Why should a deity exist?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
02-02-2017, 10:59 AM
RE: Why should a deity exist?
(02-02-2017 10:44 AM)JHaysPE Wrote:  This is simply what the term means - to equip a human for something with which they are not naturally equipped.

Consider

Okay... that's.. not what I've come to use the word.

Perhaps we are indeed going to need a new word in our conversation? Consider

(02-02-2017 10:44 AM)JHaysPE Wrote:  If you would like to nominate a different word that I may use for "equipping a human for that which they are not naturally equipped", then offer it.

Okay... there's immediately a problem within this part for me.

If I'm understanding you, then....

You need a word to describe a human jaunting into hyperspace... Consider

That's the closest I can think of where you've presented the word 'Supernatural' and my own understanding of the word 'Supernatural' cross over.

Are we closer to understanding one another?

Consider
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-02-2017, 11:05 AM
RE: Why should a deity exist?
(02-02-2017 10:30 AM)JHaysPE Wrote:  Judaism is at 4,500 years right now, and still on-going.

Actually Judaism is in NO WAY 4500 years old.
The Tribal Confederation was in existence around 1200 BCE, and before that we really don't know what was going on. The Kingdoms (and there were for the most part always 2) began after the turn of the millennium, (1000 BCE).

Yahweh had a WIFE, (Ashera, proven by archaeology, who was worshiped in Jerusalem, Dan, and BethEl, as statues of her were found). Abraham, Noah, and the Exodus are MYTHS. Judaism was always (just like Christianity) "a work in progress", and did not become monotheistic until after the Exile, when the Persian Emperor sent them back to serve as a buffer state between his empire and the invading Greeks. He sent with them (with the Prophet Ezra, as recounted in the Book of Nehemiah) 2 things. 1. A letter authorizing the King of Israel to rule in his name, and 2. for the first known time in history, the "Torah of Moses", (which the priests wrote in Babylon to serve as a politically unifying document) ... the first 4 books of the Bible, which is why so much of those texts include elements of Babylonian mythology.

It would be really nice if religionists actually knew something about their own history.

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
[+] 4 users Like Bucky Ball's post
02-02-2017, 11:06 AM (This post was last modified: 02-02-2017 11:11 AM by Chas.)
RE: Why should a deity exist?
(02-02-2017 10:52 AM)JHaysPE Wrote:  
(02-02-2017 10:31 AM)Chas Wrote:  The natural world not evidence of intentional design. Planets orbit due to gravity, day and night exist for planets that rotate, stars shine from nuclear fusion.
Living things are the product of evolution by natural selection.
Natural selection is a mindless, purposeless algorithm comprising imperfect replication and differential reproductive success. From that, change is inevitable.
Are the following true?

• Humans are the product of natural selection, having evolved from other organisms

Yes.

Quote:• Gravity exists and behaves as it does for the entirety of this evolutionary process that has resulted in humans

Yes, and the same goes for the strong force, the weak force, and electromagnetic waves.

Quote:"Algorithm" suggests a purpose, purpose suggests a design, and design suggests intelligence.

No. Algorithm does not suggest purpose, design, or intelligence.

The surf sorts rocks on a beach by size. That is an algorithm.

Quote:So I sense incongruence between "purposeless" and "algorithm". If natural selection is an enhanced form of random occurrence, then it can't be an algorithm.

See above. You misunderstand the word.

Quote:I concede its merely semantics, but I'd like to more fully understand your thinking behind the "order" of natural selection, resulting in a narrowing of the permutations and combinations of "random chance", as opposed to the series of random occurrences, which resulted in an environment, from which :natural order' became a mechanism.

I have no idea what you are asking. Please clarify.

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
02-02-2017, 11:11 AM
RE: Why should a deity exist?
(02-02-2017 10:52 AM)JHaysPE Wrote:  I concede its merely semantics, but I'd like to more fully understand your thinking behind the "order" of natural selection, resulting in a narrowing of the permutations and combinations of "random chance", as opposed to the series of random occurrences, which resulted in an environment, from which :natural order' became a mechanism.

It's not "semantics".
One a process has begun, the probabilities for the next steps are no longer "random". Probability 101.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos_theory
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqPGOhXoprU

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
02-02-2017, 11:18 AM
RE: Why should a deity exist?
(02-02-2017 10:59 AM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  Okay... there's immediately a problem within this part for me.

If I'm understanding you, then....

You need a word to describe a human jaunting into hyperspace... Consider

That's the closest I can think of where you've presented the word 'Supernatural' and my own understanding of the word 'Supernatural' cross over.

Are we closer to understanding one another?

Consider
Yes...I need a word for a thing, which equips a human intellect and will for a capability or capacity for which they are not naturally suited.

Automobile, spaceship, stilts, are of this type, but they are external physical equipment and apparatus.

What I am after with this term is an internal intellectual operative. Something along the lines of such ideas as "patriotism", or "competitive spirit" - inspirational type stuff that allows humans to intellectually inform achievement of extra-ordinary accomplishments.

What would really serve this end is a link to an article to an atheist athlete who describes the motivation and inspiration for their training regimen, as an example.

This is where I am headed with the thought of "Supernatural". In Aquinian terms, it would be "motive" - that which serves to inspire the countering of appetites that might impede accomplishment if not otherwise informed by something inspirational ("motivational").

Ideas? Other than "Supernatural"?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-02-2017, 11:26 AM (This post was last modified: 02-02-2017 12:45 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Why should a deity exist?
It's "Thomistic" not "Aquinian". Facepalm
Do you even Catholic ?

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
02-02-2017, 11:33 AM
RE: Why should a deity exist?
(02-02-2017 11:11 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  It's not "semantics".
One a process has begun, the probabilities for the next steps are no longer "random". Probability 101.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos_theory
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqPGOhXoprU
And what initiates the process? I see this as a bit of parsing, rather than refuting.

At some complex level, we should be able to fore-know every occurrence of everything ever to happen from here on in existence. All that requires is the mapping of every subatomic particle that exists, together with the application of the super-position of every force influencing and interacting with that matter. We then simply allow the program to to run, and we get to predict the outcome of everything.

All I have done here, I think, is re-state Zeno's paradox in a different from than rabbits and turtles. In order for this grand unified model to be predictive, it would have to run faster than the speed of light. So it can't be predictive, it can only parallel the existing universe - at the same speed and replicating the outcomes exactly as they happen.

So - the probabilities do exist. Random mutations occur all the time, and to the extent that one of them results in a better suited organism for the environment, instead of cancer, then speciation may result (if the new organism can't mate with the old one, for example), and a new branch on the evolutionary tree is started. From there, any random mutations which occur will serve to either improve the survivability odds of the resulting creature, or they won't. And so on it goes.

Dawkins offered that natural selection serves to limit the scope of the need for random chance to work on every permutation and combination of traits expressed by genes. Only mutations resulting in natural selection are relevant to the model, with the others dying out, and therefore, being rendered irrelevant.

Ironically, because of the design of his experiment, he accidently showed the link between intelligent input and the outcome of natural selection working on random combinations of expressed traits. This is already established in selective expression in domestic animal traits, with intelligent input from humans, but his experiment showed that a system designed to operate in a "constrained randomness" expresses the purpose of an intelligent agent.

Oops...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-02-2017, 11:36 AM
RE: Why should a deity exist?
(02-02-2017 11:06 AM)Chas Wrote:  I have no idea what you are asking. Please clarify.
Ok...

(02-02-2017 11:06 AM)Chas Wrote:  The surf sorts rocks on a beach by size. That is an algorithm.
How would existence be different if this algorithm didn't exist, or if it worked in "reverse" - big rocks were pushed up on the beach, and fine sand wasn't?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-02-2017, 11:42 AM
RE: Why should a deity exist?
(02-02-2017 08:52 AM)JHaysPE Wrote:  
(01-02-2017 03:28 PM)unfogged Wrote:  You said that we could test that. Please elaborate on how. Please also provide the evidence that leads you to think this may be the case in first place.
I think science is getting close to this. It becomes testable when someone offers a "machine" that is "intelligent". I note that science has done this, only t offer the concessions that what has been produced is not "intelligence", but specialized programming or algorithms suited to a specialized purpose.

That doesn't answer the question at all. If a machine is desigend that exhibits what we would call intelligence then it would, if anything, disprove your disembodied intelligence claim. We'd have an example of something that functioned without needing or having any connection to anything etereal. I have yet to hear any reason to assume that there is something more than the physical brain and its operation involved.


Quote:What I am saying is that by definition (for want of a better one), humans are "intelligent". Border Collies are canines, which have resulted from the "selective breeding" by the intelligent input of dog breeders, to result in a canine particular well suited for and expressing the purpose of "sheep herding". I can cite no such canine that has been "naturally selected" which expresses this purpose - I only see it in the "unnatural selection" of man to result in such a creature.

Wolves are pack animals and demonstrate the ability to hunt in a coordinated manner. Humans took that ability, which evolved through natural selection, and guided the breeding process to morph that into a herding dog to suit our needs.

You continue to assume that because things can be intentionally adapted to a purpose by an intelligence it means that all things that serve a purpose must have been intentionally designed.

Quote:Where I differ is in the observation that some creatures seem to exhibit purpose, which has assured their survival, resulting from natural selection, and not resulting from man's intelligence to selectively breed traits, in order to realize a purpose for man.

Where I think you go wrong is in assuming that because humans can use something that benefits other creatures for our own purpose it must have been planned that way by some other intelligence. If something benefits a species then natural selection will favor it. The fact that we can come along and leverage that same trait for our benefit is hardly surprising.


(02-02-2017 09:56 AM)JHaysPE Wrote:  
(02-02-2017 08:58 AM)unfogged Wrote:  We'll add "supernatural" to the list of words that you have unique definitions for.
Not sure what religion you've had exposure to, but I'll go out on a limb here and say that the definition that I presented is the view of the vast majority of Christians who use the term. "Supernatural" describes the SCUBA tanks on the diver - allowing the diver to function underwater, where it is not within the diver's nature to do so (hence "super" natural). That's really all there is to the term.

No, you are looking for "unnatural' or maybe 'abnormal'. Supernatural implies something operating outside the laws of physics; it is a suspension of what is natural. SCUBA tanks operate entirely within the bounds of normal physics, they just don't occur naturally in humans. As I've said before, when you use these really offbeat definitions you make communication incredibly difficult.


Quote:"Self-preservation" is presumed within "natural selection", as the creature exhibiting a proclivity for self-destruction is now extinct.

Altruism has evolved in many species and there is a great deal of information about how and why it evolves. A species where the individuals are prepared to support and defend each other can gain an advantage that outweighs the cost to the individuals involved.

Quote:That's not what i intended to say. What I would like to say is that a creature with a proclivity for self-destruction is likely assured extinction, as natural selection would tend to favor a creature which exhibits the predilection of self-preservation.

Natural selection does not operate at the level of individuals. A measure of altruism within a species can benefit the survival of that species.

Quote: fall back to the idea of domesticated animals resulting from selective breeding as being "existence by design". All i need to establish this is the observation that I do not observe packs of Boston Terriers competing with the Lions and Cheetahs for Gazelle on the African Plains (although that would be cool to see if someone can point me to You-tube URL). Symbiosis might be something for me to investigate, for example, because it suggests the extreme odds of two mutually evolving creatures - but I have yet to have an atheist point this out to me as serving the atheist point.

I fail to see what point you are trying to make. Yes, intelligent agents can implement design. That does not in any way imply that natural processes can appear to design things without the need for intelligent guidance.

(02-02-2017 10:45 AM)JHaysPE Wrote:  
(02-02-2017 10:32 AM)Chas Wrote:  Do you even Google®?

Paleolithic religion
Lol...yes, but generally to support my points, not yours. I'll have a look at your link, thanks.

So you only bother to search for information that confirms what you already believe? That explains a lot.

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
[+] 1 user Likes unfogged's post
02-02-2017, 11:56 AM (This post was last modified: 02-02-2017 01:09 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Why should a deity exist?
(02-02-2017 11:33 AM)JHaysPE Wrote:  And what initiates the process? I see this as a bit of parsing, rather than refuting.

A random event. Obviously you have no idea what you're talking about here.

Quote:At some complex level, we should be able to fore-know every occurrence of everything ever to happen from here on in existence.

No. Obviously not. All one can know are probabilities, (and there are scientists who say we could know everything in advance within probability ranges) if we had sufficient computational power.

Quote:All that requires is the mapping of every subatomic particle that exists, together with the application of the super-position of every force influencing and interacting with that matter. We then simply allow the program to to run, and we get to predict the outcome of everything.

Yes. Within the range that both Uncertainty and Probability operate.

Quote:All I have done here, I think, is re-state Zeno's paradox in a different from than rabbits and turtles. In order for this grand unified model to be predictive, it would have to run faster than the speed of light. So it can't be predictive, it can only parallel the existing universe - at the same speed and replicating the outcomes exactly as they happen.

Yeah so what ?

Quote:So - the probabilities do exist. Random mutations occur all the time, and to the extent that one of them results in a better suited organism for the environment, instead of cancer, then speciation may result (if the new organism can't mate with the old one, for example), and a new branch on the evolutionary tree is started. From there, any random mutations which occur will serve to either improve the survivability odds of the resulting creature, or they won't. And so on it goes.

Partially true. Once an initial process has begun as the result of the truly initial random change, the NEXT change in that chain has a higher probability than it would have without the change before. It's how "complexity" arises. It's no longer really "random" after the initial event.

Quote:Ironically, because of the design of his experiment, he accidently showed the link between intelligent input and the outcome of natural selection working on random combinations of expressed traits. This is already established in selective expression in domestic animal traits, with intelligent input from humans, but his experiment showed that a system designed to operate in a "constrained randomness" expresses the purpose of an intelligent agent.

He did no such thing...(show us where you got that, and give us two examples).
Countless creationists and other religionists have tried to misrepresent what he said in "The Blind Watchmaker", and failed.
In a given environment, Natural Selection over long periods of time, promotes changes which *can look* (to the UNINFORMED) like they were "designed". In fact we know the environment working with Natural selection is all that's needed. You do not understand Probability or how Natural Selection works. You also do not understand what cancer is.
The Christian Professor of Evolutionary Biology (Brown U) Kenneth R Miller, does not agree with "design". At the end of his book, "Finding Darwin's God" he leaves little room for any divine, but a tiny little window, in Uncertainty.
http://findingdarwinsgod.com/excerpt/index.html

And I repeat again, if a deity had anything to do with "design", why did it do such a piss poor job, and not build in the necessary controls to keep the replication process from going off-kilter, and allowing cancers in innocent children ? Elephants get far less cancers, as they EVOLVED (not by "design") a better way than humans to make sure the replication process happens more correctly.
http://www.nbcnews.com/health/cancer/why...er-n441141
He couldn't give that to us ?
There is a DNA replication checking process ... why couldn't we get a better one ?
http://www.sparknotes.com/biology/molecu...ion3.rhtml
LOL

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
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: