Why should a deity exist?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
26-01-2017, 07:48 AM
RE: Why should a deity exist?
(26-01-2017 07:13 AM)JHaysPE Wrote:  And you continue to deny that these two "versions" of "faith" are exercising the same capacity.

Do you mean "acting without all the facts"? If so, I deny that either version of faith is using that capacity because nobody ever has all the facts except perhaps in trivial cases.

(26-01-2017 07:29 AM)JHaysPE Wrote:  It sets up a discussion as to whether atheism is a privation of religious belief, or an affirmative rejection. The former, to me, would seem to inform apathy, which might make the relevance of discussions non-existent.

I think you will find, if you bother to ask instead of jumping in with assumptions about what we believe, that most people here self-identify as agnostic atheists. We do not believe in any gods because we have found no good reason to. We do not claim knowledge that nothing that might deserve the label god exists but we generally dismiss all the god claims we've been offered as irrational to accept.

Quote:On the other hand, if atheism is an affirmation, a definite "thing" rather than a privation, to me it implies a definition for "God" that is being affirmatively rejected. So far, I have seen no definitions offered - as I too reject "God" as defined by a Blue CareBear™ riding a purple unicorn, and dispensing pixie dust from a basket of Mithra.

Well, that's part of the problem. Theists have yet to offer a coherent definition of "god". A god that creates imperfect people then gets mad at them so he makes himself one of them in order to let them kill him as a sacrifice to himself in order to let him forgive them... I'll take the Blue CareBear and the purple unicorn. They actually seem more possible.

Quote:I would then add that "God" is not physical, so no throwing a sample of "God" on an Instron Machine and pulling to failure to assess mechanical properties.

I don't care what god is not. I would like a coherent definition of what it is.

Quote:I am open to the possibilities, but I can't "un-know" what I have developed over a number of years of consideration and contemplation.

So you are open to the possibilities but you aren't. Consideration and contemplation alone are not paths to truth. The conclusions reached must be tested against reality or they are just conjectures.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like unfogged's post
26-01-2017, 07:49 AM (This post was last modified: 26-01-2017 07:55 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Why should a deity exist?
There is no (fake) distinction between a "passive agnostic" and an atheist. Just more religionist BS to try to explain it to themselves.
Either you buy the bullshit or you don't.
The fatuous attempt to say that the dismissal of (any) religion, informed by years of study of Comparative Religion, Comparative Mythology, world cultures, languages and literature,
is somehow "willful" and not "necessary" is intellectual dishonesty.

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
26-01-2017, 07:57 AM
RE: Why should a deity exist?
(26-01-2017 07:49 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Either you buy the bullshit or you don't.

Bullshit be expensive yo. you can even get degrees in it Tongue

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
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
26-01-2017, 08:00 AM
RE: Why should a deity exist?
At work.

(25-01-2017 02:19 PM)JHaysPE Wrote:  
(25-01-2017 01:44 PM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  Hello JHaysPE! Big Grin

Terribly sorry i've not greeted you and such yet. Different times zones, shift work etc.

Welcome to the forums and hope you'll enjoy your time here. Smile

So, since I'm really behind in the conversation. Blush

Might you drop a small post to just highlight your position?

I'll be more than happy to chat back and forth with you. Smile

Much cheers.
My objective here, under the topic of "Why should a deity exist?" is to investigate and understand the informing of choices and inspiration of willed actions from people who do not exercise religious faith.

I am following lines of questions, and responses, to come to an understanding of whether or not 'faith" (choosing or acting with less than the facts) is exercised, and if it is exercised, it is effective or not, and if effective, it so except when it comes to religious faith.

My position is that Deity/Not Deity is simply a statement of faith, no matter which is picked. It is picking one side of a coin or another. If that is true, then any discussion of the subject is meaningless - as people have chosen what they choose to believe, based on the relevance of one position or the other to them.

From there, it might be interesting to explore the products of this "faith" in terms of choices it informs, or accomplishments it inspires.

Thanks for your reply! Thumbsup

When I have time and a keyboard I'll do my blue collar best at putting words to screen.

While I have some space.

About myself.

Raised Roman Catholic. Not strongly by any parent.

Eventually just looked at the information and rampant contradictions within the organization such that I now ignore said stuff. (Running joke that I keep meaning to send off the letter to get excommunicated. Tongue )

As for the over arching 'Religion' thing? I nkw identify as a 'Non-theist'.

In that I see nothing to I indicate the existence/presents of any diety.

Thumbsup
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-01-2017, 08:51 AM
RE: Why should a deity exist?
"Every religion is true one way or another. It is true when understood metaphorically. But when it gets stuck in its own metaphors, interpreting them as facts, then you are in trouble." - Joseph Campbell

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
26-01-2017, 11:02 AM (This post was last modified: 26-01-2017 11:20 AM by JHaysPE.)
RE: Why should a deity exist?
(26-01-2017 07:33 AM)unfogged Wrote:  No. The rock used as a paperweight had no designed purpose. If I purchase a tire specifically to make a flowerbed out of it then I am not re-purposing it. I am ignoring the purpose intended by the original designer but that is irrelevant. Things I use have the purpose that I give to them; that often aligns with an originally intended purpose but not always.

Your butter knife has a mind? We were talking about design and purpose. You conflate the two while I see them as distinct.

If I get one and train it to perform some useful task and don't care about it being cute or playful then I have given it a new purpose.

This isn't a bargaining situation. I don't concede a point unless I agree with it so this "I'll accept X if you accept Y" crap is not going to fly. It sounds to me like you are again trying to portray natural selection as an agent and, while I might let that slide in talking to somebody that I know understands it, I'm not so flexible with people who use such strange definitions.

Natural selection isn't an influence on the outcome if that implies that there could be other influences. The closest I could come to agreeing with your wording would be something like 'the gradual changes in species as creatures best suited to their environment are more successful at reproducing is labelled natural selection'.
May that statement be worded "Natural selection is the gradual change in species, as creatures best suited to their environment are more successful at reproducing".

Does it follow that the particular traits, which allow this "better suited" quality of a creature, are the ones that are expressed by natural selection?

As to the concessions - I'm not negotiating a contract with you. I am simply trying to identify the limits and scope of application of terms. This tends to keep the dialogue focused, I think.

As to the idea of "purpose of rock" - doesn't rock simply "exist"? Wouldn't there be rocks, without a rational mind to discern the utility of a rock to pound on something? Would a butter knife exist without the purpose of "spreading butter"? And isn't the existence of a butter knife dependent on the intelligence of a rational mind who desired to spread butter?

I didn't state my objection to your "rock" assertion above very clearly. The difference is that "rock" isn't dependent on the intelligent input of a rational mind, whereas "butter knife" is dependent upon the intelligent input of a rational mind, and is for the purpose of spreading butter. I concede that the original design of a butter knife may have been from a naturally occurring rock, which a rational mind "purposed" for spreading butter.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-01-2017, 11:18 AM
RE: Why should a deity exist?
(25-01-2017 07:32 PM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  You are minimizing. Whether it is blindness on your part or willful dishonesty, it's hard for me to tell, at this point. I would, however, consider the dog waiting to go outside to be an example, yes. He has been taught that in his "pack" it is unacceptable to pee in the living space, and that he must go outside the walls of the living space in order to use the bathroom. He then reasons that he'd better let the pack members who can open the portal to the outside know he has to pee, and endeavors to do so by various methods. We also have done studies that show a dog experiences emotion in the same way as humans, and in the same regions of the brain, via fMRI studies.

But I was actually referring to numerous studies that clearly show reasoning skills being exercised by primates (and several other animals, but for simplicity's sake I've been focusing on primates), and even empathic reasoning, where they "feel the pain" of the other primate and try to help them out, using problem solving to achieve the desired solution. [If you like, I will gladly find you references to all of the above; I'm presuming you're well-read enough to be already familiar with them, at this point.]

What I don't get is how you don't grasp that this is indeed a "spectrum" of rationality, based on the brain architecture and intellectual capacity of the species in question. And from that root, we further developed our ability to be rational as our brains got bigger. If you choose to narrowly define rationality as "able to exercise perfect logic", then I'd say 99% of humanity fails to fit that definition, almost all of the time.
I thinkyou're offering a false dichotomy here, to offer the choice of either primate reasoning, or 100% pure logic. I've never seen nor read about a non-human primate trained to complete a US income tax 1040 form. I'm suggesting there is a level of consideration above which we might label "human intelligence", as opposed to the dog being able to discern that he needs to be outside to pee.

(25-01-2017 07:32 PM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  Pray to the magic man in the sky all you like, bub. Nobody's listening.
My time is limited, but this strawman caught my eye. it is unreasonable to pray to an immutable God, seeking to change that God. Prayer practice for faithful is the contemplation of what the malleable, mutable, compliant will of one's self is to do with what the immutable will of existence has presented. This is prayer practice as it is for the vast majority of all faithful.

I note that this reality is jaded by TV preachers praying to God for Hot Wheels under the Christmas tree, but this isn't prayer practice, its delusion. So your strawman characterization of prayer practice is also, in fact, a composition fallacy.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-01-2017, 11:20 AM
RE: Why should a deity exist?
(26-01-2017 11:02 AM)JHaysPE Wrote:  May that statement be worded "Natural selection is the gradual change in species, as creatures best suited to their environment are more successful at reproducing".

I think I can accept that.

Quote:Does it follow that the particular traits, which allow this "better suited" quality of a creature, are the ones that are expressed by natural selection?

I don't know how you mean "expressed by natural selection". The traits are expressed by individuals in the population and if those traits confer an advantage then they are selected for.

Quote:As to the idea of "purpose of rock" - doesn't rock simply "exist"? Wouldn't there be rocks, without a rational mind to discern the utility of a rock to pound on something? Would a butter knife exist without the purpose of "spreading butter"? And isn't the existence of a butter knife dependent on the intelligence of a rational mind who desired to spread butter?
I didn't state my objection to your "rock" assertion above very clearly. The difference is that "rock" isn't dependent on the intelligent input of a rational mind, whereas "butter knife" is dependent upon the intelligent input of a rational mind. I concede that the original design of a butter knife may have been from a naturally occurring rock, which a rational mind "purposed" for spreading butter.

The rock was not designed with a particular purpose in mind. The butter knife was designed was a particular purpose in mind. When I pick up the rock and use it as a paperweight or to pound a nail I am giving the rock a purpose. When I pick up the butter knife and use it to tighten a screw I am giving the knife a purpose. When I assign a purpose to something it is completely irrelevant whether some designer existed and had a different purpose in mind.

If the knife had never been designed then I would have had to do more work to get the screw tightened but the knife was essentially just a raw material that happened to need little effort to be usable as a screwdriver. If there were no loose, small rocks of the appropriate size nearby I would have had to do more work to make a paperweight instead of just picking up a rock that needed no modifications for the purpose I was about to give it.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-01-2017, 12:08 PM
RE: Why should a deity exist?
(26-01-2017 11:20 AM)unfogged Wrote:  The rock was not designed with a particular purpose in mind. The butter knife was designed was a particular purpose in mind. When I pick up the rock and use it as a paperweight or to pound a nail I am giving the rock a purpose. When I pick up the butter knife and use it to tighten a screw I am giving the knife a purpose. When I assign a purpose to something it is completely irrelevant whether some designer existed and had a different purpose in mind.
Would you agree that in order for a thing to have a purpose, that purpose has to be given by a rational mind, such as yours? Would you agree that a rock has no purpose, until a rational mind picks up the rock, because of its particular shape or weight, and provides this purpose?

Would you agree that if the rock served the purpose of the rational mind effectively, that the rational mind might take the care and precautions to preserve that particular rock, and that the preservation of this rock above other randomly shaped rocks would behave similarly to the natural process of "natural selection" preserving the traits and features of creatures that are most suited for the environs? Or is there no parallel?

(26-01-2017 11:20 AM)unfogged Wrote:  If the knife had never been designed then I would have had to do more work to get the screw tightened but the knife was essentially just a raw material that happened to need little effort to be usable as a screwdriver. If there were no loose, small rocks of the appropriate size nearby I would have had to do more work to make a paperweight instead of just picking up a rock that needed no modifications for the purpose I was about to give it.
Does this work, this effort, to create utility by either modifying a rock, or by searching until you found the right one, indicate intelligent input to the selection of a suited rock, as opposed to picking up the first rock you find (or the only rock you find) and trying to make it work the best you are able?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-01-2017, 12:29 PM
RE: Why should a deity exist?
At work.

Just a point in regards to all this rock use.

The technical term is "Knapping" I believe.

T'is quite the science. Used well into the 1800's since black powder muskets needed their striking flints kept in good shape.

I also believe there's a field of study into the more distant arts and practices. Actual term escapes me atm.

Cheers! Thumbsup
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Peebothuhul's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: