A Pragmatist's Guide to God
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
15-04-2017, 02:54 AM
RE: A Pragmatist's Guide to God
Our brains will end up being pragmatic anyway, if push comes to shove. If we find ourselves in a situation so awful we can literally no longer cope, we may experience a psychotic break, so that we are put into an alternate version of reality.

Trying to induce this kind of effect is extremely foolish, in my opinion. It's not pragmatic. It sounds to me like the OP is finding ways of rationalizing a belief that is already there.

I have a website here which discusses the issues and terminology surrounding religion and atheism. It's hopefully user friendly to all.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Robvalue's post
15-04-2017, 04:32 AM
RE: A Pragmatist's Guide to God
(14-04-2017 06:44 PM)Stephen Pedersen Wrote:  I'm sorry you have a dislike for William James. The crux of pragmatism is that it tries to weave its way through the two philosophical corridors of ultra rationalism and ultra empiricism so that people can find some common ground that isn't so radical.

We have so much more information than James had that what was pragmatic for him isn't pragmatic anymore.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Thoreauvian's post
15-04-2017, 05:06 AM
RE: A Pragmatist's Guide to God
(14-04-2017 09:08 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(14-04-2017 08:44 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  I don't think it's all that. I think he found his Gwynnies in this other dude's philosophy and he's working on the wording of it. Of course, I could be wrong. That's a thing that happens. Big Grin

Now he's just being fucking sappy though. I hate sappy.

He's a condescending sentimentalist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like julep's post
15-04-2017, 05:30 AM
RE: A Pragmatist's Guide to God
(14-04-2017 08:07 PM)Stephen Pedersen Wrote:  
(14-04-2017 07:56 PM)Chas Wrote:  That had precisely nothing to do with her comments. Facepalm
Hello good sir,
It answers what I intended by my original post. But I will further extrapolate. As I've gotten older I've gained a since of wonder and awe about the cosmos. I'm not an atheist or theist. I'm an optimistic agnostic. I mentioned Paley's watch argument before. That is just one argument that gives evidence of a designer.

No, it does not. It is a shallow plea to incredulity.
And arguments are not evidence, they are just arguments.

Quote:As you know, there are many.

But no strong or convincing ones.

Quote:However, I don't think it's conclusive.

Not even close.

Quote:Another poster mentioned how design doesn't need a designer. How design can be functionally created and that argument holds merit also.

Yes, it's called the theory of evolution and it has compelling evidence to support it.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Chas's post
15-04-2017, 05:58 AM
RE: A Pragmatist's Guide to God
(14-04-2017 08:07 PM)Stephen Pedersen Wrote:  Another poster mentioned how design doesn't need a designer. How design can be functionally created and that argument holds merit also.

Yes, natural evolution would be what that is called. Why would one think that a designer is behind it? Evolution proves itself to be directionless, incredibly stupid in many instances and incapable of any intelligence beyond simple and mindless adaptation to environment.

It generates too many mistakes to consider any force driving it "intelligent" in any meaningful sense.

What a "wonderfully designed" influenza virus - to kill you with!

[Image: 4001181-influenza-virus.jpg]

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 7 users Like TheInquisition's post
15-04-2017, 06:28 AM
RE: A Pragmatist's Guide to God
(14-04-2017 07:16 PM)Stephen Pedersen Wrote:  However, many yearn for spirituality, in something that's greater than themselves.

That is not evidence that what they may yearn for actually exists, especially in the specific form that they imagine it.

Quote:Now what I do find interesting is that you guys who are hostile should look in the mirror and ask what your doing with your finite amount of existence staring at a computer screen replying to yours truly.

Making this one tiny corner of the world cleaner by opposing irrational ideas.

Quote:The religious ceremony is meant to make one pious, a trait that is becoming rare these days.

What you call pious, I call pompous. Until you demonstrate that your piety is directed at something real and not just self-aggrandizing bloviating I have no use for it. Yes, you will dismiss that as me being hostile but sometimes hostility is the right response. I'm tired of "pious" people telling me how I should think.

(14-04-2017 08:07 PM)Stephen Pedersen Wrote:  But I will further extrapolate. As I've gotten older I've gained a since of wonder and awe about the cosmos. I'm not an atheist or theist. I'm an optimistic agnostic.

You seem to be using "atheist" to mean "believes that no god exists" and that's not how many here use it. The definition I use is more "does not accept the claim that a god exists". I count myself as an agnostic atheist. I see no reason to believe in any god but I can not prove that nothing deserving that label exists.

I also have a sense of awe and wonder about the cosmos. I'm amazed at what we've learned about how it developed and hope we find out more about how it came to be and what will happen in the future. I just don't see that pretending to have an answer to those questions helps or that there's any reason to personify the forces that may be at work.

Quote:I mentioned Paley's watch argument before. That is just one argument that gives evidence of a designer.

On the surface, it refutes itself because it identifies a designed object by comparing it to the undesigned objects surrounding it. On a deeper level it fails because it neglects the operational of natural selection and physical laws on objects. It assumes its own conclusion at the outset and is circular because of that.

Quote:As you know, there are many.

I have yet to hear one that is not fallacious in one way or another.

Quote: However, I don't think it's conclusive. Another poster mentioned how design doesn't need a designer. How design can be functionally created and that argument holds merit also.

Yes, it does hold merit. We can show apparent order arising from seemingly random systems. We don't need "faith" to understand things that can be demonstrated.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 9 users Like unfogged's post
15-04-2017, 06:46 AM
RE: A Pragmatist's Guide to God
(15-04-2017 05:58 AM)TheInquisition Wrote:  
(14-04-2017 08:07 PM)Stephen Pedersen Wrote:  Another poster mentioned how design doesn't need a designer. How design can be functionally created and that argument holds merit also.

Yes, natural evolution would be what that is called. Why would one think that a designer is behind it? Evolution proves itself to be directionless, incredibly stupid in many instances and incapable of any intelligence beyond simple and mindless adaptation to environment.

It generates too many mistakes to consider any force driving it "intelligent" in any meaningful sense.

What a "wonderfully designed" influenza virus - to kill you with!

[Image: 4001181-influenza-virus.jpg]

It's so obvious that that is intelligently designed. Yes

[Image: 1.jpg?i10c=img.resize(height:160)]

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Chas's post
15-04-2017, 06:52 AM
RE: A Pragmatist's Guide to God
(15-04-2017 06:28 AM)unfogged Wrote:  
(14-04-2017 07:16 PM)Stephen Pedersen Wrote:  Now what I do find interesting is that you guys who are hostile should look in the mirror and ask what your doing with your finite amount of existence staring at a computer screen replying to yours truly.

Making this one tiny corner of the world cleaner by opposing irrational ideas.

If I may I’d like to add that some of us, like me, come here to spend some time with my virtual friends and acquaintances. But since the door to the frat/sorority house is always open now and then a visitor shows up to the party with some ideas that don’t stand up to scrutiny. We are always happy to point that out.


(15-04-2017 06:28 AM)unfogged Wrote:  
(14-04-2017 07:16 PM)Stephen Pedersen Wrote:  I mentioned Paley's watch argument before. That is just one argument that gives evidence of a designer.

On the surface, it refutes itself because it identifies a designed object by comparing it to the undesigned objects surrounding it. On a deeper level it fails because it neglects the operational of natural selection and physical laws on objects. It assumes its own conclusion at the outset and is circular because of that.

Yes. Paley’s watch argument fails because it compares a biologically evolved living organism to an inanimate object.





In case you didn’t figure it out the crab represents Paley’s watch.

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Full Circle's post
15-04-2017, 06:54 AM
RE: A Pragmatist's Guide to God
The thing is, human beings are produced by nature.
Anything we make is still ultimately a product of nature.

Insanity - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Rahn127's post
15-04-2017, 07:31 AM (This post was last modified: 15-04-2017 07:45 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: A Pragmatist's Guide to God
*Paley's Watch* is not an argument either for optimism or agnosticism.




Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: