Yeah, that's what I thought. Big talker, but don't want anybody to look too closely.
Yeah, that's what I thought. Big talker, but don't want anybody to look too closely.No I wouldn't be, nor would I participate.
Yeah, that's what I thought. Big talker, but don't want anybody to look too closely.
Yeah, that's what I thought. Big talker, but don't want anybody to look too closely.
Look too closely at what?
I've been through a nice discussion about them with CK and others in a single thread, and the fact of the matter is, we've all left with our same belief/lack of belief as before the discussion started.
I will admit, I am not convinced by the arguments put forth against their veracity, and usually, the same lines of "evidence" are regurgitated like yesterday's lunch...time and time again.
Alleged prophecies. What did you think I was talking about?Look too closely at what?
Which thread was that? I searched and couldn't find it.I've been through a nice discussion about them with CK and others in a single thread, and the fact of the matter is, we've all left with our same belief/lack of belief as before the discussion started.
Are you familiar with my arguments on the subject?I will admit, I am not convinced by the arguments put forth against their veracity...
To be perfectly honest, that sounds like a preconceived idea, not one gleaned from honest investigation and sound reasoning....and usually, the same lines of "evidence" are regurgitated like yesterday's lunch...time and time again.
The Son of Sam truly thought that he was hearing voices from a dog that was commanding him to kill people.
Just because you believe it doesn't make it true. In fact, in honor of Rob M., I'll give another Richard Dawkins quote.
"No amount of belief can make a belief into a fact."
The whole "it's true to me" is a joke, too.
I dont know what part of "it's true to me" is a joke. I think you should elaborate more.The whole "it's true to me" is a joke, too.
Look too closely at what?
I've been through a nice discussion about them with CK and others in a single thread, and the fact of the matter is, we've all left with our same belief/lack of belief as before the discussion started.
I will admit, I am not convinced by the arguments put forth against their veracity, and usually, the same lines of "evidence" are regurgitated like yesterday's lunch...time and time again.
In regard to moonbogg's post, what exactly are you disagreeing with?Hope in something that will never come to pass is intellectually dishonest -especially when the person is attempting to brainwash the rest of his species with the same false hope. It is a wicked and immoral gesture.
Dawkins talks about this using the analogy that the universe owes them something, like peace of mind. Well, it doesn't. If you're still clinging to childish things like religion and "hope" in something that has no evidence will ever or has ever come to pass, then you're setting yourself up for disappointment and you're setting up the next person for disappointment by spreading the lie of that false hope.
The universe is cold, heartless, and unforgiving. Screw your balls on and stop crying in the dark when you go to bed, using "god" as a crutch to help you feel better. You are doing yourself a vast disservice and you are helping to spread that same disservice to the rest of us by perpetuating the lie that is religion.
Just because I believe what? That things have meaning to me?The Son of Sam truly thought that he was hearing voices from a dog that was commanding him to kill people.
Just because you believe it doesn't make it true. In fact, in honor of Rob M., I'll give another Richard Dawkins quote.
"No amount of belief can make a belief into a fact."
The whole "it's true to me" is a joke, too.
Hey thinclient, i asked you some questions but didn't get a response. I'll ask again in case you missed it
In regard to moonbogg's post, what exactly are you disagreeing with?
Just because I believe what? That things have meaning to me?
I'm also not sure what you are referring to when you say "The whole "it's true to me" is a joke, too." I'm not sure what the context of this is. Are you referring to the idea that things have meaning to me?
Thx!
A few things always come to mind reading these type of threads:
1. If you don't know how the universe started, you really don't have any ground for arguing against a supernatural entity creating the universe. You have no reason to not believe, and there is nothing solid in the universe that lends evidence to another way that the
universe could have started.
It is not a matter of sophisticated theories and elevated understanding, it is simple as the the one thing we currently understand about the nature of the universe: something doesn't come from nothing.
Whether or not you choose to beat your head against that wall is up to you. You can say "I don't know", but if you say "I don't know", then why in the world would you fight against another belief unless it conflicts with something else that you want to believe?
You have no reason to believe otherwise unless there is something you disagree with on a philosophical level- that is an entirely different matter.
2. These arguments always end up with some discussion about whatever deity that could be responsible for the creation of the universe is a real jerk or completely immoral b/c of this or that handling of this problem or that problem or evil in the world, etc. Again, this is really not a complicated matter. If there is a supreme entity that created the universe, something tells me that it would know a bit more about how things should or shouldn't be, and something tells me that that entity should be calling the shots. If you think you can possibly know more than a supreme being, or at least a being that can bring our universe about, well, there is not much that can be said for that. If you think flailing your arms against this being amounts to anything more than fanning a little breeze, you are sadly mistaken.
3. If you believe the universe is ultimately meaningless, why in the world do you care about anything? Why would you care if someone doesn't share your beliefs or not? If there is no meaning in the universe, it really doesn't matter what you do. There is no morality, there is no good, there is no bad. There is no right or wrong way to handle a situation. There is no point to save the planet, save the whales, save the rainforest, or save for your child's college tuition. You do it b/c you have some sort of feeling that guides you to do it? Some sort of evolutionary push to perpetuate the species? That doesn't mean anything. You have to steer your mind from the truth of the situation to chase after those notions if you truly believe that we are a cosmic accident.
In defense of Rob, I am not sure how you expect a person to act when he is attacked in post after post. It is irrational to characterize a person as an "idiot" if they have been perceived to slip up a bit. This is less a tool of rational debate and more a tool of manipulation.
If you can't show that the universe started, you don't have a basis for arguing that anything was the cause of it, let alone a supernatural being.A few things always come to mind reading these type of threads:
1. If you don't know how the universe started, you really don't have any ground for arguing against a supernatural entity creating the universe.
Quantum vacuum fluctuation. It's unlikely, but not impossible. Why should we believe that a undetectable being of unlimited powers and inscrutable motives is more likely?You have no reason to not believe, and there is nothing solid in the universe that lends evidence to another way that the
universe could have started.
So what do the proposed gods come from?It is not a matter of sophisticated theories and elevated understanding, it is simple as the the one thing we currently understand about the nature of the universe: something doesn't come from nothing.
Because the suggested belief appears to have no basis in reality.Whether or not you choose to beat your head against that wall is up to you. You can say "I don't know", but if you say "I don't know", then why in the world would you fight against another belief unless it conflicts with something else that you want to believe?
I have philosophical disagreements with people persuading me to believe unlikely things for bad reasons.You have no reason to believe otherwise unless there is something you disagree with on a philosophical level- that is an entirely different matter.
And according to what premise should that naturally follow?If there is a supreme entity that created the universe, something tells me that it would know a bit more about how things should or shouldn't be, and something tells me that that entity should be calling the shots.
Introduce me to these nihilists of which you speak, for I have yet to meet one.3. If you believe the universe is ultimately meaningless, why in the world do you care about anything? Why would you care if someone doesn't share your beliefs or not? If there is no meaning in the universe, it really doesn't matter what you do. There is no morality, there is no good, there is no bad. There is no right or wrong way to handle a situation. There is no point to save the planet, save the whales, save the rainforest, or save for your child's college tuition. You do it b/c you have some sort of feeling that guides you to do it? Some sort of evolutionary push to perpetuate the species? That doesn't mean anything. You have to steer your mind from the truth of the situation to chase after those notions if you truly believe that we are a cosmic accident.
I went back and reread the post. I'm not sure where you got "open your mind and you'll understand" from his post. He talked about beauty in the universe as a process. Perhaps you were referring to previous posts from him which I probably didn't read.I haven't gone back to read his post again, but I'm disagreeing with this whole "open your mind and you'll understand" nonsense. There are truths that cannot be observed with simple observation and require more complex observation, yes. That's how chemical bonds and atoms are studied: through complex observation because simple observation ultimately cannot study them.
However, the human mind is prone to hallucination and delusion. One cannot "divine" the existence of god or anything else. Getting lost in imagination isn't proof of anything.
Well, I don't believe things have any inherent meaning or universal meaning, so to me , the only meaning things have is relative to others. They only have meaning to people. In my post don't think I ever claimed things have any meaning other then to myself.The meaning that you apply to something might make that something more valuable to you but it doesn't mean that the something actually possesses the meaning that you perceive it to possess.
Irrelevant to what? Everything is irrelevant to the universe. I could push a button and kill every child on earth and the universe would keep on chugging along, completely uncaring of what I did.The things that have meaning to you are, ultimately, irrelevant.
Yeah, maybe we have different contexts in mind.If you're saying "things have meaning to me" in an abstract sense not related to the topic at hand, fine, I have those feelings too because I experience love and hate and empathy and the loss of death, blah blah blah, but that doesn't mean anything in relation to thoughts on god.
Therefore, talking about things having meaning in this thread must ultimately be some kind of justification for a belief or a faith since science doesn't give two shits about what means something to you or not.
The same argument you make here can be made against anyone who claims to know the mind of god. Your argument is defeating your own side's claim.
This is a stupid question. Morals, ethics, the meaning of life, it's all been discussed in this thread and other threads repeatedly. If you want an answer, read the thread because I'm tired of typing it out. It seems like the loudest of your kind are willing to scream out questions but unwilling to read the damn answer.
Where, now?In order to address this argument properly, one would have to be outside the universe and hold the experiment there.
Where, now?
None of that light/dark business is meaningful. Allegory and imagination are philosophy, not fact or rationale.
Delusion right here, folks. There are people who see the universe exactly the opposite way that you do. What makes you right and them wrong? The same thing that makes you wrong and them right: subjective perception.
Your imagination is running away down the rabbit hole and your brain is convinced of things that are nothing more than figments of your imagination.
A few things always come to mind reading these type of threads:
1. If you don't know how the universe started, you really don't have any ground for arguing against a supernatural entity creating the universe. You have no reason to not believe, and there is nothing solid in the universe that lends evidence to another way that the universe could have started.
It is not a matter of sophisticated theories and elevated understanding, it is simple as the the one thing we currently understand about the nature of the universe: something doesn't come from nothing.
Whether or not you choose to beat your head against that wall is up to you. You can say "I don't know", but if you say "I don't know", then why in the world would you fight against another belief unless it conflicts with something else that you want to believe?
2. These arguments always end up with some discussion about whatever deity that could be responsible for the creation of the universe is a real jerk or completely immoral b/c of this or that handling of this problem or that problem or evil in the world, etc. Again, this is really not a complicated matter. If there is a supreme entity that created the universe, something tells me that it would know a bit more about how things should or shouldn't be, and something tells me that that entity should be calling the shots.
3. If you believe the universe is ultimately meaningless, why in the world do you care about anything? Why would you care if someone doesn't share your beliefs or not? If there is no meaning in the universe, it really doesn't matter what you do. There is no morality, there is no good, there is no bad. There is no right or wrong way to handle a situation. There is no point to save the planet, save the whales, save the rainforest, or save for your child's college tuition. You do it b/c you have some sort of feeling that guides you to do it? Some sort of evolutionary push to perpetuate the species? That doesn't mean anything. You have to steer your mind from the truth of the situation to chase after those notions if you truly believe that we are a cosmic accident.
What have you got against imagination? I wonder as you typed that if you realized what a sorry, empty, intellectually dull existence you would have without it.
Before the discovery of the Higgs Boson at the LHC recently, it was only an imagined particle in someone's mind (at first Peter Higgs' and then others followed).
It wasn't real, and there was no evidence to support it's existence. Some scientists agreed with the proposal, some did not.
It turns out he had been proven right after all those years, but even if his theory had been proven wrong, we would still have learned something.
So what's wrong with imagination? Is it ok for us to believe in something without evidence or should we just reject everything except what we already know as facts?
How are we to make progress in the small bubble you seem to want to live in where we only believe what we already know.
Not an accurate portrayal. Scientists don't just Imagine things. They ponder possible solutions to known phenomena.
Not an accurate portrayal. Scientists don't just Imagine things. They ponder possible solutions to known phenomena.
And what do you suppose scientists use to "ponder possible solutions"? That would be imagination, which, as one famous scientist put it, is more important than the knowledge you cling to like the very same teddy bear in the sky your opposition does.
Are you willing to "ponder" that you won't make a Planck's length of progress as a species without imagination?
Yes, of course, but they don't just Imagine things in a vacuum, as you implied.