I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-06-2014, 08:15 AM
RE: I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist
Science is a process. If my professor says that this beam feels the most stress here and will break at this point here guess what? I take the beam and I put it in the compression chamber to watch how it breaks. I'll do this three or four times, doing calculations beforehand and checking them vs the results. If my professor and my calculations predict the result accurately I can trust that the system works. If the beam breaks in some other way, I bring this to his attention and we find out what's going on. THIS is science. It is a process. This is how science works. It takes nothing for granted that cannot
be tested or demonstrated.

So do I put "faith" in science? This is an odd statement. I don't think of processes that way. I have found reality (at the scale I deal with, so shaddup quantum physicists) to be fairly consistent. Further testing is needed but until proven otherwise I will continue to operate on this assumption.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes natachan's post
03-06-2014, 08:22 AM
RE: I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist
(03-06-2014 08:09 AM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  i see no one is addressing the points for yet the Nth time i made about the Kalam.

Fixed for you.

Everyone's fed up of you repeating yourself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Mathilda's post
03-06-2014, 08:53 AM
RE: I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist
(03-06-2014 08:22 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  
(03-06-2014 08:09 AM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  i see no one is addressing the points for yet the Nth time i made about the Kalam.

Fixed for you.

Everyone's fed up of you repeating yourself.

lol come on Doctor, I know you have something to say about it that you have not said.

you know there are professional philosophers who have attempted to grapple with the Kalam. these people i reference are actually philosophers in the academy and not your run of the mill youtube pseudo philosopher. have you read their work on the kalam? smith, oppy, grunbaum, dennett etc etc?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-06-2014, 08:57 AM
RE: I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist
(03-06-2014 08:53 AM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  
(03-06-2014 08:22 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  Fixed for you.

Everyone's fed up of you repeating yourself.

lol come on Doctor, I know you have something to say about it that you have not said.

you know there are professional philosophers who have attempted to grapple with the Kalam. these people i reference are actually philosophers in the academy and not your run of the mill youtube pseudo philosopher. have you read their work on the kalam? smith, oppy, grunbaum, dennett etc etc?

I have not seen you demonstrate that the "creator" of the universe must be the God of the Bible.

Truth seeker.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-06-2014, 08:58 AM
I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist
(03-06-2014 08:04 AM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  
(02-06-2014 06:29 PM)RogueWarrior Wrote:  Jeremy there is nothing wrong in having beliefs. What matters is WHY someone believes. Do they have good reasons?

I think should think that most people would want to believe as many true things as possible and disbelieve as many false things as possible.

How does one find out the true things?
Science has consistently proven to be the best , most reliable and self correcting tool humanity has to investigate the universe.

If people believe science can some day answer those questions, it is because science has a frikken excellent track record of answering questions about our universe.

That is not faith in science.

you trust in science. you put your hope in science. you rely on it to give you knowledge about the world you live in. and you believe it will tell you all there is to know about the universe even though you cannot prove this.

that is all i mean by faith.

Because you're equivocating between reasonable trust of a system that has constantly replaced your belief in demon possession with psychology and medicine, spontaneous generation with biology, and geocentrism with astronomy.

That's not blind faith.

“It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.”
― Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-06-2014, 09:00 AM
I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist
(03-06-2014 08:09 AM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  i see no one is addressing the points i made about the Kalam.

You mean the same Kalam I just addressed on this page, and you lost 4 debates where you could not support the first and second premise?

What Kalam? The failed argument from 1250 CE?

Don't you have any arguments that lived?

“It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.”
― Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-06-2014, 09:04 AM
RE: I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist
(03-06-2014 08:53 AM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  
(03-06-2014 08:22 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  Fixed for you.

Everyone's fed up of you repeating yourself.

lol come on Doctor, I know you have something to say about it that you have not said.

you know there are professional philosophers who have attempted to grapple with the Kalam. these people i reference are actually philosophers in the academy and not your run of the mill youtube pseudo philosopher. have you read their work on the kalam? smith, oppy, grunbaum, dennett etc etc?

I can't even be bothered reading your posts properly any more (e.g. the post above). Repeating what you say and going round in circles for the umpteenth time is not going to convince anyone. And trying to goad people into replying isn't sufficient. People know what trolls are and they are quite easy to ignore. So if you want responses then you need to go away and think of some new tactic to make things interesting for people and motivate them to respond to you.

Just repeating yourself incessantly until people give up trying to reason with you and then saying "Hah! I won!" is pointless. The only person you are convincing is yourself (if that). You aren't even convincing any lurkers because they will see how the forum have dismissed you as incompetent.

I see no reason to continue trying to reason with you when you're too scared to even go one on one with either me or Mark Fulton in a boxing match.

Now shoo fly or come up with a more interesting tactic. My time is too valuable to waste and you bore me.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Mathilda's post
03-06-2014, 09:06 AM
I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist
(03-06-2014 08:53 AM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  
(03-06-2014 08:22 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  Fixed for you.

Everyone's fed up of you repeating yourself.

lol come on Doctor, I know you have something to say about it that you have not said.

you know there are professional philosophers who have attempted to grapple with the Kalam. these people i reference are actually philosophers in the academy and not your run of the mill youtube pseudo philosopher. have you read their work on the kalam? smith, oppy, grunbaum, dennett etc etc?

The Kalam is presented as an historical argument in every philosophy 101 class, and then promptly destroyed.

Do you have something compelling to present, or are you stuck in the year 1250?

Is this part of your plan to immortalize the name of Jeremy E. Walker on the internet as the #1 most conclusive failure of all time?

“It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.”
― Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like rampant.a.i.'s post
03-06-2014, 09:06 AM
RE: I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist
(03-06-2014 08:15 AM)natachan Wrote:  Science is a process. If my professor says that this beam feels the most stress here and will break at this point here guess what? I take the beam and I put it in the compression chamber to watch how it breaks. I'll do this three or four times, doing calculations beforehand and checking them vs the results. If my professor and my calculations predict the result accurately I can trust that the system works. If the beam breaks in some other way, I bring this to his attention and we find out what's going on. THIS is science. It is a process. This is how science works. It takes nothing for granted that cannot
be tested or demonstrated.

So do I put "faith" in science? This is an odd statement. I don't think of processes that way. I have found reality (at the scale I deal with, so shaddup quantum physicists) to be fairly consistent. Further testing is needed but until proven otherwise I will continue to operate on this assumption.

i agree with much of what you say. i find science fascinating.

but i cannot say that science by itself is a sufficient criterion for rationality for science has a very limited domain or area of operation.

at bottom there are things you trust in and believe in that are not verifiable by the scientific method. thats my point.

you assume that your cognitive faculties are functioning properly. you assume that tomorrow, nature will behave as it has in the past. you assume these things and many more like them and none of them can be proven via science. science itself cannot even be proven by science for to try to do so would be arguing in a circle.

science is good when used correctly. when it is abused, there are problems.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-06-2014, 09:11 AM
RE: I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist
(03-06-2014 09:06 AM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  you assume that your cognitive faculties are functioning properly. you assume that tomorrow, nature will behave as it has in the past. you assume these things and many more like them and none of them can be proven via science. science itself cannot even be proven by science for to try to do so would be arguing in a circle.

How does a belief in a God solve this problem?

Truth seeker.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like diddo97's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: