Assumptions about a creator
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
11-03-2017, 12:49 PM
RE: Assumptions about a creator
(11-03-2017 09:42 AM)Alla Wrote:  
Rachel Wrote:Can you give an objective observation confirming that this has ever happened? Can you give even a single example of a natural phenomenon which required a god to function?
I think I can. If I am wrong, please correct me.

I will take a desert in Utah, for example. Peach tree or a rose bush can not grow in Utah's desert naturally . But someone(creators) have some goals. They need peach trees in this desert, they need rose bushes, corn, wheat and many other things in this desert. They(creators) intervene and only then there is something that would never happen naturally in the desert.

This assumes we have a perfect understanding of what can and can't happen "naturally".

So if something not in-keeping with our models happens, then we simply have an unexplained event. It is jumping to extreme conclusions to think a God did it.

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
11-03-2017, 01:14 PM (This post was last modified: 11-03-2017 01:20 PM by Alla.)
RE: Assumptions about a creator
I agree with you, Robvalue.
When there is something that we can not explain there is no reason to conclude that some kind of creator is behind this.
There is no reason to conclude that creator created our reality.
I only tried to show with my example that it is not totally crazy thing to assume that there is a creator who intervenes in some way in our reality.
It is also not crazy thing to assume that there is no any creator.
But something or somebody may convince me that there is creator and this is irrelevant to you.


P.S. What I find very unreasonable and crazy is when someone tells me:" if you don't believe what I believe you will be tortured by my creator for whole eternity".
I say back to this person :"whatever"

English is my second language.
I AM DEPLORABLE AND IRREDEEMABLE
SHE PERSISTED WE RESISTED
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-03-2017, 04:05 PM
RE: Assumptions about a creator
(11-03-2017 11:10 AM)socialistview Wrote:  
(11-03-2017 02:21 AM)Reltzik Wrote:  Not without falsification criteria and reserved judgement, it isn't. Also, some parsimony would be nice.

How do you falsify a hypothesis.
A scientifically valid hypothesis is falsifiable, which means that you can describe how you would go about DIS-proving it. If there is no way to disprove a thing, there is no way to prove it either. In science, something is considered proven if (1) there is a clear way to disprove it and (2) numerous people following (1) have been unable to disprove it.

Bonus points are awarded if you can come up with MULTIPLE ways to dis-prove your hypothesis and STILL no one can disprove it.

This is the fundamental problem with religious faith. Articles of religious faith are simply asserted without evidence (someone says the thing is true without evidencing the claim -- perhaps claiming in addition that god told them it's true or a holy book says it's true or tradition or church fathers said it was true). When a religious belief has at its core an invisible deity, other invisible beings (angels, demons), invisible realms (heaven, hell) then there is inherently no way to disprove those things, so they do not represent scientifically valid hypotheses, even if they are a hypothesis at all (and not simply an unsubstantiatable assertion).

One can come up with non-religious assertions that are not falsifiable, too. For example suppose I claim, socialistview, I have an invisible third eye in the middle of my forehead, between my visible eyes. Not only is it invisible, you can't feel it or detect it in any way. You are unable to detect it because you have to have faith to detect it. You simply don't believe. But it exists.

How would you falsify that? You can't. It's just bald assertion. There are two principles here: (1) you can't disprove my third eye, therefore you can't prove it. (2) since I claim I have a third eye without evidence, you are justified in dismissing my claim out of hand.

This is why religious faith claims are dismissed out of hand. They are presented without evidence, so are rejected without consideration. Besides, they cannot be (dis)proven. They are, ultimately, just something that you claim to be so, or that others claim to be so and you believe them. It has no more standing than if I claim I have a third eye or a pet leprechaun or can fly by flapping my arms if you don't watch me while I do it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like mordant's post
11-03-2017, 05:21 PM
RE: Assumptions about a creator
Well what about if you say you can do something with it like bring back heaven with your third eye.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-03-2017, 01:44 AM
RE: Assumptions about a creator
(11-03-2017 01:14 PM)Alla Wrote:  I agree with you, Robvalue.
When there is something that we can not explain there is no reason to conclude that some kind of creator is behind this.
There is no reason to conclude that creator created our reality.
I only tried to show with my example that it is not totally crazy thing to assume that there is a creator who intervenes in some way in our reality.
It is also not crazy thing to assume that there is no any creator.
But something or somebody may convince me that there is creator and this is irrelevant to you.


P.S. What I find very unreasonable and crazy is when someone tells me:" if you don't believe what I believe you will be tortured by my creator for whole eternity".
I say back to this person :"whatever"

Sure, yeah Smile

But Rachel asked for a case where it has happened, or that we can conclude God must have been involved. I would say that there are no such cases.

I wouldn't say it's crazy to assume a creator intervenes, but I'd say it's totally unfounded and unnecessary.

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
[+] 1 user Likes Robvalue's post
12-03-2017, 06:28 AM
RE: Assumptions about a creator
(11-03-2017 05:21 PM)socialistview Wrote:  Well what about if you say you can do something with it like bring back heaven with your third eye.

That would be an unfalsifiable claim which would be dismissed.

An example of a falsifiable claim would be Harold Camping's claim that Jesus would return on May 21st 2011, along with the rapture and millions of people dying. That was a specific enough claim that could be proven wrong, nothing happened on May 21st 2011, except Camping and his followers had to face reality.

[Image: Point_over_your_head.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
[+] 3 users Like TheInquisition's post
12-03-2017, 09:02 AM
RE: Assumptions about a creator
Ok jesus is suppose to come back.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-03-2017, 09:16 AM
RE: Assumptions about a creator
(12-03-2017 09:02 AM)socialistview Wrote:  Ok jesus is suppose to come back.

Except for the tiny problem that that doesn't fit in with the theology of Jesus' Jewish religion. -Or was Jesus wrong about Judaism?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-03-2017, 09:19 AM
RE: Assumptions about a creator
Jesus was supposed to return and end the world within the lifetime of the people he was talking to. He made a falsifiable claim. He failed to perform. He didn't even manage to be seen by anyone in the original account after being crucified, they had to add a forged ending.

Of course, some people twist their brain in knots trying to convince themselves Jesus didn't say what he said (or even what was reported that he said) but in fact said something totally different, that you have to have a special code to understand or something.

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
[+] 4 users Like Robvalue's post
12-03-2017, 10:05 AM
RE: Assumptions about a creator
No jesus stayed on earth for forty days after the crucifixion and saw 500 of his followers. The bible doesn't say in yheir life time.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: