How well can Atheistic Humanists defend their Worldview/Origins ?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
24-11-2014, 07:35 PM
RE: How well can Atheistic Humanists defend their Worldview/Origins ?
I've thought about replying to all this mess, but I'm just to tired to teach tonight.

Dude go back in time and pay more attention in school.

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
24-11-2014, 09:54 PM (This post was last modified: 24-11-2014 10:00 PM by Bear100.)
RE: How well can Atheistic Humanists defend their Worldview/Origins ?
Intelligent Design in a nutshell is, "if we don't understand it, god did it."

Essentially, it's the lazy way out. It's OK not to understand everything, as science doesn't claim to do so, but using god as a convenient explanation for stuff too complex for us at the momement, is a distraction to finding out the real answers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Bear100's post
24-11-2014, 10:06 PM
RE: How well can Atheistic Humanists defend their Worldview/Origins ?
There should be a Gish gallop rule for theist posts. Where a moderator can modify a post to hide everything after the first fallacy or completely ignorant statement. This way we could limit our responses to one thing at a time. It gets tiring with dealing with gallops.

Some of you should really dial back the antagonism. If the above rule was in effect we could discourse with Humble about his first sentence. Four words into the OP and Humble steps in it. Right in it. Right in the middle of it.
It oozed between his toes.

Atheistic worldview?????
No such thing. Doesn't exist. Maybe Humble would like to know why?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like RogueWarrior's post
24-11-2014, 10:58 PM
RE: How well can Atheistic Humanists defend their Worldview/Origins ?
What needs to be defended? There is evidence, and I follow the evidence. The evidence certainly doesn't support the conclusion that any god did it. If and when the evidence changes, my conclusions will too. But the history of science is a long list of us discovering that 'not magic' is how the world really works, and I see no reasons for this trend to not continue. Drinking Beverage

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes EvolutionKills's post
24-11-2014, 11:55 PM
RE: How well can Atheistic Humanists defend their Worldview/Origins ?
I can use materialism to calculate the number of sheets of drywall I need to finish a room, ease the pain in a sore joint, or make a nice cup of tea.

I can't use a hypothetical deity for bugger-all.

Materialism > Spirituality. 'Nuff said.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Astreja's post
25-11-2014, 01:00 AM
RE: How well can Atheistic Humanists defend their Worldview/Origins ?
(24-11-2014 11:55 PM)Astreja Wrote:  I can't use a hypothetical deity for bugger-all.

Before I got married
I wore a black shawl
But now I am married
I wear bugger all...





I think of this song every time someone says the phrase "bugger all" Tongue

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
25-11-2014, 09:44 AM
RE: How well can Atheistic Humanists defend their Worldview/Origins ?
(24-11-2014 10:19 AM)Im a humble little Theist Wrote:  In order -----------

1. Information are deliberate messages that consist of specified complexity as in the DNA molecule and a blueprint of instructions on how to reach a final goal in a system via an assembly process. Where did this willful purposed Information come from in the very first life form ? Can you demonstrate an example of information coming from something other than intelligent input ? Do so. If you came down the stairs in the morning and there on the table were the words : 'Have a nice day honey' using alphabet cereal, would you assume the cat knocked the box of cereal over ? Do you believe it is a possibility given an infinite number of tries from the Cat ?
2. The theorized Big Bang is a finite event, but where did the Energy come from for it to bang ?
3. Big Bang cosmology has all the matter wound up tightly in less space than a pinhead so where did the matter come from along with the energy to expand both ? What was the non intelligent First Cause which willed this to occur ?
4. Explain how (animate) life came from dead non-DNA matter consisting of atoms ? Cogently explain the actual process that a rock can birth a living life form of any kind regardless of size .

1.,2,3. The Laws of logic, physics, chemistry,math came with the Big Bang and govern the sustenance of our Universe/Solar System/Earth -- man didn't bring them into being because Man wasn't at the beginning. How did these unchanging Laws come about from raw materials and raw chemicals without a shred of intelligent direction ?
4. If morality is a varying manmade construct , then it is not objective ; this means that there is no absolute standard for judging what is truly right from wrong and is thus just a persons opinion or a Groups opinion. If there are no absolute moral laws then why do Moral Relativists get very upset when Someone violates them morally for it might be the opinion of the Violator his action was not incorrect to do toward you ------ yet the Victim vehemently objects to being morally violated and feels absolute about it . If there are no absolute moral laws, then why do we hide a wrong we do so no one will find out if it isn't really objectively wrong ?
5. If the brain is nothing but the compilations of atoms then explain how non-atom Thoughts arise from these atoms --- detail the precise process please. Where in the brain can a thought be found ? Where is the Mind located in the Human Anatomy ?

What does any of this have to do with atheism?

Pfffft! Tongue

[Image: dobie.png]Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-11-2014, 10:31 AM
RE: How well can Atheistic Humanists defend their Worldview/Origins ?
This guys not triple T?

living word
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-11-2014, 10:40 AM
RE: How well can Atheistic Humanists defend their Worldview/Origins ?
(25-11-2014 10:31 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  This guys not triple T?

Nah. TTT could at least type properly.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
25-11-2014, 11:36 AM (This post was last modified: 25-11-2014 11:42 AM by Im a humble little Theist.)
RE: How well can Atheistic Humanists defend their Worldview/Origins ?
(24-11-2014 10:45 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(24-11-2014 10:19 AM)Im a humble little Theist Wrote:  In order -----------

1. Information are deliberate messages that consist of specified complexity

No, that is not what information is. Information is any kind of event that affects the state of a dynamic system.

Quote: as in the DNA molecule and a blueprint of instructions on how to reach a final goal in a system via am assembly process.

No, DNA is not a blueprint for an assembly process and does not contain any goal, nor information in the sense you misunderstand it to be.

Fetal development is growth with continuous morphological change as the chemical environment surrounding the fetus changes.

Quote:Where did this willful purposed Information come from in the very first life form ? Can you demonstrate an example of information coming from something other than intelligent input ? Do so. If you came down the stairs in the morning and there on the table were the words : 'Have a nice day honey' using alphabet cereal, would you assume the cat knocked the box of cereal over ? Do you believe it is a possibility given an infinite number of tries from the Cat ?

Chemistry is the answer, not your misunderstanding of information.

Quote:2. The theorized Big Bang is a finite event, but where did the Energy come from for it to bang ?

We don't know for certain.

Quote:3. Big Bang cosmology has all the matter wound up tightly in less space than a pinhead

No, it doesn't. It is all energy, no matter. Matter does not exist until the universe has expanded and cooled sufficiently.

Quote:so where did the matter come from along with the energy to expand both ? What was the non intelligent First Cause which willed this to occur ?

We don't know for certain.

Quote:4. Explain how (animate) life came from dead non-DNA matter consisting of atoms ? Cogently explain the actual process that a rock can birth a living life form of any kind regardless of size .

We don't know for certain, but there are several good hypotheses for abiogenesis, none of which involve rocks giving birth to living life forms.

Quote:1.,2,3. The Laws of logic, physics, chemistry,math came with the Big Bang and govern the sustenance of our Universe/Solar System/Earth -- man didn't bring them into being because Man wasn't at the beginning. How did these unchanging Laws come about from raw materials and raw chemicals without a shred of intelligent direction ?

Physical laws are human descriptions of human observations of the natural world.

Quote:4. If morality is a varying manmade construct , then it is not objective ;

Correct, there is no objective morality.

Quote:this means that there is no absolute standard for judging what is truly right from wrong

Correct, there is no absolute standard.

Quote:and is thus just a persons opinion or a Groups opinion.

No, not quite. Humans evolved as a social species and our feelings of empathy, fairness, caring for our young, sacrificing all evolved because they were beneficial.

Quote:If there are no absolute moral laws then why do Moral Relativists get very upset when Someone violates them morally for it might be the opinion of the Violator his action was not incorrect to do toward you ------ yet the Victim vehemently objects to being morally violated and feels absolute about it . If there are no absolute moral laws, then why do we hide a wrong we do so no one will find out if it isn't really objectively wrong ?

Because there are negative consequences for violating society's rules.

Quote:5. If the brain is nothing but the compilations of atoms then explain how non-atom Thoughts arise from these atoms --- detail the precise process please. Where in the brain can a thought be found ? Where is the Mind located in the Human Anatomy ?

Thoughts don't "arise from these atoms", thoughts arise from the complex pattern of chemicals and structures of the brain.

We don't know all the details, but neuroscientists are working on it.


'WE DONT KNOW' was your frequent response , yet you DO know that there isn't/cant be any personal theistic intelligent Creator for what we have which sure doesn't resemble the atheistic worldview/origins of chaos, haphazard looking effects , accidental compilations of atoms ad nauseum , thrown-together non design, and non suitability for human life --- that's what we should expect from a non-personal / non intelligent / non willed Universe that hasn't a shred of reason or purpose and that occurred 'accidentally' .

Perhaps you should rethink your Reverse God of the Gaps creed : "The supernatural doesn't exist (or if it does, it certainly had nothing to do with fashioning a personal Universe and creating life from non-life), therefore some natural process must have caused a personal Universe and caused life to come from non-life.'
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: