Please present a better explanation for our existence than Theism
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 4 Votes - 2.75 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
29-05-2011, 10:33 AM
 
RE: Please present a better explanation for our existence than Theism
(29-05-2011 10:28 AM)Unbeliever Wrote:  So you don't read any of our replies, then. Thanks for clearing that up.

i have read the replies, but non of them are compelling.
Quote this message in a reply
29-05-2011, 10:41 AM
RE: Please present a better explanation for our existence than Theism
(29-05-2011 10:33 AM)ElShadai Wrote:  
(29-05-2011 10:28 AM)Unbeliever Wrote:  So you don't read any of our replies, then. Thanks for clearing that up.

i have read the replies, but non of them are compelling.

Sorry, being someone that have just read this so far, they have given you answers, seems to me that you just don't like what the tell you and then ingnore most of what the say.

Most of the things put over here so far seems very logical to me.

By the time you stop ready this, you'll realze what a waste of time it has been Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Maumin's post
29-05-2011, 12:45 PM
RE: Please present a better explanation for our existence than Theism
(27-05-2011 06:58 AM)The_observer Wrote:  Dude...
You are one hell of a shape-shifter. You start by asking a serious question and when you see all your counter arguments are refuted or proven incorrect,
(29-05-2011 10:33 AM)ElShadai Wrote:  my answers have been proven wrong ? you make me laugh.

Please show these answers, and how they debunk mines.
(29-05-2011 10:33 AM)ElShadai Wrote:  
(29-05-2011 10:28 AM)Unbeliever Wrote:  So you don't read any of our replies, then. Thanks for clearing that up.
i have read the replies, but non of them are compelling.
Just because you don't like the answers does not mean they might not be true. "Finding them not compelling is just another form of disliking them. They don't appeal to your emotions. Fine with me. But also quite stupid. Especially since you asked the question, but are not emotionally ready for the answers. Sorry.

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
30-05-2011, 07:52 PM
RE: Please present a better explanation for our existence than Theism
(29-05-2011 10:33 AM)ElShadai Wrote:  
(29-05-2011 10:28 AM)Unbeliever Wrote:  So you don't read any of our replies, then. Thanks for clearing that up.

i have read the replies, but non of them are compelling.

"Compelling" has nothing to do with it. "Compelling" is irrelevant.

You are wrong. Your arguments are flawed. There is no evidence for your god's existence. Whether or not you find those facts "compelling" does not matter in the least.

"Sometimes it is better to light a flamethrower than to curse the darkness."
- Terry Pratchett
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Unbeliever's post
30-05-2011, 08:35 PM
 
RE: Please present a better explanation for our existence than Theism
OMG, is this thread still going?

Who here likes Dinosaurs?
[Image: AakIi.png]
Quote this message in a reply
30-05-2011, 09:40 PM
RE: Please present a better explanation for our existence than Theism
(29-05-2011 10:33 AM)ElShadai Wrote:  
(29-05-2011 10:28 AM)Unbeliever Wrote:  So you don't read any of our replies, then. Thanks for clearing that up.

i have read the replies, but non of them are compelling.

You have not answered mine. Please do so.

Post #99.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-05-2011, 10:11 PM (This post was last modified: 31-05-2011 04:20 AM by Observer.)
RE: Please present a better explanation for our existence than Theism
116 posts...
quick...
Do something about "average statistics"...
[Image: hitler460.jpg]
there... much better...

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
30-05-2011, 11:45 PM
RE: Please present a better explanation for our existence than Theism
I suppose I should respond.

"that does not belong to this topic. If you want to discuss influence of theism on science, open a other topic."

Actually, you not only made the claim on this thread that christianity has helped the development of science, but that religion did not hinder the progress or development of science.

I responded to this, and you dismissed and ignored the substance of my arguments.

"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason and intellect has intended us to forego their use." - Galileo

"Every man is guilty of all the good he did not do." - Voltaire
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-05-2011, 08:17 AM
RE: Please present a better explanation for our existence than Theism
If our theist is willing to keep kicking, I suppose I will too. We've stopped my discussion about the burden of proof and Naturalism, which I feel is a shame. Assessing who has the burden of proof and finding common grounds there is the first thing we should do. I made a post about how Naturalism has the burden of proof, how it doesn't, and how it fills it. You've never really responded to this part, but another thing that I said.

Quote:Okay, I think I lost you on my last point. Naturalism states that only the natural world exist. That is correct, no argument there. But that statement, "Only the natural world exists" cannot be evaluated as is. First, we need to ask ourselves what the natural world is, and what is not the natural world. The natural world is the world dictated by natural laws. The one we live in, right now. What is not the natural world? The world that is not dictated by natural laws, A.K.A. the supernatural world. Take note here, Naturalism's statement "Only the natural world exists" takes two, not one, two stances. The stance that natural world exists(putting emphasize on the existence of the natural world), and that only the natural world exists(putting more emphasize on the notion that no other world exists). The natural world exists, and the supernatural(I'm using the rather lax definition of "Any world outside of the natural world" here) world does not. Two claims comprise naturalism. Hopefully I have you so far.

Now, we just evaluate those two claims independently. Naturalism is a philosophical stances that makes two stances. First, it says the natural world exists. Hopefully we all agree, the natural world does exist. Secondly, only the natural world exists. Since we already previously stated and established that the natural world exists, we don't need to include that aspect into the second part, letting us focus primarily on it's main point; that the supernatural world does not exist. That is a rejection of a positive claim. The first claim, the positive one, does have evidence. The second claim, the negative one, doesn't require evidence.

Just to hammer this point home, let's go abstract(I know, yay, right?). X and Y are dichotomous but all inclusive. Either something is X, or something is Y. We have examples of X. Strong, sturdy proof of X. X is essentially undeniable. We have, to date, no evidence of Y.Y, while having it's own definition distinct from X, appears not to exist. Now, that this point, we can substitution anything in, provided if follows the previously laid out premises. Let's say that out system consists of of Earth and Mars, and just Earth and Mars. X can be life that started on Earth. It's almost undeniable that life is on Earth. Y can be life on Mars. We have no evidence of life on Mars. So, let's make a belief that life, within the two stated planets, Earth and Mars, only exists on Earth. This is more or less the same structure as "Naturalism states that only the natural world exists". So, since the belief that life, between Mars and Earth, only exists on Earth is as positive a claim as naturalism, does that mean it need to provide proof that life doesn't exist on Mars? And if we cannot definitively prove that life doesn't exist on Mars, does that mean that the default position should be life exists on Mars?

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
31-05-2011, 09:13 AM (This post was last modified: 31-05-2011 09:45 AM by LeighJones.)
RE: Please present a better explanation for our existence than Theism
Better 'explanations' than theism:

Justnowism, which is what I personally adhere to, prove it wrong please =):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWGJ3ydBQiE (justnowism video, explaining the concept)





Deism
agnostic atheism
One day a giant space turtle took a dump, creating everything, including giant space turtles

All better than theism
My challenge: Come up with an explanation that's worse than theism.


also: I like stegasauruses (Stegasauri, stegapodes?) :3
Also godwins law has been invoked! MADNESS! ANARCHY! lets party!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: