Strong Atheists: do any of u have a position on god's existence which is facts-based?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
19-08-2014, 12:02 PM
RE: Strong Atheists: do any of u have a position on god's existence which is facts-based?
(19-08-2014 11:34 AM)cjlr Wrote:  
(19-08-2014 11:30 AM)Ray Butler Wrote:  I agree, but it isn't apologetics, it is being objective, you cannot hold an absolute view from a mind that isn't, it goes without saying.

And because I can't hold an absolute objective point of view, I can't prove there's not a God?

Is that where this is going?

Because yes, that sure as shit is apologetics, and it's very transparently dancing around the burden of proof.

And no; I don't find the existence of a God to be relevant to the human condition, as an individual or a collective, believing in God doesn't change our situation until we let it, and to allow it to change our situation is irrational to me because we can figure things out without doing that.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-08-2014, 12:05 PM
RE: Strong Atheists: do any of u have a position on god's existence which is facts-based?
"Strong Atheists: do any of u have a position on god's existence which is facts-based?"

Yes. Yes, I do.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-08-2014, 12:05 PM
RE: Strong Atheists: do any of u have a position on god's existence which is facts-based?
(19-08-2014 11:17 AM)Ray Butler Wrote:  
(19-08-2014 11:14 AM)Chas Wrote:  Infinities have been proven quite nicely by Georg Cantor and others.
And if you can come up with a cogent argument for how that says anything about an absolute being, please enlighten us.

I'm sure there are those who claim this, but no one does it successfully.

Because in an infinite universe there is infinite potential, and infinite possibilities, in an infinite universe possibilities can very much become probabilities, not discounting an infinite mind.

But the universe isn't infinite. So, there's that.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
19-08-2014, 12:07 PM
RE: Strong Atheists: do any of u have a position on god's existence which is facts-based?
(19-08-2014 11:58 AM)phil.a Wrote:  <snip>

Bunch of BS. The statement is false, no matter how you try to spin it. The Earth is not flat, period.

The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-08-2014, 12:09 PM
RE: Strong Atheists: do any of u have a position on god's existence which is facts-based?
(19-08-2014 11:58 AM)phil.a Wrote:  
(19-08-2014 05:26 AM)One Above All Wrote:  You do, of course, realize that someone can say something that is 100% false, right?
If I told you that the Earth was flat, for example, that statement would be false.

We'd need to have structures of cognition of the same dimensionality for that to be so. Eg a rational worldview human has 3D structures of cognition and so direct awareness of 3D space is possible. If he had 2D structures of cognition, then the same spatial awareness would not be possible, he would see a globe as a (flat) circle.

Interestingly, pre-rational humans are only reflectively self-aware in 2 dimensions. So in fact, 3D space does appear in their awareness somewhat confusingly collapsed into 2 dimensions.

You can spot this in the artistic depictions of:

* Pre rational (pre-renaissance) art (perspective absent or poorly depicted)
* Rational worldview art (depiction of perspective snaps into focus)

A new dimension of cognitive complexity emerged in european humans during the renaissance. The flat earth idea was in fact, a pre-rational concept.

Phil

Sorry, no - that is over-reaching.

It is likely that it was a matter of realization of how to better represent 3-D in 2-D; that is, a conceptual and technological advance.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-08-2014, 12:12 PM
RE: Strong Atheists: do any of u have a position on god's existence which is facts-based?
(19-08-2014 12:02 PM)Ray Butler Wrote:  
(19-08-2014 11:34 AM)cjlr Wrote:  And because I can't hold an absolute objective point of view, I can't prove there's not a God?

Is that where this is going?

Because yes, that sure as shit is apologetics, and it's very transparently dancing around the burden of proof.

And no; I don't find the existence of a God to be relevant to the human condition, as an individual or a collective, believing in God doesn't change our situation until we let it, and to allow it to change our situation is irrational to me because we can figure things out without doing that.

All theistic religions would beg to differ...

I'd agree insofar as deism is ultimately entirely meaningless, but even deism is just asserting things for the sake of asserting them.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-08-2014, 12:15 PM
RE: Strong Atheists: do any of u have a position on god's existence which is facts-based?
(19-08-2014 12:12 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(19-08-2014 12:02 PM)Ray Butler Wrote:  And no; I don't find the existence of a God to be relevant to the human condition, as an individual or a collective, believing in God doesn't change our situation until we let it, and to allow it to change our situation is irrational to me because we can figure things out without doing that.

All theistic religions would beg to differ...

I'd agree insofar as deism is ultimately entirely meaningless, but even deism is just asserting things for the sake of asserting them.

There are plenty of arguments for deism. Many christian apologists seem to be well versed in them.

Truth seeker.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-08-2014, 12:23 PM
RE: Strong Atheists: do any of u have a position on god's existence which is facts-based?
(19-08-2014 12:15 PM)diddo97 Wrote:  
(19-08-2014 12:12 PM)cjlr Wrote:  All theistic religions would beg to differ...

I'd agree insofar as deism is ultimately entirely meaningless, but even deism is just asserting things for the sake of asserting them.

There are plenty of arguments for deism. Many christian apologists seem to be well versed in them.

All of which boils down to a god of the gaps argument aka an argument from ignorance.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Revenant77x's post
19-08-2014, 12:23 PM
RE: Strong Atheists: do any of u have a position on god's existence which is facts-based?
(19-08-2014 12:05 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(19-08-2014 11:17 AM)Ray Butler Wrote:  Because in an infinite universe there is infinite potential, and infinite possibilities, in an infinite universe possibilities can very much become probabilities, not discounting an infinite mind.

But the universe isn't infinite. So, there's that.

We have hit theoretical boundaries to the universe, I know that much.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-08-2014, 12:31 PM
RE: Strong Atheists: do any of u have a position on god's existence which is facts-based?
(19-08-2014 12:12 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(19-08-2014 12:02 PM)Ray Butler Wrote:  And no; I don't find the existence of a God to be relevant to the human condition, as an individual or a collective, believing in God doesn't change our situation until we let it, and to allow it to change our situation is irrational to me because we can figure things out without doing that.

All theistic religions would beg to differ...

I'd agree insofar as deism is ultimately entirely meaningless, but even deism is just asserting things for the sake of asserting them.

Yes, religions disagree, naturally; their existence depends on it.

I like Marcus Aurelius who states; "The first rule is to keep an untroubled spirit, the second is to look things in the face and know them for what they are"

This is very important; we need to be able to discipline our natural impulses at will if we are to provide the psychological environment for clear thought. Religion is supposed to help people deal with fears and desires so they can think clearly, obviously this fails to impress upon too many practitioners of the Faiths. But once you find techniques, like philosophy or Faith, that help you control those fears and desires then you can engage substantial observation and really start to develop science, or even other philosophies.

Personally I think the best way to discipline fears and desires is ego; the ego hates to let things control it, and technically fears and desires control it, so by its own pride it should want to overcome those impulses, and could do it without any philosophy at all.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: