Shortcomings of the "probability of life" argument
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
01-04-2016, 08:06 AM
RE: Shortcomings of the "probability of life" argument
(01-04-2016 07:29 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(31-03-2016 05:02 PM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  I really don't know. He fact that you think that any creature who can ponder it's own existance would do something exactly like a human would do is absurd. If a dolphin could ponder it's own existance or how frail life can be under the sea, I would not expect it to build a HOA. If you do, than I really don't think you have a clue on what you are talking about.

It would be nice to know, though. Perhaps a dolphin could explain to you why the supernatural is silly or maybe a squid would evangelize to you on their lord and savior Cthulhu since they have ancient stories that prove their beliefs.


Edit: also, if a dolphin was a theist of some sort, wouldn't that mean that you are as smart as a dolphin? Not sure that is something to be proud of.


That's interesting, I'm used to hearing atheists claims that infants are atheists, that other animals lack a belief in God. Now it seems that even absent of language they possibly could.

So I guess that means we'll no longer have to hear the common canard of how we're born atheists?

But to the point I was making. If another animal can contemplate a question with that degree of self-awareness of where he came from, a question that would require such a degree of contemplation, then he's probably right around the corner from getting a degree, or demanding equal rights, or a planet of the apes scenario.
That's not a point it's an assertion and it's entirely unfounded. You're just making nonsense up because your conclusion requires it.

When valour preys on reason, it eats the sword it fights with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-04-2016, 08:09 AM
RE: Shortcomings of the "probability of life" argument
(01-04-2016 07:29 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  That's interesting, I'm used to hearing atheists claims that infants are atheists, that other animals lack a belief in God. Now it seems that even absent of language they possibly could.

P1. An atheist is someone who has no belief in a god.
P2. An infant without language has no belief in a god.

C. An infant is an atheist.

I fail to see what's "interesting" about something so obvious.

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
[+] 6 users Like Bucky Ball's post
01-04-2016, 09:13 AM
RE: Shortcomings of the "probability of life" argument
(01-04-2016 07:29 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(31-03-2016 05:02 PM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  I really don't know. He fact that you think that any creature who can ponder it's own existance would do something exactly like a human would do is absurd. If a dolphin could ponder it's own existance or how frail life can be under the sea, I would not expect it to build a HOA. If you do, than I really don't think you have a clue on what you are talking about.

It would be nice to know, though. Perhaps a dolphin could explain to you why the supernatural is silly or maybe a squid would evangelize to you on their lord and savior Cthulhu since they have ancient stories that prove their beliefs.


Edit: also, if a dolphin was a theist of some sort, wouldn't that mean that you are as smart as a dolphin? Not sure that is something to be proud of.


That's interesting, I'm used to hearing atheists claims that infants are atheists, that other animals lack a belief in God. Now it seems that even absent of language they possibly could.

So I guess that means we'll no longer have to hear the common canard of how we're born atheists?

But to the point I was making. If another animal can contemplate a question with that degree of self-awareness of where he came from, a question that would require such a degree of contemplation, then he's probably right around the corner from getting a degree, or demanding equal rights, or a planet of the apes scenario.

I'm not used to that one at all.. We presumably know way more about how human infants minds work from our study and basis into childhood. The same isn't quite as well known how adult elephants or dolphins may be able to understand their surroundings. Elephants afterall do seem to have death rituals whether there is anything more to that than just remembering one being gone, isn't known to me. It's still possible they can question their existence to some degree of awareness.

We also can say that human babies seem to have a dualistic sense of their surroundings too at an early stage. That's a thing some people use both ways to say things about metaphysical thinking but it doesn't confirm to any idea or understanding of supreme beings.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-04-2016, 09:52 AM
RE: Shortcomings of the "probability of life" argument
(01-04-2016 07:29 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  That's interesting, I'm used to hearing atheists claims that infants are atheists, that other animals lack a belief in God. Now it seems that even absent of language they possibly could.

So I guess that means we'll no longer have to hear the common canard of how we're born atheists?

Well, considering I don't speak for everyone and atheism has no cannon. Probably not.

If you don't teach a child to believe in god, they probably won't on their own. Certianly, if you have a Lord of the Flies scenario where the population has absolutely no theist ideas, they may not create a god at all and if they did, it probably would make more sense than a Jew being nailed to some wood laced with less self-loathing than christianity.

(01-04-2016 07:29 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  But to the point I was making. If another animal can contemplate a question with that degree of self-awareness of where he came from, a question that would require such a degree of contemplation, then he's probably right around the corner from getting a degree, or demanding equal rights, or a planet of the apes scenario.

Sad strawman you have constructed Tom. Quite the non sequitr.

"If we are honest—and scientists have to be—we must admit that religion is a jumble of false assertions, with no basis in reality.
The very idea of God is a product of the human imagination."
- Paul Dirac
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes The Organic Chemist's post
01-04-2016, 03:22 PM
RE: Shortcomings of the "probability of life" argument
I'm just glad this hole in the ground fits our particular puddle so perfectly.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like cjlr's post
01-04-2016, 03:53 PM
RE: Shortcomings of the "probability of life" argument
(01-04-2016 07:29 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(31-03-2016 05:02 PM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  I really don't know. He fact that you think that any creature who can ponder it's own existance would do something exactly like a human would do is absurd. If a dolphin could ponder it's own existance or how frail life can be under the sea, I would not expect it to build a HOA. If you do, than I really don't think you have a clue on what you are talking about.

It would be nice to know, though. Perhaps a dolphin could explain to you why the supernatural is silly or maybe a squid would evangelize to you on their lord and savior Cthulhu since they have ancient stories that prove their beliefs.


Edit: also, if a dolphin was a theist of some sort, wouldn't that mean that you are as smart as a dolphin? Not sure that is something to be proud of.


That's interesting, I'm used to hearing atheists claims that infants are atheists, that other animals lack a belief in God. Now it seems that even absent of language they possibly could.

So I guess that means we'll no longer have to hear the common canard of how we're born atheists?

But to the point I was making. If another animal can contemplate a question with that degree of self-awareness of where he came from, a question that would require such a degree of contemplation, then he's probably right around the corner from getting a degree, or demanding equal rights, or a planet of the apes scenario.

I was raised in a very rustic, secluded mountainous area. No hot water, an outhouse for a bathroom, no TV or radio. Both my parents were non believers and religion simply wasn't discussed. It wasn't until I was about 9 years old that a god concept was introduced to me through a christmas song. Prior to that I had no idea of a god, there was nothing. God was non existent. I'd even go so far as to say I wasn't even in the default position because there was no position to be in when something doesn't exist.

A god is a similar situation to the unborn. They simply don't exist. The unborn weren't conceived so they aren't there. There is no "they" in the unborn. There is nothing. One has to create an imaginary person out of whole cloth to make a never born person real but they're only real in ones mind. This is similar to a god. It's a being who exists in the mind but only after introductions are made.

Shakespeare's Comedy of Errors.... on Donald J. Trump:

He is deformed, crooked, old, and sere,
Ill-fac’d, worse bodied, shapeless every where;
Vicious, ungentle, foolish, blunt, unkind,
Stigmatical in making, worse in mind.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-04-2016, 05:37 AM
RE: Shortcomings of the "probability of life" argument
(01-04-2016 08:09 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(01-04-2016 07:29 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  That's interesting, I'm used to hearing atheists claims that infants are atheists, that other animals lack a belief in God. Now it seems that even absent of language they possibly could.

P1. An atheist is someone who has no belief in a god.
P2. An infant without language has no belief in a god.

C. An infant is an atheist.

I fail to see what's "interesting" about something so obvious.

Can an infant without language contemplate where they came from?

Can a dolphin without language contemplate where they came from?

"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
02-04-2016, 05:42 AM
RE: Shortcomings of the "probability of life" argument
(01-04-2016 09:52 AM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  Well, considering I don't speak for everyone and atheism has no cannon. Probably not.

If you don't teach a child to believe in god, they probably won't on their own. Certianly, if you have a Lord of the Flies scenario where the population has absolutely no theist ideas, they may not create a god at all and if they did, it probably would make more sense than a Jew being nailed to some wood laced with less self-loathing than christianity.

I think there's something contradictory about this position and your previous suggestions.

It appears you're open to the possibility that other animals such as dolphins might be able to contemplate where the came from, without being taught?

The same can be said about a child, or an infant here as well, that they can contemplate where they came from without being taught?

Is this correct?

If so, would you say that they can possibly contemplate the questions, but can't contemplate or formulate their own answers?

"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
02-04-2016, 05:46 AM
RE: Shortcomings of the "probability of life" argument
(02-04-2016 05:37 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(01-04-2016 08:09 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  P1. An atheist is someone who has no belief in a god.
P2. An infant without language has no belief in a god.

C. An infant is an atheist.

I fail to see what's "interesting" about something so obvious.

Can an infant without language contemplate where they came from?

Can a dolphin without language contemplate where they came from?


If they could, but they are unable to communicate that fact, how do you propose we find out? Facepalm

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-04-2016, 05:48 AM
RE: Shortcomings of the "probability of life" argument
(01-04-2016 03:22 PM)cjlr Wrote:  I'm just glad this hole in the ground fits our particular puddle so perfectly.

Indeed, almost as if the ground was designed to accommodate it.

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: