User Tag List

First 56789 Last

Results 61 to 70 of 87

  1. #61
    Chumped. Obsidius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    323

    Default

    Also, might I add, if we are arguing "logic", you better do so yourself, because your original argument, as previously stated, does seem like a gigantic appeal to complexity and ignorance. The truth of the matter is, we cannot know either way, we merely need to establish the likelihood of either explanation and decide which way we lean, and in other words, this means that the best we can do is "agnostic-theist" or "agnostic-atheist", because other alternatives make 'objective' or 'positive' claims about the Universe which cannot be fully substantiated. For example, you have stated that there is a link between the complexity of the Universe and its "perfection" (which is questionable in itself), and the existence of God; however, you have offered no link of causality, just that "it seems like it has been guided", so you are inferring sentiment where unknowns lie, popularly known as "God of the gaps".
    Yeah, well, that's just, like, your opinion man.

  2. #62
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    17,521

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BadOctopus View Post
    Do try to stay on topic.
    In case this was not clear enough: further derails will be removed.

    Do stay on topic.


    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...
    Likes Luke O, Obsidius, Hard liked this post

  3. #63
    Member Tippo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Posts
    94

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yasin View Post
    Hi! I am an intp and i would love to share my thoughts with other intps about the existence of god. I mean i have my own explanation on the existence of god,so if a few intps are interested in listening to my arguements,i would love to present them. And i would also love to hear if the explanation is logical and convincing or not. And if it is not logical and convincing,then i would also love to hear the reasons for which it seemed to be illogical.
    He's a regular poster here.

  4. #64
    Most Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    1&5
    Posts
    124

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Luke O View Post
    I must admit I'm a little confused. If I'm correct, this is what you're telling me:
    1) Prior to humanity, there was a perfect balance between plants and animals, which you deem a coincidence.
    Yes i certainly told about a perfect balance between plants and animals. But what you meant by a perfect balance and what i meant by a perfect balance were different. You(probably) meant perfect balance to be a thing, for which there will be no natural disasters, no mutations, no changes etc. But what i meant by perfect balance between plants and animals was the system between plants and animals, where both plants and animals have there own roles, and they maintain a perfect cooperation(as explained in my original explanation, exchange of carbon-dioxide and oxygen, carrying of pollens) and this balance/cooperation is extremely improbable. This perfect cooperation is what i mean by perfect balance.

    But the more important thing is, the part in which i told about the perfect balance(or cooperation) between plants and animals, this part was just the second of the first two parts which were used, just for explaining the complexities of life, and to explain the need and role of innumerous coincidences in order to carry on the reactions required for it in the perfect ways.

    Quote Originally Posted by Luke O View Post
    2) When humanity arrived, this balance was broken, therefore incoincidental and therefore proof of God.
    No, i did not mean that. "The only roles the humans have is to create imbalance", these types of sentences were used only to emphasize that the humans have no natural roles in the ecosystem, they can only destroy. What i really meant in the third part(the part which explained the exceptions of humans) of both my original explanation and it's summary was:
    "And WHO DEPEND ON ALL THE OTHER BEINGS BUT NO OTHER BEING DEPENDS ON THEM FOR SURVIVAL AND WOULD NOT FACE EXTINCTION DUE TO THEIR EXTINCTION(extinction of humans)?"(written in original explanation)

    "If we are really not so special and no one had created us, and coincidence(without guidance) is the thing that is working behind every life, then WE SHOULD ALSO HAVE BEEN PLAYING ROLES IN THE ECOSYSTEM AND WITHOUT US THE ENVIRONMENT WOULD HAVE BEEN IMBALANCED."(written in the summary)

    Humans have no natural roles or need in the ecosystem, so(i am adding a few things in brackets, for your convenience):
    "But can you imagine what would happen if all the humans are killed? No imbalance would be created in nature(because the humans don't have any necessity),rather it would be saved from imbalance and the other living beings would live even more peacefully. The earth would remain the same as it was even centuries later(until any natural disaster or anything similar occurs). No imbalance(due to their extinction) would be found anywhere. Only the pet animals will face a bit of problem at first(i am joking)."(written in my original explanation)

    If you kill all the tigers, the ecosystem would face a great problem, a big imbalance. If the ecosystem needs to keep running, there will be need for changes, lots of changes, another species will be needed which will play the roles of tigers, or, any other changes will have to take place. But kill all the humans, the ecosystem can run even better, there will be need for no changes, because the humans were not playing any roles, so there scarcity has no effect on the system.

    Hope you are clear, "they can only create imbalance", these sentences just emphasize that the humans have no natural roles, they are not needed by the ecosystem unlike the other organisms, but themselves need all the organisms. This is the incoincidence, and this incoincidence happened only in case of the only being on Earth that can question the existence of god and it does not make sense. Reading my explanation along with the summary again might help you.

    Quote Originally Posted by Luke O View Post
    You also say that there should have been another species around similar to humans. There were the Neanderthals, and the recently discovered Homo floresiensis, close relatives of us.
    I admit, i am a little confused at this part. I am still thinking.

  5. #65
    Senior Member Passacaglia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    647

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yasin View Post

    We know that the living world works in a perfect and extremely complex system. extremely complex reactions,both physical and chemical,are always occurring in just the perfect doses in just the right place and time so that the whole universe remains balanced.
    Okay, right from the start, you use a lot of words that make sense in your head, but not necessarily to who you're talking to. Which complex reactions are always occurring, and in which perfect doses? What about the universe do you see as balanced? You use the word 'perfect' in particular again and again, but it's not a very useful word if you're trying to convince non-believers.

    Are you, btw? You give the impression that you're trying to convert people, but then, the big classical arguments for the existence of God were actually invented to bolster the faith of those who already believe, rather than to convince non-believers.

    Quote Originally Posted by yasin View Post
    Now let's think about the first being ever created/born/produced. science says that the living beings are formed by various lifeless chemical elements like carbon,hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, iron, iodine, potassium, phosphorus etc(i CERTAINLY agree).but every organic substance,produced by the reactions of these non-living elements,are produced by extremely complex,perfectly calculated and lengthy chemical processes. even if it is just carbohydrates.
    The majority of your argument, which revolves around the beginning of life on Earth, is basically a biological slant on the classical Teleological Argument. There are valid objections to this argument, some of which others here have touched on, but it's enough to at least give most people pause. Even if someone objects to it, they'll probably have a hard time putting their finger on exactly why, especially during a face-to-face conversation. Unless of course they're practiced in this sort of debate.

    Quote Originally Posted by yasin View Post
    now imagine if i say i will put a huge container in space where there is no living being,the container almost as huge as the earth,i will fill it with lifeless elements like oxygen, carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen,iodine, iron, phosphorus, potassium, sodium etc and there will be not even a single living or dead cell there. now if i say after 1 trillion years,you will find the container crawling with insects,what would everyone and even the scientists say?i asked this to a few people and all of them said something like,"they will say,how can it be?are you mad?”
    Who were you talking to that thought you were mad?

    This is one of those hypotheticals that believers and non-believers will both have ‘Well duh’ reactions to, but for opposing reasons. A believer will say ‘Well duh, that can’t happen [unless God wills it],” while a non-believer will say ‘Well duh, it happened on Earth, of course it could [and probably has] happened elsewhere.’

    Quote Originally Posted by yasin View Post
    They had no notable amount of physical strength or special physical abilities like flying,breathing in water,horns,big teeth,extreme flexibility,extreme speed etc.
    Just as an aside, humans are in the 99th size percentile of species. That is, we’re bigger than 99% of other species on Earth, even though we tend to notice the bigger scarier ones in the last 100th percentile more than the others.

    But yeah, our bipedal form, our opposable thumbs, and most of all our large brains are what gave us the edge which led to us dominating this planet.

    Quote Originally Posted by yasin View Post
    But the humans had another unique uniqueness. We know that the animals,plants,insects and all living beings are interdependent,one cannot survive without the other.
    This is partly true. The ecosystem is a complex and delicate thing, but it does have a certain amount of give. That’s why evolution doesn’t bring the ecosystem to an apocalypse state every time a species evolves a new advantage, and why life still struggles on despite humanity fucking with it. (We’ve exterminated species, like the dodo, and introduced exotic species to new habitats, like the dingo to Australia.)

    Quote Originally Posted by yasin View Post
    This is just an indication and proof that coincidence is not so easy to occur thousands and thousands and thousands of times.
    Here is where your conclusion does not follow logically from your argument. Your argument is that life as it appears on Earth is incredibly unlikely to have happened by chance; but even if one buys this argument, it is not proof of anything.

    Quote Originally Posted by yasin View Post
    And this someone,who is behind everything, is GOD.
    You said you don’t believe in the Christian god; is your god one that I might know from another religion, or a more personal god? Just curious.

  6. #66
    Most Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    1&5
    Posts
    124

    Default

    You quoted me:
    "We know that the living world works in a perfect and extremely complex system. extremely complex reactions,both physical and chemical,are always occurring in just the perfect doses in just the right place and time so that the whole universe remains balanced."
    you said:
    Quote Originally Posted by Passacaglia View Post
    Okay, right from the start, you use a lot of words that make sense in your head, but not necessarily to who you're talking to. Which complex reactions are always occurring, and in which perfect doses? What about the universe do you see as balanced? You use the word 'perfect' in particular again and again, but it's not a very useful word if you're trying to convince non-believers.
    Exactly!! i know what i try to mean, but the person who reads it, does not understand what i try to mean. and about the perfect doses of chemical reactions, such a perfect dose so that life could be formed from lifeless things, plants and animals can evolve, so that plants will give oxygen while taking carbon dioxide, and animals will take the oxygen and give carbon dioxide, so that levels of both oxygen and carbon dioxide remain almost constant in the atmosphere(until any other change though), animals/insects will pollinate trees, trees will reproduce, they will also give food and house to the animals. Seems as if they talk to each other although they actually cannot. and this is the perfect dose, which makes it seem the animals and plants plan with each other. hope you are clear.

    then you quoted me:
    "now imagine if i say i will put a huge container in space where there is no living being,the container almost as huge as the earth,i will fill it with lifeless elements like oxygen, carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen,iodine, iron, phosphorus, potassium, sodium etc and there will be not even a single living or dead cell there. now if i say after 1 trillion years,you will find the container crawling with insects,what would everyone and even the scientists say?i asked this to a few people and all of them said something like,"they will say,how can it be?are you mad?”"

    you said:
    Quote Originally Posted by Passacaglia View Post
    Who were you talking to that thought you were mad?

    This is one of those hypotheticals that believers and non-believers will both have ‘Well duh’ reactions to, but for opposing reasons. A believer will say ‘Well duh, that can’t happen [unless God wills it],” while a non-believer will say ‘Well duh, it happened on Earth, of course it could [and probably has] happened elsewhere.’
    except one guy, all were my frineds. all of them are non-intps, no one was significantly intelligent. but this example is just used to make the reader or the listener feel how extremely improbable it can be and what an innumerous number of coincidences it would require to do all these. i myself would say, it can happen, it's not impossible man!

    then you quoted me:
    "They had no notable amount of physical strength or special physical abilities like flying,breathing in water,horns,big teeth,extreme flexibility,extreme speed etc."

    you said:
    Quote Originally Posted by Passacaglia View Post
    Just as an aside, humans are in the 99th size percentile of species. That is, we’re bigger than 99% of other species on Earth, even though we tend to notice the bigger scarier ones in the last 100th percentile more than the others.

    But yeah, our bipedal form, our opposable thumbs, and most of all our large brains are what gave us the edge which led to us dominating this planet.
    i did not talk only about size. we cannot fly but we rule the sky, we cannot stay under water for more than 4 minutes, but we also rule it, we don't have huge teeth or horns, but we are the ones who kill tigers, cows, goats, bulls and all those. hope you have understood.

    you quoted me:
    "But the humans had another unique uniqueness. We know that the animals,plants,insects and all living beings are interdependent,one cannot survive without the other."

    Quote Originally Posted by Passacaglia View Post
    This is partly true. The ecosystem is a complex and delicate thing, but it does have a certain amount of give. That’s why evolution doesn’t bring the ecosystem to an apocalypse state every time a species evolves a new advantage, and why life still struggles on despite humanity fucking with it. (We’ve exterminated species, like the dodo, and introduced exotic species to new habitats, like the dingo to Australia.)
    i did not understand exactly what you tried to mean at this part. sorry, hope you will clarify me.

    you quoted me:
    "This is just an indication and proof that coincidence is not so easy to occur thousands and thousands and thousands of times."

    you said:
    Quote Originally Posted by Passacaglia View Post
    Here is where your conclusion does not follow logically from your argument. Your argument is that life as it appears on Earth is incredibly unlikely to have happened by chance; but even if one buys this argument, it is not proof of anything.
    i admit i made a mistake in this part. but what i tried to mean was correct, just the wording should have been different. i should not have said, "coincidence is not so easy to occur thousands and thousands and thousands of times". rather, i should have said it in this way:
    "And WHO DEPEND ON ALL THE OTHER BEINGS BUT NO OTHER BEING DEPENDS ON THEM FOR SURVIVAL AND WOULD NOT FACE EXTINCTION DUE TO THEIR EXTINCTION(extinction of humans)?"(written in original explanation)"(written in my original explanation)

    "If we are really not so special and no one had created us, and coincidence(without guidance) is the thing that is working behind every life, then we should also have been playing roles in the ecosystem and without us the environment would have been imbalanced. But this idea of humans naturally playing roles in the ecosystem as other living things is just absurd. Our only role in the system of Earth is to create imbalance(we have no natural roles). This shows that coincidence did not work for us the way it did for others. But it cannot happen. And for this I called the uniqueness of human beings to be "in-coincidental". But this "in-coincidence" is never supposed to be. But why did it happen? If coincidence occurred so many times without anyone's guidance, there should not have been any "in-coincidence"."(written in my summary)
    hope you are clear and will pardon me for the mistake. you see, this is actually the first time i have typed this explanation down, so there are mistakes. i will actually have to modify and improvise the original explanation a little bit, most of the things will be the same, just the wording will be a bit different.

    you quoted me:
    "And this someone,who is behind everything, is GOD."

    you said:
    Quote Originally Posted by Passacaglia View Post
    You said you don’t believe in the Christian god; is your god one that I might know from another religion, or a more personal god? Just curious.
    thank you very much for showing curiousity. i feel happy when people show interest in my ideas. but i would like to see your reply to this post before telling about religion.

    - - - Updated - - -


  7. #67
    Senior Member Chrysanthea's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    373

    Default

    Ehh... I don't know. And I don't think I ever will plan on investigating any further into the possible existence of a supreme being called God. However, if I were forced to make an opinion... then I feel as if we are all the eyes of the supreme being. We are God, the Universe, the Force Behind the Creation of Everything... whatever the hell makes you most comfortable. I can't easily support this thought, but if I weren't allowed to abstain from having an opinion on the subject, that would be it. Maybe we are the idiotic Aedra who were tricked by Lorkhan into creating the Universe, and thus became devolved from our former Higher Self in order to create enough energy to bring about the Beginning of everything. I dunno.
    Last edited by Chrysanthea; 05-23-2015 at 10:14 AM. Reason: Inexcusable grammatical error! D:

  8. #68
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    I think its impossible to know whether something that created all of this and could be by some called god. Some say that god is this stuff all around us, all of the universe and that its somehow conscious. Then you could start arguing about what it means to be conscious(and its not that simple what many people first think). Maybe the creators are us, some say that time flows backwards and that we live in a black hole and that everything is connected, and that everything is possible because the universe is infinite, so it could be possible that we are creating this universe by becoming possible over time and simply observing it, thus altering the universe. There is just too many different views, definitions and the fact that you cant scientifically prove that god does not exist, neither is it possible(at least with current technology and i think any sort of technology we can ever create) to prove that god does exist. But naturally if you go to specifics about some certain religions and their texts, those things have(most of the time) been going around for hundreds of years from mouth to ear like a broken telephone before being written down and even then edited heavily by some people and after that translated multiple times, which means that the book can say all sorts of crap that can easily be at least intellectually be proven wrong. However i think there is really just one truth common to all religions, its what jesus tried to say, what buddha wanted to say, what some hindu gods try to say. That truth is that if you live from your heart and have pure intentions(have proper morals according to what ever book in case), then you are as son of god(or something alike) and get eternal bliss or get good in return in other ways from the world you treat good(karma).
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  9. #69
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2014
    MBTI
    N/A
    Socionics
    EIE Ni
    Posts
    3,380

    Default

    "If god created the universe, who created god?" - most children

    Undeniably Atheist: The Infinite Regress of Gods

  10. #70
    Most Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    1&5
    Posts
    124

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by INTP View Post
    I think its impossible to know whether something that created all of this and could be by some called god. Some say that god is this stuff all around us, all of the universe and that its somehow conscious. Then you could start arguing about what it means to be conscious(and its not that simple what many people first think). Maybe the creators are us, some say that time flows backwards and that we live in a black hole and that everything is connected, and that everything is possible because the universe is infinite, so it could be possible that we are creating this universe by becoming possible over time and simply observing it, thus altering the universe. There is just too many different views, definitions and the fact that you cant scientifically prove that god does not exist, neither is it possible(at least with current technology and i think any sort of technology we can ever create) to prove that god does exist. But naturally if you go to specifics about some certain religions and their texts, those things have(most of the time) been going around for hundreds of years from mouth to ear like a broken telephone before being written down and even then edited heavily by some people and after that translated multiple times, which means that the book can say all sorts of crap that can easily be at least intellectually be proven wrong. However i think there is really just one truth common to all religions, its what jesus tried to say, what buddha wanted to say, what some hindu gods try to say. That truth is that if you live from your heart and have pure intentions(have proper morals according to what ever book in case), then you are as son of god(or something alike) and get eternal bliss or get good in return in other ways from the world you treat good(karma).
    You are saying that god's existence cannot be proved with the technology we have. But actually my original explanation, it's summary and many other posts on this whole thread were just trying to prove god's existence. I don't think you need highly developed technology to prove god, rather, I think you only need an open and thoughtful mind to find the reasons for god's existence.

    You are also saying that there are different views of what god might be like, but you see, how can you know how god is like? In my explanation, I have tried to prove god's existence, because I think the signs of life clearly show his existence(explained before), but if you ask me questions like, how god looks, how he lives without food, where he is, how he controls everything, I would say, I don't know. Because the signs of life clearly show his existence(explained before), but the signs of life don't even give any hints about his appearance, thinking process, or anything like that. But I would still believe in him, because the signs of life do show his existence, but not how he works. Hope this helps you to understand that it's meaningless to think where god is or how god looks, because we cannot know where he is by looking at the signs of life, we can only know that he exists.

    Now, you say that if we live with good morals and have good intentions, we will have a good return. An intj Hindu friend of mine has no answers to my questions, so one day he told me the same thing, if he does something good, he will get paradise, my question is, what is the logical proof that this statement is correct, and he will get paradise if he does something good, and what is the proof that the so called good deed has been actually chosen by god, whose existence is logically seen in the signs of life?

Similar Threads

  1. Does The Thought of God Not Existing Terrify You?
    By serenesam in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 71
    Last Post: 04-01-2014, 02:46 PM
  2. Does strong government really offer security?
    By Elfboy in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 09-24-2011, 02:47 AM
  3. Titles For Movies You Wish REALLY EXISTED!
    By Gloriana in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 50
    Last Post: 08-11-2010, 05:40 AM
  4. Does time really exist
    By yenom in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 03-10-2009, 01:59 AM

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