Why I'm a Theist
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 1.5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
12-08-2015, 04:06 PM
RE: Why I'm a Theist
(12-08-2015 06:26 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(11-08-2015 02:13 PM)Free Wrote:  Yes, but we all know the phone was created, and we can find out who created it.

Yes, but that knowledge is not needed, so someone who didn't know it was created, would still be able to describe it's functions, and the interactions of it's various parts, just like scientist do with biological entities.

Sorry, but no. If one does not acknowledge that it was created, then it would have to be a naturally occurring object. In which case, one could not discern any purpose.

Quote:
Quote:The universe simply doesn't work that way. In fact, some things are completely counter-intuitive and boggle the mind.

I'm not sure what appealing to counter-intuition here is about? Are you suggesting that the human existence, that universe was product of a cosmic accident, a fluke, while true, is counter-intuitive?

If so, what would be the false intuitive assumption?

Quote:I find the universe itself to be far more realistic than any belief in any deity ever could be. At least with the universe we can begin to learn about it, where with any deity that we cannot see, touch, or observe in any way, we cannot learn anything about.

Except of course in what he reveals in his work. The question of God is more about the story, than the author.

Please give examples of "what he reveals in his work".

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
[+] 4 users Like Chas's post
27-11-2017, 06:36 PM
RE: Why I'm a Theist
.....

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-11-2017, 11:13 AM
RE: Why I'm a Theist
(11-08-2015 10:44 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(11-08-2015 10:36 AM)Chas Wrote:  Not really. We know the smart phone was designed and that changes the approach.

Not really. Reverse engineering is reverse engineering. A person could believe it was not designed, and yet reach the same conclusion on how the various parts of phone interact with each other.

You make the common mistake of comparing the animate with the inanimate, a false analogy. The entire premise of the watchmaker fallacy underpins your example.

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-11-2017, 11:49 AM (This post was last modified: 28-11-2017 01:27 PM by isbelldl.)
RE: Why I'm a Theist
Evidence of existence is not evidence of a creator. We don't have the ability to observe other universes (if such things even exists) to know whether physical constants exist or are the same for all universes. It's possible that other universes exist with different properties that either may or may not support intelligent life. We may only think this one is special because this is the one we happen to exist in. The evidence of existence doesn't support the claim of an intelligent creator any more strongly than it does multiple possible universes. You've provided conjecture, not evidence.

Edit: My apologies. I have not yet read all of this thread, so I may have just been repeating the thoughts of others. I was replying from my phone, & it isn't very clear that there are multiple pages to a thread on the mobile site.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like isbelldl's post
28-11-2017, 11:57 AM (This post was last modified: 28-11-2017 12:04 PM by Tomasia.)
Why I'm a Theist
(28-11-2017 11:13 AM)Full Circle Wrote:  
(11-08-2015 10:44 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Not really. Reverse engineering is reverse engineering. A person could believe it was not designed, and yet reach the same conclusion on how the various parts of phone interact with each other.

You make the common mistake of comparing the animate with the inanimate, a false analogy. The entire premise of the watchmaker fallacy underpins your example.


No the distinction is irrelevant to the rationale. The comparison stands, regardless of whatever personal rule or limitation you apply to your own reasoning.

"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
28-11-2017, 12:21 PM
RE: Why I'm a Theist
(28-11-2017 11:57 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(28-11-2017 11:13 AM)Full Circle Wrote:  You make the common mistake of comparing the animate with the inanimate, a false analogy. The entire premise of the watchmaker fallacy underpins your example.


No the distinction is irrelevant to the rationale. The comparison stands, regardless of whatever personal rule or limitation you apply to your own reasoning.

The distinction is entirely relevant. Comparing a tool to an evolved biological organism is ludicrous.

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Full Circle's post
28-11-2017, 01:48 PM
RE: Why I'm a Theist
(28-11-2017 11:13 AM)Full Circle Wrote:  
(11-08-2015 10:44 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Not really. Reverse engineering is reverse engineering. A person could believe it was not designed, and yet reach the same conclusion on how the various parts of phone interact with each other.

You make the common mistake of comparing the animate with the inanimate, a false analogy. The entire premise of the watchmaker fallacy underpins your example.

The machine which we are inspecting, demonstrates, by its construction, contrivance and design. Contrivance must have had a contriver; design, a designer; whether the machine immediately proceeded from another machine or

[page] 14
That circumstance alters not the case. That other machine may, in like manner, have proceeded from a former machine: nor does that alter the case; contrivance must have had a contriver. That former one from one preceding it: no alteration still; a contriver is still necessary.
- William Paley - Natural Theology
----

Does the Universe resemble a machine designed by an intelligence or more like a series of machines? Cosmology and evolution are two areas where we see self organizing systems that need no God.

Yog Sothoth! Yog Sothoth! Come back old ones! Yog Sothoth!

Cheerful Charlie
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Cheerful Charlie's post
28-11-2017, 04:45 PM
RE: Why I'm a Theist
The Lord thy god said unto me:
Dude, these humans are just so damn stupid, I'm out. Then it packed its bags and left. This is why I have no faith.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes jonqpublic's post
29-11-2017, 05:10 AM (This post was last modified: 29-11-2017 05:38 AM by Tomasia.)
Why I'm a Theist
(28-11-2017 01:48 PM)Cheerful Charlie Wrote:  Does the Universe resemble a machine designed by an intelligence or more like a series of machines? Cosmology and evolution are two areas where we see self organizing systems that need no God.

The universe appears to be a product of foresight and intelligence, a thing of immense complexity, of matter being able to organize itself to produce conscious creatures, self-aware, with moral and creative capacities, who seek meaning and truth, and a sense of the sacred. Creatures who appeared to be aimed towards something, not merely seeking survival, but something to live for. The universe is far more grandiose, monstrous, and beautiful than it need be. It could just as well have been a universe in which none of this is possible, that no combination of matter produces animate objects, or self aware creatures, but it’s not.

Any person with even a moderate level of honesty, including atheists, like Dawkins can see why it appears designed, that we’re a product of a teleological order.

The inference here is rational, and logical, even if folks such as yourself believe it’s ultimately wrong. The reasoning is sound, even if the conclusion might be ultimately false.









Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

"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
29-11-2017, 05:39 AM
RE: Why I'm a Theist
(29-11-2017 05:10 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  The universe appears to be
Irrelevant to everybody else but you. Drinking Beverage
It appears to me that you should have heared why your argument is fallacious often enough to know better (it has been explained to you a thousand times, literally), but...see honesty.

(29-11-2017 05:10 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  It’s more grandiose, monstrous, and beautiful than it need be. It could just as well have been a universe in which none of this is possible, than no combination of matter produces animate objects, or self aware creatures, but it’s not.
You know what the universe need to be (or not)? Great! Tell us more!

(29-11-2017 05:10 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  It could just as well have been a universe in which none of this is possible, than no combination of matter produces animate objects, or self aware creatures, but it’s not.
It could have been different from what it actually is? Wow, thats deep. Ok, so...? It could have also been even more complex and filled with more life and more intelligent life than it actually is.
So?

(29-11-2017 05:10 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Any person with even a moderate level of honesty...
You talking about honesty is like Trump talking about Pocahontas: Most embarassing to the person talking.

(29-11-2017 05:10 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  The inference here is rational, and logical
Just like the inference of pink unicorns. Drinking Beverage

Gamer over, insert new player.

Ceterum censeo, religionem delendam esse
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Deesse23's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: