My most formidable adversary ever.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-05-2011, 08:20 AM
RE: My most formidable adversary ever.
(06-05-2011 10:58 PM)MasterRottweiler Wrote:  PS. Which one is the most common answer from Aquinas defenders about the arbitrary denial of infinite regress? In case he mention this, I want to be one step ahead Big Grin.

They typically use the notion that God is outside of time and space, and therefor our rules do not apply to him. This gets into other dimensions, or universes, however you want to see it. While we would have no idea what they are or how they relate to us, we do know how our own universe works. In order to affect our universe, something has to exist within out universe. Non-existent things can't really do much in our universe. We can speculate on inter-dimensional travel, but this is rather pointless since we know next to nothing about it. What we do know; our universe, our laws. If God can interact with out universe, then some form of him must exist in out universe, and that would still be governed under the laws of our universe.

Now he could probably go off into some complicated, pseudo-science stuff at this point since we know so little about this stuff, but just pull out Occam's Razor. One cannot make up a a model with it's sole evidence being that they want this model to exist. We have knowledge of how our universe can come to exist without anything that most people would call a god that is possible, supported by reason, and uses the least amount of assumptions.

I don't believe Jesus is the son of God until I see the long form birth certificate!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-05-2011, 08:44 AM
RE: My most formidable adversary ever.
(06-05-2011 10:58 PM)MasterRottweiler Wrote:  PS. Which one is the most common answer from Aquinas defenders about the arbitrary denial of infinite regress? In case he mention this, I want to be one step ahead Big Grin.

If he uses that line, he has the burden of proof, not you.
Furthermore, using a starting point (as many philosophers do) is one thing. I can understand people doing it, even if I don't need it.

But calling it God and correlating it to the Judeo-Christian God is something else. That's a leap of faith without a shred of proof. Once again, if he wants to make that correlation, the burden of proof is on him. Quoting the bible doesn't count as its falseness has been demonstrated numerous times.

"Infinitus est numerus stultorum." (The number of fools is infinite)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-05-2011, 11:11 AM
RE: My most formidable adversary ever.
A scientist is a lowly human being but that guy as a "philosopher" is what ? A less lowly human being ?
Seriously , his arrogance is waaaaaaaay over 9000.

Atheism is a religion like OFF is a TV channel !!!

Proud of my genetic relatives Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-05-2011, 03:04 PM
RE: My most formidable adversary ever.
Any news MasterRotweiller?

Observer

Agnostic atheist
Secular humanist
Emotional rationalist
Disclaimer: Don’t mix the personal opinion above with the absolute and objective truth. Remember to think for yourself. Thank you.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-05-2011, 11:30 PM (This post was last modified: 11-05-2011 11:35 PM by MasterRottweiler.)
RE: My most formidable adversary ever.
(11-05-2011 03:04 PM)The_observer Wrote:  Any news MasterRotweiller?

Apparently not... I've been waiting for him to post the logical counter-argumens for the counter-arguments posted by another user, interestingly enough, he's now blamig the admin, his last comment was about the admin not publishing his posts; "blah blah blah I can destroy your argumens..., insert ad-hominem here, admin isnt poublishing my posts, blah blah blah...", How convenient isnt it? But anyway, I'll let you know if he post something, meanwhile I've been doing a lot of research about philosophic arguments in order to be better prepared if another wild philosopher appears Big Grin. Again, thanks a lot for your help.

Peace guys.

"The tendency to turn human judgments into divine commands makes religion one of the most dangerous forces in the world.”
-Georgia Harkness.

"La fe es patrimonio de los pendejos. (Faith is patrimony of the dumbfucks)."
-Diego Rivera
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-05-2011, 12:30 AM
RE: My most formidable adversary ever.
(11-05-2011 11:30 PM)MasterRottweiler Wrote:  I've been doing a lot of research about philosophic arguments in order to be better prepared if another wild philosopher appears Big Grin.
*A wild philosopher appears*
*MasterRotweiller, I choose you*
*MasterRotweiller uses "knowledge"*
*It's super effective!*

Observer

Agnostic atheist
Secular humanist
Emotional rationalist
Disclaimer: Don’t mix the personal opinion above with the absolute and objective truth. Remember to think for yourself. Thank you.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Observer's post
12-05-2011, 01:09 AM
RE: My most formidable adversary ever.
(12-05-2011 12:30 AM)The_observer Wrote:  
(11-05-2011 11:30 PM)MasterRottweiler Wrote:  I've been doing a lot of research about philosophic arguments in order to be better prepared if another wild philosopher appears Big Grin.
*A wild philosopher appears*
*MasterRotweiller, I choose you*
*MasterRotweiller uses "knowledge"*
*It's super effective!*

LOL Big Grin, I thought the very same Pokemon reference hehe. But yeah escencially, if a wild philosopher appears, I think I'm now more resistant to confuse attacks Tongue.

"The tendency to turn human judgments into divine commands makes religion one of the most dangerous forces in the world.”
-Georgia Harkness.

"La fe es patrimonio de los pendejos. (Faith is patrimony of the dumbfucks)."
-Diego Rivera
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-05-2011, 07:26 PM
 
RE: My most formidable adversary ever.
MasterRottweiler,
the conundrum, canard and confabulation of argument in and of god has the
grotesque of each persons perception

every body has a different point of view
no 2 are the same

if you read past masters
they all say different than the other
but
all are beating on the same bush
trying to flesh out god in their image
impossible for another to see

all argument are words and text and noise at my feet
the truth is?
me alone
you alone
every body... alone

frightening hey?
that's why people believe someone else
they are afraid of their singular vision
being alone

it takes a brave soul to see according to their lights
why?
because you have to die first

die?
the wanting
the concepts
the ideas
the self

not easy
fact is
too hard... for most
that's why there are masters... to help


.
Quote this message in a reply
26-05-2011, 06:12 PM
 
RE: My most formidable adversary ever.
(05-05-2011 03:20 PM)MasterRottweiler Wrote:  Hey there guys, I write this down because I'm currently having a debate with a philosopher theist, and I've been having some problems with the points he makes, also I dont know if this is the right section of the forum to post this Tongue.

He is a theist who is currently trying to challenge all the atheists on a local forum (which is not theist or atheist btw, its just for posting random funny things) since some users post things making fun of religion and vice-versa, he is now on a crusade against atheists using philosophy and metaphysics to say we are dumb for not believing in god or "necesary being" since the arguments he uses are the logical proof that there is a god.

He says that philosophy and metaphysics is the only way to really prove things that empirical science dont, because philosophy is objective and reasonably true, also he is attacking our intelectual vanity since most of us didn't study philosophy, he basically says that all empirical sciences are irrelevant comparing them with philosophy. but anyway thats not the point.

He is using so far Thomas Aquinas 5 ways to proof the existence of god, along with the Argument from Design and the Fine Tuning Argument, I can argue with the last 2 arguments, but so far the 5 ways of Thomas Aquinas are making my head hurt.

He says that NOBODY in human history since Thomas Aquinas, have ever succesfully disproved Aquinas 5 proofs. Is that true? I know that there is an article on Iron Chariots trying to disprove Aquinas. To be honest guys my head is pretty much f*cked up, and I'm quite confused now about the validity of Aquinas arguments.

Can someone truly prove the existence of god using Aquinas arguments?

Greetings! I have read through, admittedly superficially, the three pages of this discussion. I think you all think too much about thinking. I shall toss in my trailerpark scholar response to your high-falutin' friend.

First, philosophy doesn't prove shit. It is nothing but mental gymnastics. It's interesting, thought provoking, but highly subjective. And besides, the vast majority of people in this world don't have the slightest clue what you're talking about.

Second, if one has to use convoluted philosophical arguments to "prove" god his problem isn't proof, it's doubt. A "true christian" knows that he knows that he knows... as in, it's a faith thing.

Third, true science is based upon hard evidence. Evidence trumps supposition or postulating every time. I say "true" science to differentiate it from theoretical science. Theoretical science is valid, of course, but it has not been proven by evidence. That's the scientific method.

Speaking of which, the scientific method seeks truth, not justification. No scientist worth his salt will ever say, "I BELIEVE" such and such is true and then formulate a plan to "prove" it. A scientist projects or theorizes an answer, seeks to validate it, and redirects research based upon whether or not what he found was what he expected. I say all that to say that science always rises above philosophy because philosophy cannot, by its nature, prove a damn thing.

Fourth, and finally, my only response to anybody who seeks to "prove" there is a god is simple. I say, I don't care what you think you prove, I remain an unbeliever until I see absolute proof, not absurd postulations or circumstantial or anecdotal "evidence." Until I can see someone's hand grow back or, say, someone pray for snow and it snows in August in Texas, something like that, then I will not believe. I won't "believe" then, either, I'll just know what is real.

As far as being called dumb for not succumbing to christian mythology, there's plenty of material that invalidates the book upon which christianity is based. Rather than falling into the trap of mind games simply ask for a legitimate explanation of the discrepancies and contradictions of the book.

If none of that works, and it probably won't, the best thing to do is just say, "whatever." People who resort to name calling or condescending attitudes are neither 'christ-like' nor worth the trouble.
Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes tedgresham's post
26-05-2011, 06:16 PM
 
RE: My most formidable adversary ever.
(26-05-2011 06:12 PM)tedgresham Wrote:  someone pray for snow and it snows in August in Texas, something like that, then I will not believe.

You are angering Al Gore. Al Gore smash you. Tongue
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: