"True Atheists are Hypocrites"
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
28-10-2010, 08:43 AM
RE: "True Atheists are Hypocrites"
(28-10-2010 08:30 AM)BnW Wrote:  I sort of dropped out of this discussion, mostly because I'm just overwhelmed with work right now and could not keep up. But, catching up quickly on this and a few of the other threads that are having parallel discussions, I've noted something.

The key difference, and primary point of contention, here is that Ghost seems to equate philosophy and philosophical theory with physics and observations of the natural world. He made the point earlier about not just disregarding 1,000 years of philosophy. I recognize that this perspective is not unique to Ghost but it is, for me, a maddening view of the world. To deny physical existence or that certain things that have been documented, tested and observed are more perception then reality is, again - for me, both foolish and unreasonable.

This is not a cut on you, Ghost, but I do think it is a correct observation. You wish to see the world as just one person's perception and seem to take the position that the laws of physics, etc. are all unique to the person who observes them and while it may seem we are speaking a common language, perhaps we are not.

I consider myself a realist, and, to me, things are what they are. That applies to the laws of physics, the amount of money I've got in my bank account, and whatever problems life throws at me. Things are what they are regardless of whether I like it or not. And, having this view, I do very well at adopting and meeting whatever unexpected challenges and surprises life throws at me. I'm not suggesting I don't get frustrated or overwhelmed at times, but generally I accept what is and, if it's a problem I find a solution and if it's something that I can't solve I learn to deal with it. That, for me, is reality.

Perhaps the world is subjective and all things are possible, but I don't see any evidence of that. What I see is plenty of evidence of objective truth and constant universe. I don't believe that makes me obtuse and, from my perspective it makes you (not you personally, but the royal "you" of subjective thinkers) seem unrealistic and foolish.

I know you hate this analogy, but I see this as I say "2 + 2 = 4" and you come back and say "hey, a unicorn!". We are just completely apart in our thinking. That doesn't make one wrong and one right, but it does lend itself to a lot of frustration.

Me too! ^ lol.
That was the first post in this thread that I understood, and made sense to me, from start to finish. I suppose that has a lot to do with the fact that I tend to be a concrete thinker. I can discuss philosophy to a point, but it's a real struggle for me.
My question about all this (remember guys, I'm just a farmer, with no formal education since high school) why does it matter? I'm not suggesting it doesn't matter. If it didn't, it wouldn't warrant discussion. To put a finer point on it, if it didn't matter to ME, it wouldn't intrigue me so much. So my question is genuine. If one argument is more accurate than another (don't get all phillosophical on my ass - just make it black and white for me for a second) how will it affect me, you, everybody.
Fascinating thread. And keep up the Jabba references. They're kind of like shiny things. They keep me interested! LOL


Footnote - BnW, after Ghost and Unbeliever have attempted to answer my question, would you mind explaining it to me? LMAO

So many cats, so few good recipes.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-10-2010, 09:06 AM
RE: "True Atheists are Hypocrites"
Quote:Footnote - BnW, after Ghost and Unbeliever have attempted to answer my question, would you mind explaining it to me? LMAO

Big Grin

I'll actually wait on them and act as a translator. And, I've got my own thoughts on your question but I am first interested to see a few responses before I share.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-10-2010, 02:10 AM
 
RE: "True Atheists are Hypocrites"
(28-10-2010 08:43 AM)Stark Raving Wrote:  That was the first post in this thread that I understood, and made sense to me, from start to finish. I suppose that has a lot to do with the fact that I tend to be a concrete thinker. I can discuss philosophy to a point, but it's a real struggle for me.
My question about all this (remember guys, I'm just a farmer, with no formal education since high school) why does it matter?

I'm a bit hurt that my posts here apparently weren't understandable, or didn't make sense, or both. What can I do about that shortfall?

My last post included the remark:
Quote:This is a fun debate, but until someone can provide credible evidence for the intervention of a supernatural STCBCG in our world, it's basically just so much hot air.

In such a forum as this, I keep in mind that some fun discussions have little or practical value. Although Matt (Ghost) and I are at odds about some things, he often has stimulating things to say and I enjoy seeing if I can get through.
Quote this message in a reply
29-10-2010, 07:16 AM
RE: "True Atheists are Hypocrites"
Don't worry 2buck. Your posts were cear, I was just making a little fun of myself. What I meant to imply was that I have a hard time following these type of coversations, becausemy brain just doesn't seem wired for it. (or at least not as well wired as you guys!) It's not your shortfall, it's mine.

I agree that there's not many practical applications for a topic like this. For me it's stimulating just trying to follow along, let alone get involved.

So many cats, so few good recipes.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-11-2010, 04:11 PM
RE: "True Atheists are Hypocrites"
Hey, 2buckchuck.

UFOs are a bad example because there's nothing supernatural about them.

Reproducibility of an experiment is a requirement. Meteroroglogists don't create storms, but they acureately track them.

Hey, Unbeliever.

The paranormal "must" do or be nothing. There is no rule impelling it to do or be anything. An object in motion MUST stay in motion. A God has no such limitation.

Quote:To find evidence for the paranormal, you just have to find an effect with no normal explanation.

That's not actually true. All kinds of stuff has no good explanation. We probably understand about 5% of the universe. That doesn't mean that everything we don't understand is supernatural.

One question. If something points to a supernatural explanation (because there's no natural explanation), how do you then prove that it is in fact supernatural?

Basically, you've set up a definition of existence that I can't penetrate because it defeats all of my counter arguments on premise. Which is fine. I just don't agree with it so I'll leave it at that. I think I've been clear about what it is I do think. If I haven't, just let me know.

Hey, BnW.

Quote:The key difference, and primary point of contention, here is that Ghost seems to equate philosophy and philosophical theory with physics and observations of the natural world. He made the point earlier about not just disregarding 1,000 years of philosophy. I recognize that this perspective is not unique to Ghost but it is, for me, a maddening view of the world. To deny physical existence or that certain things that have been documented, tested and observed are more perception then reality is, again - for me, both foolish and unreasonable.

I don't actually understand what you're saying here.

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-11-2010, 04:30 PM
 
RE: "True Atheists are Hypocrites"
(06-11-2010 04:11 PM)Ghost Wrote:  That's not actually true. All kinds of stuff has no good explanation. We probably understand about 5% of the universe. That doesn't mean that everything we don't understand is supernatural.

Hi Ghost

I think everything we don't understand in the universe yet is not a result of an inability to find a natural explanation, but a lack of technical ability on our part at this point in time. The LHC may solve this, or it may not. The word theoretically place a big part here. It must theoretically have a natural explanation.

It can also mean that the supernatural never has to be evoked at all (and if every thing in the universe so far discovered is a precedent, it will not have to be). At what point does an agnostic accept that the universe is purely natural and scientific. Does such a point even exist?
Quote this message in a reply
07-11-2010, 11:09 AM
RE: "True Atheists are Hypocrites"
(06-11-2010 04:11 PM)Ghost Wrote:  
Quote:To find evidence for the paranormal, you just have to find an effect with no normal explanation.

That's not actually true. All kinds of stuff has no good explanation. We probably understand about 5% of the universe. That doesn't mean that everything we don't understand is supernatural.

You misunderstand. I didn't say that something with no known explanation is supernatural. I said that things with no explanation are supernatural.

If something has a natural explanation, it is not supernatural. Therefore, to find evidence for the supernatural, there must be something with no natural explanation. Not just a natural explanation that is hidden, but no explanation. Otherwise, all you're doing is looking at a natural phenomenon and saying that "Oh, it looks perfectly natural, but it's really caused by Lucky the Leprechaun's magic marshmallows. It just does it in such a way that it looks perfectly natural."

Quote:One question. If something points to a supernatural explanation (because there's no natural explanation), how do you then prove that it is in fact supernatural?

You already have. If you can prove that it has no natural explanation, then you've already proven that it's supernatural.

Quote:Basically, you've set up a definition of existence that I can't penetrate because it defeats all of my counter arguments on premise.

How so?

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-11-2010, 04:55 PM
 
RE: "True Atheists are Hypocrites"
(06-11-2010 04:11 PM)Ghost Wrote:  Hey, 2buckchuck.

UFOs are a bad example because there's nothing supernatural about them.

You managed to miss the point quite nicely, there. My point was 'There are many examples of visual evidence that cannot be "debunked" as evidence.' - that UFOs are (or are not) supernatural was irrelevant to the point.

(06-11-2010 04:11 PM)Ghost Wrote:  Reproducibility of an experiment is a requirement. Meteroroglogists don't create storms, but they acureately track them.

Sorry, but you just don't understand how science works. Simply repeating the statement that reproducibility is a requirement doesn't make it so.

Meteorologists can't reproduce storms, so a meteorological experiment with the real weather can never be reproduced. Meteorologists can produce simulations of storms using computer models, but that's a very different process. And they can analyze the data collected from some real event in a reproducible way, but that's just not the same as reproducing a laboratory experiment.

Same for geologists, astronomers, etc.
Quote this message in a reply
08-11-2010, 09:53 PM
RE: "True Atheists are Hypocrites"
Hey, TruthAddict and Unbeliever.

I think the difficulty with what you're both saying is that it requires science to have catalogued every rule and every phenomenon in the universe. But for now, we're far away from that. There's a TON of stuff we can't explain. So today, right now, saying we don't have a natural explanation isn't sufficient.

Hey, 2buckchuck.

Sorry. Me dumb. Me no get science. Me shut up now.

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-11-2010, 09:59 PM
RE: "True Atheists are Hypocrites"
Quote:I think the difficulty with what you're both saying is that it requires science to have catalogued every rule and every phenomenon in the universe.

No, no it does not. It does absolutely nothing of the sort, actually. And, nothing either of them has written can logically lead to that path. No one can reasonably expect for us to ever be able to identify and explain every potential phenomenon because no one can be so arrogant as to expect we would even recognize every phenomenon.

What both 2Buck and Truth Addict, and everyone else, has offered is a practical explanation of what science does and how we deal with our human frailties and short comings in trying to understand the universe in which we live in. It's really not that complicated.

Quote:Sorry. Me dumb. Me no get science. Me shut up now.

Dumb? No. Exasperating? Absolutely. Exasperating doesn't bother me (well, maybe it does but that's my problem) but your tendency to claim things are other than what they are makes it very difficult to have a rational discourse.

All part of the fun, though.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: