User Tag List

First 2345614 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 208

  1. #31
    Senior Member lowtech redneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edgar View Post
    Oh yeah? Have you seen Ghost in the Shell?

    ...yeah, I didn't think so.
    Yeah, many years ago. At the time I was expecting something less philosophical and a lot more action-oriented (I had heard it was good, but didn't get any further details). I don't remember much about it, except that I found it to be boring and vaguely offensive on the philosophical level. I've always intended to watch it again, to see what my opinion of it would be now.

  2. #32
    Senior Member TopherRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    ENFJ
    Enneagram
    2w3 so/sx
    Posts
    1,273

    Default

    When scientists declare that God doesn't exist, they are referring specifically to the conception of God as a literal, conscious and self-aware entity who actively manipulates worldly events based on prayer.

    It's pretty obvious that this idea is bullshit...
    Oh really? Why? Why do you think so?

    Basically, I just get tired of hearing "spiritual" people respond to criticisms of God with, "OH YEAH WELL IT DOESN'T DISPROVE *MY* GOD!"
    Hey, why don't you come and argue with a Christian your own size then?

    Why don't you stop using your conversations with ignorant and uneducated Christians as a basis to dismiss the entire group, and their faith as bullshit?

    The vast majority of religious people today, when they say they believe in God, actually do believe in a conscious and self-aware entity with a moral agenda who actively imposes those arbitrary moral directives on humanity. THAT is what "God" means in a realistic context today.

    The fact is the entire discussion of God is meaningless until you actually decide what "God" means. Your teacher was probably just saying something to appease everybody in your class regardless of position on this sensitive issue.
    To say that Christians "know", is incorrect. It's a bad word choice. To say that Christians "have faith", is much more correct. God doesn't expect us to "know" 100% that He's out there when we haven't seen him for 2000 years. It's probably also more appropriate to say, we seek to have such faith, that in our actions, we will proceed as if we "know". The apostles "knew". They saw Christ and everything that went with Him. I have faith based on their testimony.

    I can also take that a step further and say that I look at life differently as a result--I can "see" how God works in it because the faith that I hold allows me to look at life much differently then the agnostic or the atheist.

    I'm sorry, but the religion=science parallel is just really poorly conceived and fleshed out even worse.
    I sort of agree with you; if science is the logical study of everything, then the concept of God fits into that study. Religion is not meant to be a competitor with science. Christians believe that God is part of everything, that he is real, and that, with an accepted prespective, we are able to study Him. I'd say the biggest argument for God is creation around you; though you believe it happened randomly and I believe it happened divinely, can you or I prove it either way?
    Love is the point.

  3. #33
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LostInNerSpace View Post
    God does exist. God has a very real tangible impact on all of our lives, including yours, whether or not you choose to admit it.
    This is a useless assertion. My saying "God does not exist. God does not have a very real tangible impact on all of our lives, including yours, whether or not you choose to admit it" has as much internal validity as your statement. It's a useless comment in a rational argument.

    I find it more productive, when talking about unverifiable beliefs, to use "I" in the comments and not "you."
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  4. #34
    Senior Member paintmuffin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    eNTP
    Posts
    159

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jenna View Post
    I have a biology teacher that is amazing, she's brilliant and someone posed the question to her yesterday about God. I really liked her answer. She is a Sunday school teacher and has no qualms telling people about her faith in God. She explained her science/faith theory like this:

    Picture a huge zillion piece puzzle of the Earth.

    You have the scientists who have put together the top right hand corner of the sky and they shout, "Reality is blue!"

    You have the theologians putting together the bottom right hand corner of the grass and they shout, "Reality is green!"

    Her point was that they are both putting together the same puzzle, but neither of them can see that.

    I really liked her answer
    The point of science is to put together the entire puzzle. As soon as they get a piece with a bit of cloud they will shout, "We changed our minds! Reality is white and blue!"

    Religion has not picked up a new piece of the puzzle in a long, long time. And they've shown no attempts to do so either.

    Kudos to the original post!
    A colleague of the great scientist James Watson remarked that Watson was always lounging around, arguing about problems instead of doing experiments. He concluded that There is more than one way of doing good science.
    It was Watsons form of idleness, the scientist went on to say, that allowed him to solve the greatest of all biological problems: the discovery of the structure of DNA. It's a point worth remembering in a society overly concerned with efficiency.

  5. #35
    Senior Member TopherRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    ENFJ
    Enneagram
    2w3 so/sx
    Posts
    1,273

    Default

    Religion has not picked up a new piece of the puzzle in a long, long time. And they've shown no attempts to do so either.
    Have you ever been to a Christian university's theology department, my Squarely Nodparent? Our understanding of the source material, and our ability to understand cultural context have sharpened consideribly over the past two hundred years--meaning we have many more pieces and know much better where they go. Opinions have changed, refined and improved. Christian theology has evolved; both toward deeper consensus and deeper conflict among among some of the greatest minds of our Faith. Go ahead, I challenge you, find a Professor of Theology that is worth his salt and he'll tell you just how many pieces we have collected over the last two millenia.
    Love is the point.

  6. #36
    Senior Member avolkiteshvara's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    MBTI
    YaYa
    Posts
    895

    Default

    Part of the problem is that everyone has their own definition of God.

    Some people think it is a blue eye brown hair deity. Others think it is the plants and trees. Some just think they are god.

    I had a good friend that once thought he was Jesus. I think he was having a psychotic episode though.

  7. #37
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JAVO View Post
    I think Richard Dawkins fairly clearly insists that reality is blue.
    I think you haven't actually read Richard Dawkins's book.

    In the very first chapter he makes it clear that he's referring only to God as a literal, conscious and self-aware entity with a moral agenda who actively manipulates worldly events based on prayer.

    He makes the same argument I do here, by saying: "You can find God anywhere if you look hard enough--but for the purposes of this book I am discussing popular monotheistic concepts of God as practiced by mainstream Western religion."

    Dawkins gets a lot shit for stuff that he never really said, just because he's so forceful. Suffice it to say, he never makes any commentary on any "vague spiritual force" theories of God, but seeks only to deconstruct the clear absurdity that is literal fundamentalist interpretation.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  8. #38
    Nickle Iron Silicone Charmed Justice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    2,808

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jenna View Post
    I have a biology teacher that is amazing, she's brilliant and someone posed the question to her yesterday about God. I really liked her answer. She is a Sunday school teacher and has no qualms telling people about her faith in God. She explained her science/faith theory like this:

    Picture a huge zillion piece puzzle of the Earth.

    You have the scientists who have put together the top right hand corner of the sky and they shout, "Reality is blue!"

    You have the theologians putting together the bottom right hand corner of the grass and they shout, "Reality is green!"

    Her point was that they are both putting together the same puzzle, but neither of them can see that.

    I really liked her answer
    But don't most religions claim to have already solved the puzzle? Religions claim to offer infallible answers to all of the world's most complicated questions with the most simplistic of conclusions. All of this with no proof.

    When questions of doubt arise within a religion, it is seen more or less as a test of said person's faith in the religion, and an investigation of the religion's legitimacy or very foundation is discouraged. This is very much unlike science. When doubts arise within the scientific community concerning a previous conclusion, the conclusions are put to the test and modified according to the new knowledge that has been obtained.

  9. #39
    Glowy Goopy Goodness The_Liquid_Laser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    3,377

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Scott View Post
    I've never understood when people make arguments of this sort. It always seems to me like conflating 'infinite' with 'all-encompassing' or something of the sort. In the same way that the set of all positive numbers is infinite yet not identical to the set of all reals, I see no reason why God can't remain infinite yet not all that is.

    Dammit Scott I wanted to post this first! (Well you're whole post is very well written, so I guess it's better that you did.) Yeah the OP confuses the ideas of "infinite" and "all-encompassing". The initial premise is flawed, so the whole argument is pointless.

    I find it so ironic when an atheist gives some poor argument, and then insists that this must be the way a reasonable person thinks. :rolleye:
    My wife and I made a game to teach kids about nutrition. Please try our game and vote for us to win. (Voting period: July 14 - August 14)
    http://www.revoltingvegetables.com

  10. #40
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fuzzcrossed View Post
    Oh really? Why? Why do you think so?
    Surprisingly, I actually don't even feel like explaining this one. There are lots of university level intro to philosophy courses and wikipedia summaries to explain this one to you, and if you can't piece it together then I have no interest in trying.

    But I will say that I think faith is a good thing for a lot of people, and that in the context of a religious life if doesn't really matter whether or not God literally exists. Conducting your life as if he does will yield the same result either way, and it brings people comfort, happiness and a sense of community, so in that way I'm all for it.

    I think religious people have every right to believe and practice the way they want to--but when you try to bring something like faith into any logical discussion, you've already lost.


    Quote Originally Posted by Fuzzcrossed View Post
    Why don't you stop using your conversations with ignorant and uneducated Christians as a basis to dismiss the entire group, and their faith as bullshit?
    Because Mycroft started the thread in a purely logic context, so I was deconstructing the common logical issues with God.

    I never said there aren't other reasons to believe in God--it seems to work really well for some people and I know that internal logical consistency is not really an important value to them, so that's fine. I wouldn't take faith away from these people because I think it does more good than harm in their lives.



    Quote Originally Posted by Fuzzcrossed View Post
    To say that Christians "know", is incorrect. It's a bad word choice. To say that Christians "have faith", is much more correct. God doesn't expect us to "know" 100% that He's out there when we haven't seen him for 2000 years. It's probably also more appropriate to say, we seek to have such faith, that in our actions, we will proceed as if we "know". The apostles "knew". They saw Christ and everything that went with Him. I have faith based on their testimony.
    Well, that's your interpretation. Unfortunately there are 954653 other interpretations from people who claim just as surely that they are "THE REAL CHRISTIANS!" and now, oops, nobody has any real idea what Jesus actually meant. There's problem #1.

    Oh by the way, my friend Jimmy and eleven of his friends told me they saw the Flying Spaghetti Monster and that they've all been touched by his noodly appendage. I have since converted to the faith.

    Srsly though their story was really passionate and elaborate! They didn't really have any evidence or any particular reason I should believe them beyond hearsay, but that's where my faith comes in--I don't need any reason to believe; accepting something on faith is accepting that it can't be taken on its own merits.


    Quote Originally Posted by Fuzzcrossed View Post
    I can also take that a step further and say that I look at life differently as a result--I can "see" how God works in it because the faith that I hold allows me to look at life much differently then the agnostic or the atheist.
    sigh. Ok man, go to wikipedia and type in "Russell's Teapot" or "Flying Spaghetti Monster" or "Invisible Pink Unicorn" or a host of other basic thought exercises that discredit the idea of arbitrary faith.

    Listen, like I said, I'm not morally against faith--I do believe that it's a good thing for many and that in those people's lives, the literal existence/non-existence of God is a non-issue...they're getting what they need out of it and that's good.

    Unfortunately that doesn't make faith any less inherently illogical.


    Quote Originally Posted by Fuzzcrossed View Post
    I sort of agree with you; if science is the logical study of everything, then the concept of God fits into that study. Religion is not meant to be a competitor with science. Christians believe that God is part of everything, that he is real, and that, with an accepted prespective, we are able to study Him. I'd say the biggest argument for God is creation around you; though you believe it happened randomly and I believe it happened divinely, can you or I prove it either way?
    No, but if you had the background in science+a little intuition it'd be pretty obvious why that argument is terrible.

    I remember when Chris Hitchens (admittedly a drunken asshole, but a smart one) went on Sean Hannity's show to discuss God, and Hannity rattled off that "OMG TEH WORLD IS TOO COMPLEX TO BE NOT DESIGNED LOL", which reduces essentially to, "Biology is real hard and I don't get it...DOGMATIC EXPLANATION GO!"

    Hitchens's response, which I will use here now: "You sound as if you've never read any of the arguments against your position."
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

Similar Threads

  1. If objective value does not exist, then why become an atheist?
    By Studmuffin23 in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 01-10-2015, 01:16 AM
  2. ADHD Does Not Exist
    By JAVO in forum Health and Fitness
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 03-18-2014, 07:41 PM
  3. America does not exist within its borders.
    By Haphazard in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 02-17-2010, 03:24 AM
  4. The place where spontaneity does not exist
    By Virtual ghost in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 03-16-2009, 04:07 PM
  5. Justice does not exist
    By Sahara in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 75
    Last Post: 08-03-2007, 01:24 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO