Poll: Atheists only: Do you believe no god(s) exists?
Yes, I believe no god(s) exists
No, I do not believe no god(s) exists
[Show Results]
 
For Atheists: Do you believe no god(s) exist?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-02-2017, 05:09 AM
RE: For Atheists: Do you believe no god(s) exist?
(05-02-2017 10:21 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(05-02-2017 09:54 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  The design part was a philosophical argument inferred from the only known alternative to randomness in a closed system that I can think of. It's not a law, just an observation.
If it's not always the case I am more than willing to be corrected.

I assume that if a closed system shows clear signs that it's current state is less likely to be random then it can only be the product of a conscious causation.

As per usual, you are not even wrong. Your understanding of entropy, randomness, and even basic philosophy is so completely, bafflingly off the mark that the only way for you to possibly make any progress whatsoever is to discard literally everything that you think you know and start again, because everything that you think you know about it is not just wrong, but almost completely unrelated to the actual concepts.

"Entropy" does not mean "disorder". The two concepts are only tangentially related; a system at maximum entropy is actually at equilibrium, which most people would consider to be pretty well ordered.

"Random" does not mean "total chaos". Stochastic systems are fundamentally random, but within constraints determined by their previous states. Assuming that true randomness does exist within the universe, it would be stochastic.

A closed system that is influenced by a designer is not a closed system.

You posit a complete false dichotomy between "everything is truly random" and "there is a designer" with no backing, while discarding the possibility of stochastic or deterministic systems outright. This is not a philosophical argument. It is not even an observation. It is, flatly and without any sort of possible defense, a fallacy.

(05-02-2017 09:54 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  I'm actually not quite certain what is meant by "laws break down" during inflation. I assumed it means the current laws if Physics don't exist at that period in time.
If I'm wrong or anyone knows better please let me know.

You are wrong.

This has been explained to you previously. The laws of physics did not cease to exist before this point in time. The conditions were simply so extreme that the models we use to represent those laws under normal circumstances became unworkable.

And even if they hadn't existed, you would not be able to use this as a basis to argue even for the possibility of fine tuning, because you still would not have established that those laws could have been any different.

Pay attention.
What you claim is that randomness and design are not mutually exclusive.
If this is the case, then it's impossible for me to argue any further.

It would be impossible to assume that any designer could be the cause of a current state of the Universe.

The problem is:
If the words "God is real" were found etched across a galaxy you could still deny it as being designed on the grounds that we have no information regarding it's cause & randomness being not mutually exclusive to design.

I'm simply saying whatever criteria you would use to justify a designer in the above scenario should also be applied to the Laws of Physics after inflation.

It's more of a philosophical argument based on the likelihood of design.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2017, 05:28 AM (This post was last modified: 06-02-2017 05:34 AM by SYZ.)
RE: For Atheists: Do you believe no god(s) exist?
(05-02-2017 05:59 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  In my last reply I stated that it is more likely that the universe had a designer, but we cannot prove that it is fine tuned for anything.

An absolute absurdity. There is no empirical evidence that would support your bizarre claim. Ergo—there can be no "fine tuning".

Quote:If the words "God is real" were found etched across a galaxy you could still deny it as being designed on the grounds that we have no information regarding it's cause & randomness being not mutually exclusive to design.

Again; this is pure nonsense. You're either trolling, or have no idea as to how to mount a valid argument. If it suddenly started raining pasta sauce, presumably you'd consider that to be evidence of the FSM? It's just as fucking stupid as your "god is real" etching.

I'm a creationist... I believe that man created God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like SYZ's post
06-02-2017, 05:37 AM (This post was last modified: 06-02-2017 05:56 AM by Agnostic Shane.)
RE: For Atheists: Do you believe no god(s) exist?
(06-02-2017 05:28 AM)SYZ Wrote:  
(05-02-2017 05:59 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  In my last reply I stated that it is more likely that the universe had a designer, but we cannot prove that it is fine tuned for anything.

An absolute absurdity. There is no empirical evidence that would support your bizarre claim. Ergo—there can be no "fine tuning".

Quote:If the words "God is real" were found etched across a galaxy you could still deny it as being designed on the grounds that we have no information regarding it's cause & randomness being not mutually exclusive to design.

Again; this is pure nonsense. You're either trolling, or have no idea as to how to mount a valid argument. If it suddenly started raining pasta sauce, presumably you'd consider that to be evidence of the FSM? It's just as fucking stupid as your "god is real" etching.
I never said it's empirical evidence.
I said it's statistical evidence.
I also said I am arguing on the likelihood of a designer & not fine tuning.
I'm not the one that brought it up,but I find myself referring to the argument in my replies more often than I want to because every time I speak about a designer someone replies with am argument against fine tuning.
Everything I said has been in defense of a likely designer.
Why would I argue on behalf of fine tuning for life?
It's a purely theistic argument. I'm Agnostic.
I'm dealing with philosophical arguments using scientific data

You are comparing the word Designer to God & FSM.
How's that for absurdity?
We have evidence & know that designers exist.
Why would you do that?
I'll be sure to bring this up each time you reply until I get a straight answer.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2017, 06:18 AM
RE: For Atheists: Do you believe no god(s) exist?
The designers that exist, require a natural environment to exist before they do.

Nature creates the chemicals of life within stars.
Those chemicals of life get mixed together on a planet and self replicate.
Evolution takes over to create a vast diversity of life.
Intelligent life is spawned
From that natural process, design from an intelligence comes forth.

Nature cannot have a designer.
A baby cannot create it's mother.

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
06-02-2017, 06:37 AM
RE: For Atheists: Do you believe no god(s) exist?
(06-02-2017 06:18 AM)Rahn127 Wrote:  The designers that exist, require a natural environment to exist before they do.

Nature creates the chemicals of life within stars.
Those chemicals of life get mixed together on a planet and self replicate.
Evolution takes over to create a vast diversity of life.
Intelligent life is spawned
From that natural process, design from an intelligence comes forth.

Nature cannot have a designer.
A baby cannot create it's mother.
I think the words "cannot have" based on a lack of evidence is too strong a word.
Tomasia has been explaining this quite some time now.
He best summed it up with:
"Absence of Evidence is not evidence of Absence"

Your argument presupposes the norm must be the truth, therefore anything outside the norm cannot possibly be true regardless of the evidence.

Your baby/mother analogy does not relate to evidence of design within a natural system.

Take for instance anti matter vs matter.
The current laws of physics dictate that anti matter should have cancelled matter out but it didn't.
It was on an episode of scishow.
This is statistical evidence of unlikely randomly caused events based on current scientific models.
Based on the unknown, it's random.
Based on scientific prediction, a cause is missing.

I'm just the guy saying this cause seems more like a designer is at work than randomness if you review what we know about the laws of physics & the philosophy of Design.
It's not based on empirical evidence
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2017, 07:11 AM
RE: For Atheists: Do you believe no god(s) exist?
(05-02-2017 08:07 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  There are no facts & no evidence for inflation so this is not an argument about Evidence of a Designer.

(05-02-2017 10:53 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Didn't you say you weren't talking about a designer ?

Quote:No.
I was always talking about a designer.
I said I wasn't talking about fine tuning for life.

Alrighty then.
Facepalm

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
06-02-2017, 08:01 AM
RE: For Atheists: Do you believe no god(s) exist?
(05-02-2017 12:36 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  Truth is truth regardless of who you are. The laws of logic and rationality, what is real and not real, and so on do not change depending on who is looking at them.
It does not.

This seems to be a very common atheists delusion, this sort of tendency to imagine that they themselves don’t exist, presenting a projection of some objectively removed being which they clearly are not. What any person holds as true, is a matter of personal interpretation. What you do is interpret some rule of logic and rationality, and then bend it to be applicable to your statements, in these rather hackneyed sort of ways.

Such as: “”No god exists" is the null hypothesis””, which doesn’t follow, and no one other than some band of dopey atheists is likely to even agree with you. It’s the equivalent of stating the position that we’re not a cosmic puddle is the null hypothesis, and declaring that position as true by fiat.

Since you value the idea of believing your belief fall into the laws of logic and rationality, what will happen if you were delusional, you would just contort your delusions to appear as if they fit into them. But you, yourself will likely lack the sort of self-awareness to recognize how poorly warranted they are.

Quote:I would go into a lengthy ramble about how a lack of evidence where evidence would be necessary can be evidence in and of itself - a lack of elephants in my living room is evidence that there are no elephants in my living room - but it really doesn't matter.

Right, the lack of evidence that we’re a cosmic puddle, that we’re just a some cosmic fluke, is evidence that this position is false. Judging by the number of atheists who lack a belief, who lack evidence in support of their position, the evidence for such a view is scarce and non-existent.

Quote:Immaterial things are still detectable. Gravity, electromagnetism, and so on.

Except none of these are immaterial, physical forces, physical interactions, are all material Hence the reason gravity and electromagnetism, don’t falsely materialism or physicalism.

Quote:Presumably, you meant to say that most theists believe God is undetectable, which would place them under the garage dragon category. But it doesn't actually matter, because in either case, we can still be certain that it does not exist.

No I didn’t mean to say that. God is perceived through revelation. Sort of like an author being revealed through his work. In philosophical terms God would be a condition of possibility here. If teleology is true, if human life is intentional etc… we can conclude that God exists, without needing God’s ectoplasm, or some equivalent of big foot’s DNA sample.

If one concludes that life has intrinsic meaning, and value, that objective morality exists, etc.. a God/Creator belief can follow just by order of these beliefs, as a condition of possibility.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2017, 08:25 AM
RE: For Atheists: Do you believe no god(s) exist?
(06-02-2017 08:01 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  This seems to be a very common atheists delusion, this sort of tendency to imagine that they themselves don’t exist, presenting a projection of some objectively removed being which they clearly are not. What any person holds as true, is a matter of personal interpretation. What you do is interpret some rule of logic and rationality, and then bend it to be applicable to your statements, in these rather hackneyed sort of ways.

Facepalm
WTAF ?

What the fuck would we do without our daily insult / sermon /generalization from the idiot who can't even write a proper sentence in the English language.

Jebus must be VERY proud of you Tomato.

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
06-02-2017, 09:24 AM
RE: For Atheists: Do you believe no god(s) exist?
(06-02-2017 08:25 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Jebus must be VERY proud of you Tomato.

Jesus love him long time

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
06-02-2017, 09:33 AM
RE: For Atheists: Do you believe no god(s) exist?
(06-02-2017 07:11 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(05-02-2017 08:07 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  There are no facts & no evidence for inflation so this is not an argument about Evidence of a Designer.

(05-02-2017 10:53 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Didn't you say you weren't talking about a designer ?

Quote:No.
I was always talking about a designer.
I said I wasn't talking about fine tuning for life.

Alrighty then.
Facepalm
Thanks for the correction.
I should have said:
"argument about Empirical Evidence of a Designer"
I'm only giving statistical evidence using only the laws of physics.

I'm only human you know.
Thanks anyway.Bowing

I need to pay particular attention to how I word things.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: