason to any and all ideas — no sacred cows allowed. In other words, skepticism is a method, not a position. Ideally, skeptics do not go into an investigation closed to the possibility that a phenomenon might be real or that a claim might be true. When we say we are “skeptical,” we mean that we must see compelling evidence before we believe. Skepticism has a long historical tradition dating back to ancient Greece, when Socrates observed: “All I know is that I know nothing.” But this pure position is sterile and unproductive and held by virtually no one. If you were skeptical about everything, you would have to be skeptical of your own skepticism. Like the decaying subatomic particle, pure skepticism uncoils and spins off the viewing screen of our intellectual cloud chamber. Modern skepticism is embodied in the scientific method, which involves gathering data to formulate and test naturalistic explanations for natural phenomena. A claim becomes factual when it is confirmed to such an extent it would be reasonable to offer temporary agreement. But all facts in science are provisional and subject to challenge, and therefore skepticism is a method leading to provisional conclusions. Some claims, such as water dowsing, ESP, and creationism, have been tested (and failed the tests) often enough that we can provisionally conclude that they are not valid. Other claims, such as hypnosis, the origins of language, and black holes, have been tested but results are inconclusive so we must continue formulating and testing hypotheses and theories until we can reach a provisional conclusion. The key to skepticism is to continuously and vigorously apply the methods of science to navigate the treacherous straits between “know nothing” skepticism and “anything goes” credulity. Over three centuries ago the French philosopher and skeptic, René Descartes, after one of the most thorough skeptical purges in intellectual history, concluded that he knew one thing for certain: Cogito ergo sum — I think therefore I am. But evolution may have designed us in the other direction. Humans evolved to be pattern-seeking, cause-inferring animals, shaped by nature to find meaningful relationships in the world. Those who were best at doing this left behind the most offspring. We are their descendents. In other words, to be human is to think: Sum Ergo Cogito — I Am Therefore I Think. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,596 #89 September 21, 2008 QuoteIt's easy to take a cheap shot at any religion, or all of them. But what do you have to offer as an alternative, There is no God. QuoteMy own religious belief in God is based on a not entirely rational belief that things actually could be better and that we don't have to surrender to hopelessness. What does that have to do with whether God exists? QuoteCan your bitter doctrine of "reality" offer anything better than despair ? Why do you think it does offer despair?Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maadmax 0 #90 September 21, 2008 So what is the point of your thread? Are you trying to convince somebody/anybody that your take of reality is the only true one? Reality is what we make it, we all live in a reality of our creation. I agree that the ideal of an absolute reality is the most plausible and that it is our privilege to seek it out. What you are proposing is nothing new and certainly does not answer any of issues I find most important in life. _______________________________________ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ErricoMalatesta 0 #91 September 21, 2008 Quote Can your bitter doctrine of "reality" offer anything better than despair ? Yeah it is a doctrine as mentioned I am glad to know that all non-religious people are in fact defeatist pessimists with nothing but despair about the world around them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jclalor 12 #92 September 21, 2008 I think one of the points being made is that you can believe what ever reality YOU wish too believe as long as it is not imposed in any way on people that don't choose to share your perception of reality. When others try and impose their superstitions on public policy it becomes a bit scary Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
deibido 0 #93 September 21, 2008 QuoteSo what is the point of your thread? _______________________________________ Please read the OP and respond accordingly. That is the point of the thread. P.S. We do not make reality, we experience it. It is the same for all of us. Skydivers in particular should be very aware of what reality is. It's that big thing underneath you that seems to keep getting bigger. If you don't think it's "real" why do you keep pulling at the correct altitude? Because you know what reality is, that's why. Stop deluding yourself. Choose Reality."User assumes all risk" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #94 September 21, 2008 Quote>>> Requesting that assertions be proved with evidence Okay. Give me evidence that there is no god. I mean emprical studies designed to demonstrat the lack. … Therein lies the issue. There is a similar lack of evidence to support or deny the existence. That's why it is dogmatic. Based on what evidence should anyone even consider the existence of a supernatural being? We are all born as atheists, with no concept of a supernatural god. We have to be taught, or some would say, brainwashed, in order to believe in such a concept. QuoteThis doesn't mean, "I asked God to help me bang Suzi." That would be evidence as credible as any offered "proving" the existence of a supernatural god. (That's not to say that it is credible evidence.)Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #95 September 21, 2008 QuoteCan you show that your religious beliefs amount to something more than complete delusion? No, but I don't have to show you anything. Some of us feel that the soul has a source. If you believe that you don't have a soul, well, I guess it would seem like a complete delusion to you. Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jclalor 12 #96 September 21, 2008 In religion and politics people's beliefs and convictions are in almost every case gotten at second-hand, and without examination, from authorities who have not themselves examined the questions at issue but have taken them at second-hand from other non-examiners, whose opinions about them were not worth a brass farthing. - Autobiography of Mark Twain Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #97 September 21, 2008 Quote>Without evidence that it exists, it is meaningless to say that it "could" exist. Fortunately, the Wright Brothers, Igor Sikorsky, Robert Goddard, Albert Einstein and Thomas Edison disagreed. The Wright brothers built on what was known. It was already known that an airfoil could produce lift. What was not clear was how to control (steer) the airfoil in flight. One day, one of the brothers flexed a cereal box in a twisting fashion and observed that the front and back of the box remained approximately parallel at corresponding locations. Thus came the idea that a wing could be slightly distorted in flight to allow controlled steering. Einstein based his work in (Special) Relativity on the premise that the laws of physics were the same from any and every frame of reference including light being observed at the same speed regardless of the motion of the observer relative to the light source. These postulates were based on current knowledge, specifically, Newton's laws had been observed to be invariant, and Michelson & Morley's experiment had demonstrated that the speed of light did not depend upon the direction of motion of the observer relative to the speed of light. Einstein didn't start from scratch, he built on what was already known. Similarly, Edison knew that lightning was a form of electricity, and lightning produced observable light. It was not unreasonable, therefore, to assume that electricity could be manipulated by humans in such a manner to produce light. Sikorsky also built on what was already known. Likewise, Goddard applied known physics theory. QuoteAgain, not true in the sciences. We have no direct evidence that there are earth-like planets circling other stars, but scientists do not consider such planets "unreal." Indeed, they are statistically nearly certain. However, we have observed planets in our own solar system. The existence of planets was known, and Earth offered proof that planets could take an earth-like form. QuoteLikewise, we had no solid evidence that there was water on Mars until very recently. Fortunately, scientists considered the possibility not only real, but nearly certain - and they just demonstrated that they were correct. There was evidence suggesting the possibility. The idea didn't come out of nowhere.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #98 September 21, 2008 Quoteathiesm is not a passive roll, it's proactively aginst the idea of a god. Atheism is simply non-belief in god. It can be a passive non-belief or an active belief that there is no god. One does not need to even consider the concept of god in order to be an atheist. Atheism is the null hypothesis of humans.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #99 September 21, 2008 QuoteQuoteathiesm is not a passive roll, it's proactively aginst the idea of a god. Atheism is simply non-belief in god. It can be a passive non-belief or an active belief that there is no god. One does not need to even consider the concept of god in order to be an atheist. Atheism is the null hypothesis of humans. Right, but you can't be an atheist and be on the fence, you definately believe there is no god....that was my point. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JackC 0 #100 September 21, 2008 QuoteRight, but you can't be an atheist and be on the fence, you definately believe there is no god....that was my point. Yeah, you can. If you believe in god you're a theist, everyone else is an atheist. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
