Why I'm a Theist
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 2 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
29-07-2015, 12:27 AM
RE: Why I'm a Theist
(29-07-2015 12:23 AM)Chas Wrote:  Like 5-year-olds, they must have an answer - even a made-up one.

And unlike 5 year old's they're unwilling to keep asking "So who made God then?" You gotta be suspicious if your line of reasoning won't even convince a kid.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like morondog's post
29-07-2015, 04:58 AM
RE: Why I'm a Theist
(28-07-2015 01:11 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  
(28-07-2015 01:06 PM)drewpaul Wrote:  ...
A simple lack of belief is absurdly easy to maintain. There are people who lack belief in things most people accept as fact, for instance that man landed on the moon. No matter what evidence is submitted, they will maintain its all created by a hoax, demand you prove its not a hoax and then say you haven't presented any evidence. Its even easier with an opinion which by definition means there is no conclusive evidence available.

A person can believe or disbelief fine to their own discretion. The problem is often people don't simply disbelieve those types of stances but proclaim knowledge of a special degree based on secretive or covered-up types of knowledge.

There isn't a fear or shame for the concept of admitting a firm unknown at the moment.

Sorry to jump in to the middle of the conversation here but I thought it worth emphasising the error here.

No one should have a problem with someone disbelieving the claim "that man landed on the moon." The claim should be (and of course is) supported by evidence.

Fair enough. Drew, you were doing well up until this point but then you went off the rails with "they will maintain its all created by a hoax" ... this is a positive claim and needs to support by evidence ... it is no longer just disbelief.

I just thought I'd point that out. No need to thank me.

Wink

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like DLJ's post
29-07-2015, 05:06 AM
RE: Why I'm a Theist
(28-07-2015 02:35 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(28-07-2015 01:20 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  No one here claims "physics fixes all the facts".

That's probably more of a problem for you than you care to realize, or have ever worked out.

Jerry Coyne: “The view that all sciences are in principle reducible to the laws of physics, must be true unless you’re religious.” Either we’re molecules in motion or we’re not.

Alex Rosenberg: "“IF WE’RE GOING TO BE SCIENTISTIC, THEN WE HAVE to attain our view of reality from what physics tells us about it. Actually, we’ll have to do more than that: we’ll have to embrace physics as the whole truth about reality.”

Excerpt From: Rosenberg, Alex. “The Atheist's Guide to Reality: Enjoying Life without Illusions.” iBooks.

Define "fixes".

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
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
29-07-2015, 06:59 AM
RE: Why I'm a Theist
(27-07-2015 06:04 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(27-07-2015 03:52 PM)Dom Wrote:  I suppose "belief" to me implies some unwavering quality, something intransigent. Perhaps one could have applied the word to me when I was younger, a teen (I knew everything then Smile ), a young adult, even up to middle age perhaps.

I thought that the long campaign to distinguish agnostic from gnostic did away with belief, as an "unwavering quality". It's "knowing" that's unwavering, while "belief" is it's less confident sibling.

Quote:Now, that I am older, I think everything is subject to change. I much prefer the word "assume". It leaves room for change. I have certainly changed my views of many things over the years. I may side with one or another view now, that does not mean I won't learn something tomorrow that changes my position.

What's always been curious to me is that your typical atheists seems to lack the sort of confidence of popular atheists, particularly the better known atheists scientists and philosophers. They lack the sort of confidence in ontological naturalism and such, displayed by those who gathered for the Moving Naturalism Forward workshop. I guess it can't really push forward, when your common atheists is not all that confident about naturalism themselves.

You continue to prove that you do not understand the methods and conclusions of science. All scientific knowledge is tentative as it could be changed with further evidence.
This has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not one believes in ontological naturalism or not.

In my opinion, ontological naturalism is likely true since science uses methodological naturalism and it works. There has never been a non-naturalistic explanation for anything- not because of the assumptions of science, but because of the evidence.

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
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
29-07-2015, 07:05 AM
RE: Why I'm a Theist
(28-07-2015 01:06 PM)drewpaul Wrote:  Unfogged,

Quote:Do we agree we are looking at these 4 options?
a. universe does exist, creator god exists (but is not obviously apparent to all)
b. universe does exist, came about from unknown natural cause

In my opinion, B is the atheist position, the one they don't care to defend or acknowledge.

A simple lack of belief is absurdly easy to maintain. There are people who lack belief in things most people accept as fact, for instance that man landed on the moon. No matter what evidence is submitted, they will maintain its all created by a hoax, demand you prove its not a hoax and then say you haven't presented any evidence. Its even easier with an opinion which by definition means there is no conclusive evidence available.

Like other theists, you seem unable to understand a scientific view.

"b." is a working hypothesis, not a belief. Since there is evidence of natural forces and no evidence of supernatural ones, it makes "a." a non-starter as a scientific hypothesis.

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
29-07-2015, 07:06 AM
RE: Why I'm a Theist
(28-07-2015 01:12 PM)drewpaul Wrote:  Bucky,

Quote:I really wish theist idiots would stop with the "naturalism" already. Whatever there is, is "natural". That would include your stupid set of gods, *if* they happened to exist. Their existence would be perfectly ''natural". It's a fake dichotomy. Are they "unnatural" ?

I wish atheists would quit using the term supernatural as if it means anything.

I wish theists would stop talking about gods as if they mean anything. Drinking Beverage

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
[+] 5 users Like Chas's post
29-07-2015, 07:10 AM
RE: Why I'm a Theist
(28-07-2015 02:35 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(28-07-2015 01:20 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  No one here claims "physics fixes all the facts".

That's probably more of a problem for you than you care to realize, or have ever worked out.

Jerry Coyne: “The view that all sciences are in principle reducible to the laws of physics, must be true unless you’re religious.” Either we’re molecules in motion or we’re not.

Alex Rosenberg: "“IF WE’RE GOING TO BE SCIENTISTIC, THEN WE HAVE to attain our view of reality from what physics tells us about it. Actually, we’ll have to do more than that: we’ll have to embrace physics as the whole truth about reality.”

Excerpt From: Rosenberg, Alex. “The Atheist's Guide to Reality: Enjoying Life without Illusions.” iBooks.

Physics may "fix all the facts" in some sense, but you have to consider what that actually means. The main issue is that of emergent properties - properties that are not easily predictable from the physics level such as the properties of water.
Given all the facts about oxygen and hydrogen, how do you go about predicting water?

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
29-07-2015, 04:09 PM
RE: Why I'm a Theist
Organic,

In my opinion, B is the atheist position, the one they don't care to defend or acknowledge.

A simple lack of belief is absurdly easy to maintain. There are people who lack belief in things most people accept as fact, for instance that man landed on the moon. No matter what evidence is submitted, they will maintain its all created by a hoax, demand you prove its not a hoax and then say you haven't presented any evidence. Its even easier with an opinion which by definition means there is no conclusive evidence available.


Quote:You're kidding right?
You are seriously saying that those who do not presuppose but are actively trying to gather and interpret hard data to answer the "unknown" part are not caring to defend or acknowledge?

I'm referring to atheists who plead the fifth in the form of claiming atheism (for them at least) is nothing more than a lack of belief even though I think they are on board with a naturalistic theory.

Quote:And your analogy of the moon is silly because there is a ton of physical evidence that we've been there. There is no evidence for the supernatural.

Ever talk to someone who thinks its all a hoax?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-07-2015, 04:11 PM
RE: Why I'm a Theist
At one time I had a 'lack of belief' also.

Quote:That's interesting. At what age and for how long and what were you doing then?

In my 20's, working dating partying mostly...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-07-2015, 04:29 PM
RE: Why I'm a Theist
Hello Free,

But have you considered the 3rd option that nothing was ever created? We can discuss this in detail if you like.

Quote:But have you considered the 3rd option that nothing was ever created? We can discuss this in detail if you like.

I have....please do.


Its what I believe is true minus conclusive proof that would make it a fact.


Quote:Perhaps you should re-state this. How could it be a fact without conclusive proof? It would appear to me that you are making a statement of faith here, and not a statement of fact.

Its what I believe is true minus conclusive proof that would make it a fact. Its an opinion based on facts.

Quote:If the only opinion that matters are those who are undecided- and you are on a forum that has 99% atheists and you are posting in the section specifically designed for atheists- then don't you think you are speaking to the wrong people?

The point is I don't want to go into this debate as if the merit of my arguments rests with the very folks who are my opponents in this debate. Atheists unless they have an epiphany and decide to become theists will invariably will say my case failed and I presented no evidence.

Check out my next few posts after the first one I lay out the facts and my argumentation from them.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: