Evidence Of Absence.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
26-08-2015, 05:33 PM
RE: Evidence Of Absence.
(26-08-2015 05:29 PM)DLJ Wrote:  
(24-08-2015 06:38 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  Wow, what a huge load of bullshit.

Eat up, how does that taste.
Perhaps that taste of shit mixed with emptiness filled with greed will leave your palate once you wake up out of your little selfish dreamlands with no consequences or significance.

Not negative towards you all.

Negative towards the sorry bastards that manipulate false data and claim truth.

They will be of the truly damned unless they revert to selfless honesty.

Apologists (as their self-descriptor indicates) are a very good example of those "sorry bastards that manipulate false [and also true] data and claim truth".

But it appears that we do agree on one thing ... that "selfless honesty" is a prerequisite of enlightenment.

In the game of life, I think I'm pretty close to that achievement (having slain the end-stage monsters at many levels) but I have still to face the big baddie at the end of the game.

I hope it won't be a disappointment.

Cool
Yeah I hate to break it to you but if you're not as close to without sin as humanly possible for you, then you're going to be disappointed.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-08-2015, 05:53 PM
RE: Evidence Of Absence.
(26-08-2015 05:33 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  Yeah I hate to break it to you but if you're not as close to without sin as humanly possible for you, then you're going to be disappointed.

Why don't you go troll somewhere else? Warnings of being punished after death are pointless until you can provide EVIDENCE that your beliefs have any basis at all in fact.

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
26-08-2015, 06:15 PM
RE: Evidence Of Absence.
(26-08-2015 05:33 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  Yeah I hate to break it to you but if you're not as close to without sin as humanly possible for you, then you're going to be disappointed.

I must caution you to be careful, Pops. The administrators may interpret your statements as coming a bit too close to proselytizing as you appear to be attempting to use a fear tactic to persuade others to subscribe to your beliefs.

Although you will have no chance with DLJ.

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? I am an atheist because it is the natural state of being we are all born into.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Free's post
26-08-2015, 06:21 PM
RE: Evidence Of Absence.
(26-08-2015 05:33 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  ...
Yeah I hate to break it to you but if you're not as close to without sin as humanly possible for you, then you're going to be disappointed.

You missed my point. It's quite the reverse.

I haven't played any computer games since the '90s but I remember always being disappointed by the last baddie and a sense of anti-climax when the game was over.

If maximising sin is the right approach to ensure a non-disappointing (appointing?) ending, then I guess I'll have to go for it. Although I don't see any evidence to support your claim.

Smile

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-08-2015, 07:29 PM
RE: Evidence Of Absence.
(26-08-2015 05:33 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  Yeah I hate to break it to you but if you're not as close to without sin as humanly possible for you, then you're going to be disappointed.

[Image: i-dont-always-get-scared-but-when-i-do-i...-a-lit.jpg]

“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
[+] 2 users Like Full Circle's post
26-08-2015, 08:21 PM (This post was last modified: 26-08-2015 08:24 PM by Matt Finney.)
RE: Evidence Of Absence.
(26-08-2015 05:18 PM)DLJ Wrote:  But, you'd agree that we can believe something without knowing it, yes?

For sure, every time I'm wrong about something this is reinforced. In these cases I thought I knew it, but it turns out I didn't know it. I still believed it, but didn't know it. One thing I do attempt in my life is to scrutinize all of my beliefs and be honest with myself about what I know, and what I don't know. I try to discard all beliefs if I don't know whether or not they are true. Any time I'm anything less that certain, I try to be very honest with people that in these cases I'm only giving my best guess. When giving my best guess, it's not really something I believe to be true, but rather something I think might be true, and it might even be something I would be willing to bet on, but not something I believe to be true.

(26-08-2015 05:18 PM)DLJ Wrote:  Is there an equivocation happening regarding conclusion vs. conclusive?

My OP is based on a pretty normal assessment report that I would do (for exorbitant consultancy fees) for a client who is asking for recommendations based on conclusions that are based on evidence (or lack of).

You're right, I need to clean up my wording.

I have no problem with conclusions, my issue is with concluding no aliens and no god.

My conclusion is that I have no reason to believe that a god exists, but I don't know enough about our universe to rule out the possibility. There's just a lot we don't know. If you and I took a container and removed everything from it, so that there is nothing inside, and then we watched a universe suddenly come into existence, we might agree that we have witnessed something supernatural. I'm not saying that I believe in anything supernatural, but when you think about our universe transitioning from nothing to something, I think it's fair to say that we just don't know enough to rule much of anything out. At least not yet.

Aliens, that's a no brainer. Pretty much every respected scientists who talks about aliens, hypothesizes that they exist. No one concludes that aliens don't exist.

(26-08-2015 05:18 PM)DLJ Wrote:  Even without "conclusive" "proof", I can draw "conclusions" based on what I have dug up (or failed to have dugged up).

The archaeological analogy, btw, is the reason that auditors refer to evidence as 'artefacts'.

So long as you don't come to the conclusion, "well, I didn't dig it up, therefore it doesn't exist," then we're in agreement.

I really have no issues with your OP. My only issue is with members concluding that aliens don't exist and that god doesn't exist. From my point of view, until we have evidence that shows that these things don't exist, I see it as a fallacy to conclude that they don't exist. To conclude that aliens don't exist, we would need to explore the entire cosmos. If god is reduced to the cause of the universe and the cause of the origin of life, then having a naturalistic explanation for those things could disprove the god that is defined in those terms.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-08-2015, 08:38 PM
RE: Evidence Of Absence.
(26-08-2015 08:21 PM)Matt Finney Wrote:  
(26-08-2015 05:18 PM)DLJ Wrote:  But, you'd agree that we can believe something without knowing it, yes?

For sure, every time I'm wrong about something this is reinforced. In these cases I thought I knew it, but it turns out I didn't know it. I still believed it, but didn't know it. One thing I do attempt in my life is to scrutinize all of my beliefs and be honest with myself about what I know, and what I don't know. I try to discard all beliefs if I don't know whether or not they are true. Any time I'm anything less that certain, I try to be very honest with people that in these cases I'm only giving my best guess. When giving my best guess, it's not really something I believe to be true, but rather something I think might be true, and it might even be something I would be willing to bet on, but not something I believe to be true.

(26-08-2015 05:18 PM)DLJ Wrote:  Is there an equivocation happening regarding conclusion vs. conclusive?

My OP is based on a pretty normal assessment report that I would do (for exorbitant consultancy fees) for a client who is asking for recommendations based on conclusions that are based on evidence (or lack of).

You're right, I need to clean up my wording.

I have no problem with conclusions, my issue is with concluding no aliens and no god.

My conclusion is that I have no reason to believe that a god exists, but I don't know enough about our universe to rule out the possibility. There's just a lot we don't know. If you and I took a container and removed everything from it, so that there is nothing inside, and then we watched a universe suddenly come into existence, we might agree that we have witnessed something supernatural. I'm not saying that I believe in anything supernatural, but when you think about our universe transitioning from nothing to something, I think it's fair to say that we just don't know enough to rule much of anything out. At least not yet.

Aliens, that's a no brainer. Pretty much every respected scientists who talks about aliens, hypothesizes that they exist. No one concludes that aliens don't exist.

(26-08-2015 05:18 PM)DLJ Wrote:  Even without "conclusive" "proof", I can draw "conclusions" based on what I have dug up (or failed to have dugged up).

The archaeological analogy, btw, is the reason that auditors refer to evidence as 'artefacts'.

So long as you don't come to the conclusion, "well, I didn't dig it up, therefore it doesn't exist," then we're in agreement.

I really have no issues with your OP. My only issue is with members concluding that aliens don't exist and that god doesn't exist. From my point of view, until we have evidence that shows that these things don't exist, I see it as a fallacy to conclude that they don't exist. To conclude that aliens don't exist, we would need to explore the entire cosmos. If god is reduced to the cause of the universe and the cause of the origin of life, then having a naturalistic explanation for those things could disprove the god that is defined in those terms.

One weighs the evidence for and against to come to a conclusion about anything, including aliens and gods. You may not agree with someone's conclusions, but that just means you weighed the evidence differently.

There is no direct evidence of aliens, but we know that intelligent life is possible and the universe is large. It is reasonable to conclude that aliens likely exist.

There is no direct evidence of gods, and we don't even have evidence of the possibility of gods. It is reasonable to conclude that gods likely do not exist.

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
[+] 3 users Like Chas's post
26-08-2015, 08:58 PM
RE: Evidence Of Absence.
(26-08-2015 08:38 PM)Chas Wrote:  There is no direct evidence of aliens, but we know that intelligent life is possible and the universe is large. It is reasonable to conclude that aliens likely exist.

There is no direct evidence of gods, and we don't even have evidence of the possibility of gods. It is reasonable to conclude that gods likely do not exist.

I would go with a weaker position and say that I don't know whether or not aliens exist, but I would guess that they do, and likewise, I don't know whether or not god exists, but I would guess that he doesn't.

I don't really see what the word "likely" adds if we know nothing about the frequency of occurrence. We could guess that aliens are likely, but if you're guessing, why not just guess that they exist? I don't see any meaningful difference. I also realize that this is a novel idea and that most people don't talk this way, but hell most people believe that god exists, so maybe most people really don't know what the hell they're talking about. Undecided
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-08-2015, 09:07 PM (This post was last modified: 26-08-2015 09:28 PM by Free.)
RE: Evidence Of Absence.
(26-08-2015 08:21 PM)Matt Finney Wrote:  I have no problem with conclusions, my issue is with concluding no aliens and no god.

This makes me wonder- by using your perspective- if you or anyone like you could ever come to a conclusion about anything.

Whenever you look for something, and see that it is not located in the place you looked, do you conclude that it isn't there? Of course you do. And if 100 people looked in the same place, and all 100 people came to the same conclusion that the object being sought wasn't there, is it not reasonable to accept it as conclusive that the object isn't there?

You see, when I look at the question of the existence of God, I view it in exactly the same perspective that we would view a missing object. I have absolutely no good reason to view the proposed possible existence of God in any way any different than I would view the supposed existence of any object being sought.

But also, there have been millions of attempts by people to find this object known as God, and yet no one has ever seen a sign of this object. Not once, in all of human history. That's a 100% failure rate, 100% of the time, millions of times.

I feel that, as atheists and agnostics, there comes a time where we must draw the line and make an honest conclusion about this object referred to as God. This missing object of God is absolutely no different than any other missing object we seek. If it isn't there, then it's quite simply not there.

It isn't even a question about philosophy, nor is it a question about beliefs of any kind. It's simply a question of reality, and accepting that particular reality.

The object of God does not exist any more than any other object that has been proposed as existing, but has never been evidenced or seen. God is just a construct, an invention borne from the psyche of ancient man in an effort to rationalize the origin and order of our existence. It was born from the mind of man, and never materialized in existence. In short, the possibility of the existence of God is all in your mind, and finds no existence in reality.

Holding on to any beliefs regarding this object of God is child like, and unbecoming to the maturation and evolution of the human experience which undoubtedly will progress far beyond a system of beliefs and venture into the next great age of intellectual enlightenment.

God simply does not exist, and none of us needs to ponder possibilities, philosophies or beliefs as either a hindrance, or a justification, towards accepting that conclusion and be 100% certain of it.

Hence, arriving at the conclusion of 100% certainty that God does not exist is an easy task for a rational mind, for the truth is that it isn't even a question about atheism, agnosticism, or theism.

It's a question of reality.

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? I am an atheist because it is the natural state of being we are all born into.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Free's post
26-08-2015, 10:46 PM
RE: Evidence Of Absence.
(26-08-2015 08:58 PM)Matt Finney Wrote:  
(26-08-2015 08:38 PM)Chas Wrote:  There is no direct evidence of aliens, but we know that intelligent life is possible and the universe is large. It is reasonable to conclude that aliens likely exist.

There is no direct evidence of gods, and we don't even have evidence of the possibility of gods. It is reasonable to conclude that gods likely do not exist.

I would go with a weaker position and say that I don't know whether or not aliens exist, but I would guess that they do, and likewise, I don't know whether or not god exists, but I would guess that he doesn't.

I don't really see what the word "likely" adds if we know nothing about the frequency of occurrence. We could guess that aliens are likely, but if you're guessing, why not just guess that they exist? I don't see any meaningful difference. I also realize that this is a novel idea and that most people don't talk this way, but hell most people believe that god exists, so maybe most people really don't know what the hell they're talking about. Undecided

'Likely' adds the point that the probability is more than 0.5, that is more probable than not. It is not just a guess, it is a result of rational consideration of the evidence and the possibilities.

Most people have a rather poor grasp of probability.

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
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: