What if God is a provable phenomenon?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
27-01-2014, 04:18 PM
RE: What if God is a provable phenomenon?
(27-01-2014 03:40 PM)lookingforanswers Wrote:  It occurs to me, Cjlr and WillHop, you guys (or girls) seem to be interested in my ultimate beliefs. I am curious about yours. Care to share?

I'll tell you that at least with cjlr, I am expecting that the answer should be pure agnosticism, as your comments seem too strongly focused on what we can't know that I would be surprised if you then tried to lean one way or the other at all to declare yourself as an agnostic atheist.

If you are going to say that you are an agnostic atheist, then I would challenge either yourself or WillHop to give me anything other than "we have no proof for the existence of a creator" to justify that position over pure agnosticism (as the lack of proof proposition would have to result in pure agnosticism without anything else to push you one way or the other).

You are making a claim that there is a creator, so "we have no evidence of a creator" is sufficient to disbelieve the god claim. I don't hold out for proof, simply evidence.

Atheist means 'not theist', that is without belief. So, yes, it is agnostic atheism. However, because there is no evidence for any gods and the universe looks exactly like it would if naturalism is true, I put the probability of the existence of any kind of god way, waaaaaaaay below 50%.

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
27-01-2014, 05:22 PM
RE: What if God is a provable phenomenon?
(27-01-2014 04:11 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(27-01-2014 03:28 PM)lookingforanswers Wrote:  Well, first of all, I should say that you asked me for my own beliefs. I don't claim that I can prove a lot of the stuff that I said there, it's just my own opinion based on the best information that I have available to me and my best attempts to use that information along with logic to come up with my own beliefs. That having been said, I'll try to answer your questions as best as I can.

I don't think a creator would need to come in and implant us with intelligence and reason after the fact. I think that he would be able to do that through manipulation of the initial conditions of creation (ie. he would know when he set the universe into motion that 13B years later humans with reason and intelligence would be an inevitable cause of the initial conditions with which he imbued the universe).

The way I figure it, if a conscious thinking being was powerful enough and intelligent enough to purposefully create a working universe with all it's unbelievable complexity, out of nothing, then he would have to be omniscient or pretty close to it. Certainly an omniscient creator would know that the initial conditions that he put in place would result in human intelligence, but I think it's likely that any sentient being capable of creating a working universe out of nothing would know that, too. In addition, since that being would be outside of the constraints of time, he would potentially also be able to see the end result of human reason while creating the universe (weird concept to think about, but it's also the reason why 13B years would be pretty meaningless to such a being).

Now, that isn't to say that humans are super special and should feel like we are the only thing in the universe that matters to a creator. I've heard the argument many times of "why would a creator care about minuscule beings on one planet our of eleventy-billion". Well, the answer, from my perspective, is that I am sure that the creator has plenty of other things going on in the universe to occupy his attention, but I am also sure that any being with the ability to create the universe also has the ability to pay attention to more than one thing at a time. I would expect that a being like that would be able to walk, chew gum, and pay attention to the actions of every human being on the planet at the same time, while also paying attention to many other fascinating aspects of the cosmos.

You can call me unreasonable, but if you are going on my statement, I haven't been given a convincing argument from the atheist side (the only remotely convincing ones I have heard have been from the agnostic camp) and I certainly haven't been given any proof from the atheist side. Nevertheless, I'm a curious fellow, so I still like to look for answers even if I end up coming up empty.

Your "charged with a criminal offence" analogy also doesn't hold water. If you are the one charged then you know whether you are guilty or innocent. I'm assuming that no one on this page knows the answer for sure about whether God exists or not. I happen to be a civil lawyer, so a better example might be someone who ends up on a jury of one of my cases. The person on the jury will be asked to make their decision by weighing the evidence and deciding on a "balance of probabilities" which side is more likely to be correct (ie. the jury finds in your favour if they are 51% sure that you are right). I certainly don't claim to be 100% sure of anything, but I am 51% sure of my own beliefs, so unless I find new evidence or a new argument that knocks that down to 49%...

I don't see how you get to 51% when there is no evidence for any creator, and less than no evidence for one that gives a shit about us.

N.B. Less than no evidence means there is evidence counter to the claim.

You get to 51 % when you REALLY REALLY NEED to get to 51 %.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
27-01-2014, 06:46 PM (This post was last modified: 27-01-2014 07:11 PM by WillHopp.)
RE: What if God is a provable phenomenon?
LFA,

In a previous post of yours, the one I replied to most recently, you wrote, "You can tell me what category that set of beliefs lands me in." So I did, but I never asked you for your beliefs; I feel you're an agnostic theist (or at least that's how I felt before your most recent posts).

I have absolutely zero interest in that which you believe. You claim to have come here "looking for answers," so I replied to your questions, remarks, etc., just in case you legitimately want to explore atheism and learn how most of us arrived at that stance; that's what a forum is. But I have no vested interest in your beliefs.

As for my beliefs, I believe in the hanging curve ball. Sorry, I couldn't resist.

I don't have any beliefs when it comes to a god. I don't label myself an atheist, but I am one. I don't qualify it with an adjective. I'm an atheist, which means there is no evidence for a god so I won't believe in one. It's merely a stance, but it's not who I am. I don't believe in Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy or leprechauns, either.

You said my analogy regarding your hypothetical heinous crime didn't hold water, but it wasn't an analogy. It was, as I just stated, a hypothetical dilemma. I wanted to know, if your life depended on it, would you put your trust, your freedom, your life, your soul (I assume you believe you have one) in a person who would use a faith-filled special-pleading philosophical argument to sway a jury with no regard to evidence or in a rational human being who knows the facts, evidence that exonerates you and the law?

I can't entrust my entire life and, likely in your case, afterlife on a hair-brained contrived syllogism that WLC invented so he could keep making money on the debate circuit and come off as a hero to the weak-minded wishful-thinkers.

Check out my atheism blog. It's just a blog, no ads, no revenue, no gods.
----
Atheism promotes critical thinking; theism promotes hypocritical thinking. -- Me
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like WillHopp's post
27-01-2014, 07:59 PM
RE: What if God is a provable phenomenon?
(27-01-2014 03:40 PM)lookingforanswers Wrote:  It occurs to me, Cjlr and WillHop, you guys (or girls) seem to be interested in my ultimate beliefs. I am curious about yours. Care to share?

I'll tell you that at least with cjlr, I am expecting that the answer should be pure agnosticism, as your comments seem too strongly focused on what we can't know that I would be surprised if you then tried to lean one way or the other at all to declare yourself as an agnostic atheist.

If you are going to say that you are an agnostic atheist, then I would challenge either yourself or WillHop to give me anything other than "we have no proof for the existence of a creator" to justify that position over pure agnosticism (as the lack of proof proposition would have to result in pure agnosticism without anything else to push you one way or the other).

We also know that your fairy stories are fairy stories.

It's Special Pleadings all the way down!


Magic Talking Snakes STFU -- revenantx77


You can't have your special pleading and eat it too. -- WillHop
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-01-2014, 05:14 PM
RE: What if God is a provable phenomenon?
(27-01-2014 07:59 PM)Taqiyya Mockingbird Wrote:  
(27-01-2014 03:40 PM)lookingforanswers Wrote:  It occurs to me, Cjlr and WillHop, you guys (or girls) seem to be interested in my ultimate beliefs. I am curious about yours. Care to share?

I'll tell you that at least with cjlr, I am expecting that the answer should be pure agnosticism, as your comments seem too strongly focused on what we can't know that I would be surprised if you then tried to lean one way or the other at all to declare yourself as an agnostic atheist.

If you are going to say that you are an agnostic atheist, then I would challenge either yourself or WillHop to give me anything other than "we have no proof for the existence of a creator" to justify that position over pure agnosticism (as the lack of proof proposition would have to result in pure agnosticism without anything else to push you one way or the other).

We also know that your fairy stories are fairy stories.

And circular reasoning is circular.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-01-2014, 06:33 PM
RE: What if God is a provable phenomenon?
(28-01-2014 05:14 PM)Brownshirt Wrote:  
(27-01-2014 07:59 PM)Taqiyya Mockingbird Wrote:  We also know that your fairy stories are fairy stories.

And circular reasoning is circular.

Same-same.

It's Special Pleadings all the way down!


Magic Talking Snakes STFU -- revenantx77


You can't have your special pleading and eat it too. -- WillHop
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-01-2014, 06:45 PM
RE: What if God is a provable phenomenon?
(28-01-2014 06:33 PM)Taqiyya Mockingbird Wrote:  
(28-01-2014 05:14 PM)Brownshirt Wrote:  And circular reasoning is circular.

Same-same.

Jesus H. Fucking Christ on a broomstick, guys, give it a fucking rest. Angry

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
28-01-2014, 06:52 PM
RE: What if God is a provable phenomenon?
(28-01-2014 06:45 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(28-01-2014 06:33 PM)Taqiyya Mockingbird Wrote:  Same-same.

Jesus H. Fucking Christ on a broomstick, guys, give it a fucking rest. Angry

Yeah please do. ... or death match! Best of 3 for the win! Thumbsup

A man blames his bad childhood on leprechauns. He claims they don't exist, but yet still says without a doubt that they stole all his money and then killed his parents. That's why he became Leprechaun-Man

Im_Ryan forum member
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-01-2014, 07:07 PM
RE: What if God is a provable phenomenon?
(28-01-2014 06:45 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(28-01-2014 06:33 PM)Taqiyya Mockingbird Wrote:  Same-same.

Jesus H. Fucking Christ on a broomstick, guys, give it a fucking rest. Angry

If he continues commenting like a cunt, so will I.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-01-2014, 07:12 PM
RE: What if God is a provable phenomenon?
Does anyone here understand that when a Christian tries to prove God it really means that they have no faith?

Using Tapatalk
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: