an ongoing interview
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
29-07-2015, 08:03 AM
RE: an ongoing interview
(29-07-2015 07:20 AM)TheInquisition Wrote:  Betting there's going to be a "where do we get our morality from?" at some point.

I hope so Smile

Flex

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes goodwithoutgod's post
29-07-2015, 08:04 AM
RE: an ongoing interview
(29-07-2015 07:50 AM)morondog Wrote:  Hope there's a happy ending Big Grin

me too, she is smart, and questioning life..two good things. Angel

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-07-2015, 08:08 AM
RE: an ongoing interview
(28-07-2015 06:55 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  Question 2 just received, and answered below, time for bed. More to follow I am sure..

2) You say there is no evidence, historical or otherwise, to support the existence of God or Gods. Yet, the cosmological argument/theory uses science/physics to support the argument that there is a God/Self-Being. Do you believe this argument is flawed? If so, why?

GWG: First let’s look at the Cosmological argument:

Incorporating Aristotle's notion of a "prime mover" into Summa Theologica and elsewhere, Thomas Aquinas famously formulated his version of the cosmological or "first cause" argument. According to this argument, the things which we see around us now are the products of a series of previous causes. But that series cannot go back in time forever. Thus there must be some first cause which was not itself caused by anything else. And that first uncaused cause is God. The argument can be put more formally as follows:

1. Every thing has either been caused to exist by something else or else exists uncaused.
2. Not every thing has been caused to exist by something else.
3. Therefore, at least one thing is itself uncaused.

There are several problems with this argument. The most crucial objection to the argument itself is that unless we know that premise 2 is true, the argument fails. If the universe is infinitely old, for instance, everything could indeed be caused by something else before it; the series of causes could go back forever. But perhaps more importantly, one could hold that the argument succeeds without believing that God exists. There could be multiple uncaused causes—multiple gods, say—or the uncaused cause could be an unintelligent, impersonal force. Finally, the argument holds that God is required to explain the existence of the universe, but offers no explanation for why God exists. If you invoke God to answer the question "Why is there a universe rather than nothing?" you raise the further question "Why is there a God rather than nothing?" The fundamental question—"Why is there something rather than nothing?"—remains unanswered either way; so why invoke a potentially nonexistent God to explain a universe which we know exists? This is the epitome of god-of-the-gaps argument. We don’t know…so….god.

One cannot state with any degree of validity that the first causal theory doesn't apply to the mythical egocentric abrahamic god because one has the unique opinion he is the "eternal god", thus wasn't "caused". How does one arrive at that thought? How does one ascertain ones version of "god" is eternal? Which god by the way? There are so many, yet each fan club thinks their god is the only god, the true god and the only true religion. The irony of that kills me. 4500 different religions, all of which claim their god is the one, the truth and the light. Christianity alone has over 40,000 strains of their delusion, and each declares all others are not "true christians".

The major premise of the argument, ""everything had a cause," is contradicted by the conclusion that "god did not have a cause." You can't have it both ways. If everything had to have had a cause, then there could not be a first cause. If it is possible to think of a god as uncaused, then it is possible to think the same of the universe.

Some theists, observing that all "effects" need a cause, assert that god is a cause but not an effect. But no one has ever observed an uncaused cause and simply inventing one merely assumes what the argument wishes to prove. If a god can be thought eternal, then so can the universe. The word "cause" is a transitive verb. Causality requires temporality. If god exists outside of time, he cannot cause anything.

The latest spin on this position by christian philosophers like William Lane Craig is that:

1) Everything that begins to exist has a cause.
2) The universe began to exist.
3) Therefore, the universe has a cause.

This may be seductive to those who already believe in a god. To me, it seems awfully suspicious. The clause "Everything that begins to exist" sounds artificial. It is not a phrase we hear outside the context of theistic philosophy. It appears to be an Ad Hoc construction designed to smooth over earlier apologetic efforts.

Sigh. Reading this should make me smarter; and it probably does. Alas, it also makes me feel dumb, relatively speaking.

So, you are built like a mountain, decorated with all sorts of military accolades, well-read and intelligent. I hope you won't mind if I imagine that you also have a very small penis. I am not saying you do. I am just saying that I tell myself you do to offset my own personal inferiority complex.

Sorry, back to the interview...

I just wanted to let you know that I love you even though you aren't naked right now. Heart
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 7 users Like TurkeyBurner's post
29-07-2015, 08:27 AM
RE: an ongoing interview
Is she interviewing just you or other people? I'm just wondering cause if she presenting the same questions to different beliefs she may find their not a equipped for such questioning.

Don't Live each day like it's your last. Live each day like you have 541 days after that one where every choice you make will have lasting implications to you and the world around you. ~ Tim Minchin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Commonsensei's post
29-07-2015, 09:07 AM
RE: an ongoing interview
(29-07-2015 08:08 AM)TurkeyBurner Wrote:  ... I am just saying that I tell myself you do to offset my own personal inferiority complex ...

Oh stop it, TB. We're well aware the Smithsonian has already contracted for possession of your nipples for its Specimens of Extraordinary Americana exhibit and you've just been too modest to brag about it. Let's just hope that contract includes a clause that prohibits the museum from taking possession "too early" Tongue
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Airportkid's post
29-07-2015, 09:59 AM
RE: an ongoing interview
(29-07-2015 08:08 AM)TurkeyBurner Wrote:  
(28-07-2015 06:55 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  Question 2 just received, and answered below, time for bed. More to follow I am sure..

2) You say there is no evidence, historical or otherwise, to support the existence of God or Gods. Yet, the cosmological argument/theory uses science/physics to support the argument that there is a God/Self-Being. Do you believe this argument is flawed? If so, why?

GWG: First let’s look at the Cosmological argument:

Incorporating Aristotle's notion of a "prime mover" into Summa Theologica and elsewhere, Thomas Aquinas famously formulated his version of the cosmological or "first cause" argument. According to this argument, the things which we see around us now are the products of a series of previous causes. But that series cannot go back in time forever. Thus there must be some first cause which was not itself caused by anything else. And that first uncaused cause is God. The argument can be put more formally as follows:

1. Every thing has either been caused to exist by something else or else exists uncaused.
2. Not every thing has been caused to exist by something else.
3. Therefore, at least one thing is itself uncaused.

There are several problems with this argument. The most crucial objection to the argument itself is that unless we know that premise 2 is true, the argument fails. If the universe is infinitely old, for instance, everything could indeed be caused by something else before it; the series of causes could go back forever. But perhaps more importantly, one could hold that the argument succeeds without believing that God exists. There could be multiple uncaused causes—multiple gods, say—or the uncaused cause could be an unintelligent, impersonal force. Finally, the argument holds that God is required to explain the existence of the universe, but offers no explanation for why God exists. If you invoke God to answer the question "Why is there a universe rather than nothing?" you raise the further question "Why is there a God rather than nothing?" The fundamental question—"Why is there something rather than nothing?"—remains unanswered either way; so why invoke a potentially nonexistent God to explain a universe which we know exists? This is the epitome of god-of-the-gaps argument. We don’t know…so….god.

One cannot state with any degree of validity that the first causal theory doesn't apply to the mythical egocentric abrahamic god because one has the unique opinion he is the "eternal god", thus wasn't "caused". How does one arrive at that thought? How does one ascertain ones version of "god" is eternal? Which god by the way? There are so many, yet each fan club thinks their god is the only god, the true god and the only true religion. The irony of that kills me. 4500 different religions, all of which claim their god is the one, the truth and the light. Christianity alone has over 40,000 strains of their delusion, and each declares all others are not "true christians".

The major premise of the argument, ""everything had a cause," is contradicted by the conclusion that "god did not have a cause." You can't have it both ways. If everything had to have had a cause, then there could not be a first cause. If it is possible to think of a god as uncaused, then it is possible to think the same of the universe.

Some theists, observing that all "effects" need a cause, assert that god is a cause but not an effect. But no one has ever observed an uncaused cause and simply inventing one merely assumes what the argument wishes to prove. If a god can be thought eternal, then so can the universe. The word "cause" is a transitive verb. Causality requires temporality. If god exists outside of time, he cannot cause anything.

The latest spin on this position by christian philosophers like William Lane Craig is that:

1) Everything that begins to exist has a cause.
2) The universe began to exist.
3) Therefore, the universe has a cause.

This may be seductive to those who already believe in a god. To me, it seems awfully suspicious. The clause "Everything that begins to exist" sounds artificial. It is not a phrase we hear outside the context of theistic philosophy. It appears to be an Ad Hoc construction designed to smooth over earlier apologetic efforts.

Sigh. Reading this should make me smarter; and it probably does. Alas, it also makes me feel dumb, relatively speaking.

So, you are built like a mountain, decorated with all sorts of military accolades, well-read and intelligent. I hope you won't mind if I imagine that you also have a very small penis. I am not saying you do. I am just saying that I tell myself you do to offset my own personal inferiority complex.

Sorry, back to the interview...
Blink

Big Grin

Thanks, makes me feel appreciated. I have always been a hyper active over achiever....sort of like a 6 foot 1 inch human vibrator Unsure

Evil_monster

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like goodwithoutgod's post
29-07-2015, 10:04 AM
RE: an ongoing interview
(29-07-2015 08:27 AM)Commonsensei Wrote:  Is she interviewing just you or other people? I'm just wondering cause if she presenting the same questions to different beliefs she may find their not a equipped for such questioning.

She is also interviewing another, I assume a theist.

I know this only because in one email she said, "Well, its a lot more in depth then the other person I am interviewing. They are easy to trip up. You are not." She stated she uses my TTA resource library as a source for the other interview, so again, I am assuming that person is of the creationist persuasion. If she is using that info, I am sure she is having a field day with the poor theist Laugh out load

Blush

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes goodwithoutgod's post
29-07-2015, 10:15 AM
RE: an ongoing interview
This is a very good read, Can't wait for more posts Big Grin

I've used your resource thread as well goodwithoutgod its amazingly helpful and has expanded my own knowledge greatly.

“We can judge our progress by the courage of our questions and the depth of our answers, our willingness to embrace what is true rather than what feels good.”
― Carl Sagan
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Worom's post
29-07-2015, 10:16 AM
RE: an ongoing interview
(29-07-2015 10:04 AM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  
(29-07-2015 08:27 AM)Commonsensei Wrote:  Is she interviewing just you or other people? I'm just wondering cause if she presenting the same questions to different beliefs she may find their not a equipped for such questioning.

She is also interviewing another, I assume a theist.

I know this only because in one email she said, "Well, its a lot more in depth then the other person I am interviewing. They are easy to trip up. You are not." She stated she uses my TTA resource library as a source for the other interview, so again, I am assuming that person is of the creationist persuasion. If she is using that info, I am sure she is having a field day with the poor theist Laugh out load

Blush

If she's questioning already, then creationism is going to make her retreat from the theist position like half-decayed roadkill.

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like TheInquisition's post
29-07-2015, 10:30 AM
RE: an ongoing interview
(29-07-2015 10:15 AM)Worom Wrote:  This is a very good read, Can't wait for more posts Big Grin

I've used your resource thread as well goodwithoutgod its amazingly helpful and has expanded my own knowledge greatly.

I have really neglected my efforts on that, so much school work, job, and family intrusion. I have a stack of 2 inch books I ordered that I need to read and absorb and do some more writing of my research and update the resource thread...meh...someday, almost done with classes, 5 to go. But I am truly glad someone has benefited from my musings and research. Thumbsup

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes goodwithoutgod's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: