|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Choosing a faith | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
Stile writes: don't get your point here.I state that my point is to show that having a moral/loving motivation can be mundane and not require God and your thought is to cite an example of letting someone into traffic ahead of yourself (which the next person may also very well do.) Which, to me, is just another mundane (no God required) example. It seems you're proving my point? Ya,it doesn't make the point I want to make well at all. My point is that the "god meme" is universally available and that we are able to universally accept or reject it. However, when we observe one person responding positively then I am more likely to respond to it in a similar fashion in the future. It can spread exponentially. However, I agree that the same point would be true without the god meme. I was trying to give an example of how self-giving love can be seen in the simple things in life.
Stile writes: I guess we can go back to basics. We live in a universe, where we have conscious life, and where our physicality is all from basic particles. It is an open question as to whether that is the result of a mindless universe with our consciousness simply evolving through mindless particles or is there an intelligence that is responsible. Either way, it is belief and we will disagree I imagine on which is the most probable. Seems like equivocation to me.If you want to call my conclusion, based on evidence "a belief" the same as your conclusion, based on your desire for it to be true also "a belief." Well... that seems like you're glossing over a very big point. One agrees with all evidence we've learned from humanity learning things. While the other adds in extra entities that have never been verified. Those two things don't seem equal to me - but you may label them as you wish. He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
dwise writes: Having never heard the word before then I'll go along with your wisdom and not use it either.
One thing I've learned on this forum was a new word, Ignosticism: dwise1 writes: It doesn't prove anything but I have thought it through a great deal. When theists in general do it, then the fault is more likely to lie in ethnocentrism and just plain not having thought it through.He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18262 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
dwise1 writes:
When theists, in general, do it, then the fault is more likely to lie in ethnocentrism and just plain not having thought it through.GDR writes: It doesn't prove anything but I have thought it through a great deal. I think the resulting belief/conclusion is based on where one wants to be. Critical thinkers/willing atheists want to be freed from the whole God meme or belief concept. Theists, in contrast, want to have a higher power...albeit one friendly towards them."A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain " *** “…far from science having buried God, not only do the results of science point towards his existence, but the scientific enterprise itself is validated by his existence.”- Dr.John Lennox “A God without wrath brought men without sin into a Kingdom without judgment through the ministrations of a Christ without a Cross.” “The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” — Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9489 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.9
|
GDR writes: Either way, it is belief and we will disagree I imagine on which is the most probable. This is one of a whole set of real annoyances for me. This equivalence stuff. "Your disbelief in god is the same as my belief in god." Please don't do it. It really isn't the same thing and when it's said it just shouts disingenuity. I accept your belief, please accept my disbelief. Note disbelief. I do not believe in your belief. That is not the same as believing in something equal and opposite. There is nothing to believe in so I have no belief. The only way I've ever been able to communicate this is with the old "If not believing in god is a belief, then not collecting stamps is a hobby" thing. But those that believe can't understand lack of belief. I don't understand why this is but they just can't understand how anyone can't believe, so mirror that back onto non-believers. Don't do it, it's wrong-headed even if it makes you feel better..Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London. Olen Suomi Soy Barcelona. I am Ukraine. "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9489 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.9
|
Phat writes: Critical thinkers/willing atheists want to be freed from the whole God meme or belief concept. Please read the above. Atheists don't belief your stuff. Just like you don't believe Thor's stuff. It's a non-thing. Nothing. We don't "want to be freed", there's nothing to be freed from. It's an irrelevance to us. Please try to accept that a non-belief is exactly that, nothing.Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London. Olen Suomi Soy Barcelona. I am Ukraine. "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
ringo writes: I don't like the term "intelligence" as applied to gods. To me, intelligence implies an ability to learn. Maybe, I'm not sure after thinking about it. I guess you can think of a static intelligence.
ringo writes: Why would a god have to learn? I think that God continues to learn about us. I am a big fan of the physicist/theologian John Polkinghorne. Polkinghorne contends that even God doesn't know the future as He has brought about a world where the future is not there to be known.
Here is a 3 minute clip where he talks about that. If that is the case then he is still learning about us.He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
GDR writes: I can’t accept the belief that intelligence and morality can evolve from mindless origins.nwr writes: What does "mindless" actually mean? I think it's pretty clear. Are we completely the result of nothing but natural processes by chance or is there a mind or intelligence behind those processes?
nwr writes: Sure. Doesn't the way nature works give a strong appearance of being designes. Have you considered that nature may have different ways of doing something analogous?He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
PaulK writes: The science-based understanding of morality points to an explanation that makes sense, based on observation. You reject that out of hand - but you don’t have an explanation for morality at all. I'm not saying that it doesn't make sense. It does. We can observe how ideas, moral and immoral, can be spread between individuals and even cultures. But how do we know what is moral and immoral. Immorality has enabled many people to achieve the immoral situation that they wanted to achieve. Morality has worked for many who wanted to achieve a moral situation. Either seems to work, so is there an overarching definition of moral and immoral or is it whatever any individual or group decides it is?He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8513 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
It doesn't explain why it happens nor does it negate other inputs. No, the question is not unanswerable. You just don’t want to accept the answers the actual world provides. The evidence we have provides reproductive advantage as the answer to your ‘why’ questions. Do you understand how reproductive advantage drives evolution? Survival of the fittest, in its various and often erroneous interpretations, is but one aspect. Society, looking out for each other, no matter how small a touch of altruism, may, as the theories go, have had significant impact on the reproductive success across the greater population. Those “altruism” chemicals/pathways become more prominent and more powerful with each generation. A couple hundred generations later and altruism becomes settled in the human species as a benefit just like muscle strength. In all of this, nowhere is some emotionally conjured cosmic intelligence evident or necessary. We understand how, and the why, these processes work, and everything we see in evolution, including emotions, can be directly attributed to generations of incrementally improving reproductive success for its development and appearance in the human species. No cosmic ghosts are needed. So why invent them?Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
GDR writes: Look at it this way. If someone from 300 years ago were to be transported into today and came upon a factory with only robots producing widgets which was being remotely controlled, it would appear that the robots are responsible for widgets. He wouldn’t know that the robots were designed by humans or even that there was human input into their functioning. (you could also look at AI as an example.)Tangle writes: Can you see that this is exactly what you are doing when you say that god did it? It's an argument from ignorance - a fallacy. The ‘primitives' looking at the robot have jumped to a wrong conclusion haven't they? They've failed to properly understand what they're looking at and got the wrong answer. They look pretty foolish on their knees worshipping a man-made robot making 'god'. (Reminds me of the cargo cult tribes worshipping Prince Philip) But they wouldn't stop at the robots would they? They'd then ask what made the robots and when they eventually worked out that it was just better educated people, they have to insert God again; just a bit higher up the ladder. It's an infinite regress until the believer inserts the entirely imaginary full stop of the uncaused cause. There is always the question of who or what made God which of course all I can do is claim, without evidence, that God is outside of time as we know it. However, your views also require going back through a virtually endless list of processes each requiring a cause untill you come to your uncaused cause. So this is kinda my point. Is there an ultimate uncaused cause, or is an uncaused cause possible, and if so what is the evidence for that? Can you show me scientifically how an uncaused cause is possible within your materialistic universe? What is the evidence for that. I claim without scientific evidence that there is an intelligence that is outside our perceived universe that is the ultimate cause for us. Either view cannot be proven and it boils down to what we choose to believe.He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: That’s ignoring the important part, the explanations of the origins of morality. Completely ignoring it.
quote: A combination of social instincts and socialisation. That’s pretty basic. Again. Morality is built on the basis of the instincts of a social species, instincts which are evolutionarily successful. We have elaborated them through culture and labelled them as morality.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
I think it's been cleared up.
He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8513 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
But how do we know what is moral and immoral. Morality is relative. Relative to the circumstance and to the society. We the people determine what is moral. For many millennia the churches, various, competing, inconsistent, tried to own the right to make those determinations. They failed the species miserably so we are now in the process of throwing off the church and relying on secular society, through the rule of law, to make those decisions. So, yes, we have a way to determine our moral values in a very materialistic mindless chemical sort of way. No ghosts necessary.Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6408 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.1
|
Are we completely the result of nothing but natural processes by chance or is there a mind or intelligence behind those processes? This is the dumbest of creationist arguments, although it is one that is much repeated. No, it isn't all chance. Whether there is a mind or intelligence involved depends on what you mean by "mind" and what you mean by "intelligence". Somehow the doubters of evolution are unwilling to ever give useful definitions. Yes, there is intelligence behind the processes, because evolution itself is intelligent. Every biological organism has a tiny bit of intelligence which it uses is choosing its behavior. No, I don't see any reason to believe that there is a single intelligent agent behind it all. Rather, what we have is a distributed intelligence that comes from the little bit of intelligence in each organism. Yes, humans are individual intelligent agents. But when you look at human intelligence, you begin to notice that this is also a distributed intelligence, arising from a little bit of intelligence in each neuron. Biological systems are engaged in trial and error testing. "Survival of the fittest" amounts to the survival of the results of successful testing. Natural selection amounts to the collecting and concentrating of the successes and elimination of the errors. To me, this seems very intelligent, though it is a different from of intelligence from what we normally see with human activity.Fundamentalism - the anti-American, anti-Christian branch of American Christianity
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8513 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
I claim without scientific evidence that there is an intelligence that is outside our perceived universe that is the ultimate cause for us. So you just pulled this out your butt. Yes, you have the right and blah, blah, believe but why? What is wrong with reality that you need to find solace in fantasy?Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned!
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024