Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Greatoliver]

Well, wouldn't that mean that we should stop bothering with trying to discuss god?

Yup, if God is transcendental. Yeah for Wittgenstein!

But Greatoliver; what makes you so sure that that either the limits of our mental capacity are fixed, or that the Universe is greater than our ability to understand it?

Our understanding may not be fixed, I agree, but this does not change the fact that there may be things we cannot understand: if there are limits to our understanding, it raises the question about what is beyond the limits.  Whether there is something outside of the box, I could not say, and so we may be able to understand everything but we will never know for certain, as the very fact it is outside of the limits of our minds means we can never reach it.

Why should this be the case? Especially since we know that evolution happens, it's entirely reasonable to suggest that even if our mental limits are too small now to truely understand the Universe, they may very well grow to encompass it in the future.

Do we know Evolution happens?  As far as I know, Evolution is still a theory, albeit a very persuasive one.  I have a feeling that something has changed recently that has proved it, or it may just be because of the anniversary of it... I digress.

I agree that our capacities may grow, but one would be equally valid to state that they could shrink.  First, just because it has happened in the past does not necessitate the happening in the future.  Second, our very idea of the mechanics of Evolution could be simple compared to the actual workings: humans have a habit of finding a paradigm that works well with observation and declaring it true (e.g. stomatal opening).  This would entail that any extrapolation of Evolution is invalid.

Generally, inductive reasoning is useful, but cannot prove anything or give truthful statements.  "Knowing" the Sun will rise tomorrow may be illogical, but it allows society to function and when we step down from our philosophical armchairs, is more useful than the endless tautologies of deductive reasoning.

...it's 'cheating'...

I agree.  The Veil of Ignorance is hideous to argue against, just because it sweeps aside anything you are arguing about, but it is a valid move:

The problem with a non-transcendental God is that it cannot exist.  The theistic God, who is all-powerful, all-loving and all-knowing, is a mess of fallacies and self-contradictions, which you can probably guess at.  Anyone trying to defend this God ends up resorting to the Veil of Ignorance as it is the only way to for God to exist.

It is a fair move however.  By describing God, we have put Him into our own capacities, which is not valid, as by doing so, some meaning has been lost, which is a bit like integrating and forgetting the constant.  If He is transcendental, we cannot understand Him and so arguing is not possible, using God as a premise.

This does mean that we can only speculate and arguing is pointless, as each speculation has the same value as any other, unless they are absurd.

If God does not follow reason, there's no point in paying any attention to him, because there's no way for you to ever know if you're doing the right thing or the wrong thing.

Basically we're back to 'irrelevant' again.

He may follow a reason of His own, but as long as it is higher than ours, it can be converted down into our own, providing some kind of reason that we can accept, even if we cannot understand.

Really, when it comes to following God, it is a bit odd anyway.  Why do people take it to be the correct way of living? I'm not a believer myself and so from looking in from the outside, I find the idea of a "leap of faith" something I could never see myself doing, even if they are irrational.

So concerning right or wrong, I don't really know why people think God is morally true, but if there was a God, it is certainly relevant.

Hmmm....

[Siquo]

You can probably read the same stuff into a cookbook if you want.

"First, take eggs" (eggs = metaphor for origin of life -> SCIENCE!!)...

True. Still, I like it.
Yay for the Babylonian gods! All Hail Tiamat!

[dreiche2]

True. Still, I like it.

That is fine, just don't claim that

1) the people who wrote Genesis had anything like scientific insight,
2) it's so unspecific that it is at least compatible with current scientific theories. The only way to make it compatible is to read it as a completely vague metaphor, and that way you can make pretty much any creation myth, or anything that can be reinterpreted as a creation myth, compatible.

[Siquo]

Meh, the order of things are roughly the same. That's all I said. I never claimed scientific insight, I was merely applauding science for coming so close to the real order in which things appeared 

[IronyOwl]

Meh, the order of things are roughly the same. That's all I said. I never claimed scientific insight, I was merely applauding science for coming so close to the real order in which things appeared 

That's ridiculous. Everyone knows there were limitless plants and animals and people-like things living in the sky long before sea creatures bothered to collect land for a woman who fell through the hole of a tree her brother had uprooted.

[Siquo]

This just in:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/7530678/Biblical-plagues-really-happened-say-scientists.html

Not that it matters for the discussion, but I find this stuff amusing.

[Greatoliver]

This just in:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/7530678/Biblical-plagues-really-happened-say-scientists.html

Not that it matters for the discussion, but I find this stuff amusing.

Proof that one should accept God's Word as the Truth!

[Ampersand]

That's not really new news. There's been a consensus for a fairly long time that a very peculiar set of circumstances in Egypt leading to a boom and bust of various animal populations  actually occurred. However, the precise cause of this boom and bust has never really been well understood because it happened a long time ago. The most likely culprit was a recent volcanic eruption that occurred in the Mediterranean around that time, at my last reckoning.

[Andir]

Concerning the first: It hinders us as it limits what we can understand/imagine/believe etc., our inability to understand all, suprisingly, means that some things are outside of our range of understanding.

Nah, I don't play that game.  I can understand that an infinite number and an infinite universe is infinite.  It's quite literally just that.  Infinite.  There's nothing to not understand in that.  Do you have a problem understanding it and you are projecting your belief on my understanding?

I don't think there is anything outside of our understanding.  The universe is a very real place.  If something is not contained in that real space, it's not real.  You can point at theories for bending space time, dark matter, some unfound particle and black holes all you like, but those are merely theories created to fill in the gaps in the equations.  If you put enough thought into something it becomes understandable.  Just because it's hard to imagine, doesn't make it impossible to imagine.  As I stated earlier, it's even possible to imagine all this stuff that's being attributed to a spiritual world is simply part of the brain's natural process at filling in the blanks (answering the equations.)  It just happens to fill in your blank spots with benevolent gods, invisible unicorns and happy trees because you don't seem to be able to cope in a world that's honest and truthful.

Also, believing what's in the box is a pink elephant is fine as long as the person telling you (whom we will refer to as the preacher) that is able to show you, otherwise they could be lying to you and you need to understand that.  Taking their word blindly is ignorance and stupid.  Saying that though, replace the pink elephant with a bomb and there's a reason to leave the room because your immediate well-being could be in danger.  But there's still going to be evidence of a bomb or an empty box to be examined.  Uprooting yourself and changing your life because of what some preacher (the person telling you there's a bomb/elephant in the box) is absurd and that "preacher" should be tried and convicted if they are lying to you.

What I am proposing is that God is something that we cannot understand: we can try to apply "logic" and other such things, or deductively prove He exists (lol Descartes) but these are all based upon mechanisms that we understand, and so could be false when viewed from a higher level.

That's fine and all, but it's based on imagination and storytelling and it holds no more truth or evidence than Star Wars Light Sabers and The Force.  It's simply for entertainment purposes and should be used for nothing more.  Unless of course you can prove it.

[Andir]

That's not really new news. There's been a consensus for a fairly long time that a very peculiar set of circumstances in Egypt leading to a boom and bust of various animal populations  actually occurred. However, the precise cause of this boom and bust has never really been well understood because it happened a long time ago. The most likely culprit was a recent volcanic eruption that occurred in the Mediterranean around that time, at my last reckoning.

They still have plagues of locusts that infest the areas around there even today and there's very real studies and explanations for them because we can still study them today.  Do they still consider it God's will?

edit:

Do we know Evolution happens?  As far as I know, Evolution is still a theory, albeit a very persuasive one.  I have a feeling that something has changed recently that has proved it, or it may just be because of the anniversary of it... I digress.

Damn, sorry for the many posts/edits, I'm hitting these topics as I go along...

Do you have a Dog?  What breed is it?  Animal breeding is a direct proof of evolutionary traits.  These traits are forced by humans, but it still shows they can exist.  Mutation is the foundation of evolution.  Place enough bacteria in a dish full of some toxic material and eventually one will survive and adapt.

[IronyOwl]

Do you have a Dog?  What breed is it?  Animal breeding is a direct proof of evolutionary traits.  These traits are forced by humans, but it still shows they can exist.  Mutation is the foundation of evolution.  Place enough bacteria in a dish full of some toxic material and eventually one will survive and adapt.

Careful now. Selective breeding is the easy half of evolution; some people get confused thinking that's it.

[Greatoliver]

Beware, beware! Multi-quoting is here! 

Nah, I don't play that game.  I can understand that an infinite number and an infinite universe is infinite.  It's quite literally just that.  Infinite.  There's nothing to not understand in that.  Do you have a problem understanding it and you are projecting your belief on my understanding?

If you can truly imagine infinite, you are exceptional. What I mean by understand is to actually realise what it is in a positive manner.  People can concieve of infinity, but this is by saying what it is not, i.e. without limits.  But to actually imagine a number that is infinitely large is something I cannot do, without refering to things it is not.

I don't think there is anything outside of our understanding.  The universe is a very real place. ... ...It just happens to fill in your blank spots with benevolent gods, invisible unicorns and happy trees because you don't seem to be able to cope in a world that's honest and truthful.

The problem here is that you are thinking merely inside your own capacities... How can you deny the possibility that there may be things you cannot imagine? Are there things you cannot think? There is no way to answer this as you cannot imagine an unimaginable thing...

Now, when it comes to a "honest and truthful" world, once again, this is speculation on your behalf.  First, your perception of the world is not necessarily true, for example, look at the Matrix.  This was roughly based upon what Descartes was going on about, which is a world where only deductive reasoning is true, i.e. our senses are deceiving.  You can claim the Universe is real, but this is based upon a flawed perception.  Only when you break free of your senses, can you see what the Universe is actually like.

Also, believin... ......rd and that "preacher" should be tried and convicted if they are lying to you.

I agree... But, people believe in God, so there must be a reason, even if it is irrational in the end...

That's fine and all, but it's based on imagination and storytelling and it holds no more truth or evidence than Star Wars Light Sabers and The Force.  It's simply for entertainment purposes and should be used for nothing more.  Unless of course you can prove it.

In defense of religious followers, most of the time, it does no harm and often, it does lead people along lives that are pleasant.  I mean, the idea of having a Theistic God above you must be amazing reassurance to believe, as if you are a Christian, everything is great as you can just go to Heaven.  In the end, it's every person to their own, as it is a personal choice... I cannot see it myself and I am content with that.

My question to you, do you only believe things you can prove? If so, what do you actually believe?  The only thing that is able to be proved are deductive truths, such as 2+2=4.  Gravity is not provable, nor is anything based upon perception, so it would lead you on a rather unbelieving life 

Oh, there's more now! 

Do you have a Dog?  What breed is it?  Animal breeding is a direct proof of evolutionary traits.  These traits are forced by humans, but it still shows they can exist.  Mutation is the foundation of evolution.  Place enough bacteria in a dish full of some toxic material and eventually one will survive and adapt.

I do, it's a Deerhound  Still, it is a theory... All of evolution could be a coincidence, or God could have done it... There are a lot of explanations to what it could be otherwise, and so it is still a theory.

[Chud]

It seems like since Atheism became a "religion" (which is ironic in itself), the world no longer gives a crap. People believe that they are just animals, so they act like them, that's why the U.S's government is failing.

Another question for Atheists, why do they call any religious people stupid because we rely on books written by people smarter then they'll ever be and then waste millions on millions of dollars on supporting completely unprovable things, and calling it the truth.

Here's a good quote against Atheism:
"If there's a God, and you believe in him, you're good. If there isn't a God, and you don't believe in him, you're good. If there isn't a God, and you believe in him, you're good. If there is a God, and you don't believe in him, you're screwed."
That's only a 25% chance of "being good" and set. Since we go for the 75% right, we're stupid. Don't stop reading yet, because this is a Christian saying.
Another fun fact, it takes more faith to be Atheist then it does to be religious, isn't that ironic too? You have more of what you're against, that's stupid.
Yet another fact, it is more provable that Jesus was the Son of God then it is to say that George Washington was the U.S's first president.

[Jreengus]

Do we know Evolution happens?  As far as I know, Evolution is still a theory, albeit a very persuasive one.  I have a feeling that something has changed recently that has proved it, or it may just be because of the anniversary of it... I digress.

This is a common mistake, that evolution is a theory. Evolution is a fact. And evolution is a theory.

The observable fact evolution is that genetic changes result in differing characteristics among a population. Darwins theory says that this occurs due to a process whereby the best fitted to an environment are more likely to survive. This is as opposed to say Lamarks theory that children inherit physical characteristics developed during their parents life.

Arguing against the fact of evolution is equatable with arguing against the fact of say gravity.

[masam]

Great oliver appears to be well versed in forensics and philosophy.  While I do believe, and that choice is my own, i'm actually enjoying his rather...thorough debunking of arguments that haven't been quite thought through all the way. 

Unfortunately because they haven't been thought through all the way, the posters arguing against you are so busy defending their points that they aren't listening to your argument.

So I have a question for everyone involved in this conversation, when you read the response of your debating opponent, are you really reading it and absorbing the ideas they lay out?  Or are you skimming it while thinking of the fastest way to respond back?  Because it's the first that will allow you to understand the most and then form a better overall approach to the response, or in some cases, allow you to concede without looking like a damn fool.

(Oh, and i'm not calling anyone here a damn fool, I'm speaking purely from my own experience.  Faith without reason breeds zealots of every kind.)