Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 69 (9102 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: sensei
Upcoming Birthdays: Tusko
Post Volume: Total: 904,253 Year: 1,134/14,231 Month: 58/1,076 Week: 167/234 Day: 19/39 Hour: 3/5


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Power of the New Intelligent Design...
Taq
Member
Posts: 9296
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.2


(1)
Message 571 of 580 (905227)
01-19-2023 7:10 PM
Reply to: Message 568 by GDR
01-19-2023 4:46 PM


GDR writes:
Barrigar's point is that when civilization comes to an end and if there is nothing other than the material, then the meaning and purposes we had in this life will ultimately have no meaning and purpose.
As long as there are 2 or more humans interacting there is civilization. If there are no humans, it isn't worth asking about purpose or meaning. Even a lone human can find purpose and meaning as they learn new things and explore before their death.
However again, as this is a finite world and if materialism represents actual reality, then ultimately there is no meaning or purpose to our lives that aren't simply transitory.
What's wrong with transitory meaning and purpose? Finding new meaning and purpose as the world changes around you doesn't seem like a problem.
This seems to fit into a trend that I have seen within Christian apologetics. There seems to be a common thread where there can't be meaning and purpose unless it is an intrinsic property of the universe. There also can't be morality unless it is based on some objective standard. Overall, Christian apologetics seems to have a problem with the subjectivity of the human experience. I have often seen phrases like, "in atheism, there is no real purpose in life," as if a subjective purpose is not real.
In my own experience as an atheist, I have become very comfortable with the subjective. I don't need the universe to have an intrinsic purpose in order to find my own purpose in life, and subjective morality works quite well for me (and for society). I am able to understand and embrace both my objective skeptical side and my very subjective and fallible human side. The human experience is one big contradiction after another, and I think it's a great ride.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 568 by GDR, posted 01-19-2023 4:46 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 572 by GDR, posted 01-19-2023 8:30 PM Taq has not replied
 Message 575 by Phat, posted 01-20-2023 3:23 PM Taq has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 5920
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.3


Message 572 of 580 (905234)
01-19-2023 8:30 PM
Reply to: Message 571 by Taq
01-19-2023 7:10 PM


Taq writes:
As long as there are 2 or more humans interacting there is civilization. If there are no humans, it isn't worth asking about purpose or meaning. Even a lone human can find purpose and meaning as they learn new things and explore before their death.
Wouldn't disagree with any of that. My point was that you misunderstood what Barrigar was saying and I wanted to correct it.
Taq writes:
What's wrong with transitory meaning and purpose? Finding new meaning and purpose as the world changes around you doesn't seem like a problem.
Nothing wrong and it isn't a problem
Taq writes:
This seems to fit into a trend that I have seen within Christian apologetics. There seems to be a common thread where there can't be meaning and purpose unless it is an intrinsic property of the universe. There also can't be morality unless it is based on some objective standard. Overall, Christian apologetics seems to have a problem with the subjectivity of the human experience. I have often seen phrases like, "in atheism, there is no real purpose in life," as if a subjective purpose is not real.
I agree with all of that. I do suggest that the difference is between our meanings and purposes in this life that would no longer be meaningful with the end of civilization as opposed to having meaning that would extend beyond this existence and into the next.
Taq writes:
n my own experience as an atheist, I have become very comfortable with the subjective. I don't need the universe to have an intrinsic purpose in order to find my own purpose in life, and subjective morality works quite well for me (and for society). I am able to understand and embrace both my objective skeptical side and my very subjective and fallible human side. The human experience is one big contradiction after another, and I think it's a great ride.
That's reasonable and well put.

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


This message is a reply to:
 Message 571 by Taq, posted 01-19-2023 7:10 PM Taq has not replied

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 20810
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.4


(1)
Message 573 of 580 (905239)
01-20-2023 11:07 AM
Reply to: Message 564 by Dredge
01-19-2023 1:19 PM


Dredge writes:
Please be advised...
You're in no position to advise anybody about anything. Your IQ is 9.

Come all of you cowboys all over this land,
I'll teach you the law of the Ranger's Command:
To hold a six shooter, and never to run
As long as there's bullets in both of your guns.
-- Woody Guthrie

This message is a reply to:
 Message 564 by Dredge, posted 01-19-2023 1:19 PM Dredge has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 574 by dwise1, posted 01-20-2023 11:17 AM ringo has seen this message but not replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5558
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 3.0


(3)
Message 574 of 580 (905240)
01-20-2023 11:17 AM
Reply to: Message 573 by ringo
01-20-2023 11:07 AM


You're in no position to advise anybody about anything. Your IQ is 9.
The best he could do would be to advise by example, a prime example of what not to be and what not to do:
"Observe Dredge. DON'T BE THAT GUY!"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 573 by ringo, posted 01-20-2023 11:07 AM ringo has seen this message but not replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 17034
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 575 of 580 (905248)
01-20-2023 3:23 PM
Reply to: Message 571 by Taq
01-19-2023 7:10 PM


A Taqtical advantage
Taq writes:
Even a lone human can find purpose and meaning as they learn new things and explore before their death.
Go on...
Taq writes:
What's wrong with transitory meaning and purpose? Finding new meaning and purpose as the world changes around you doesn't seem like a problem.
I look at it like this. Dream as if you (or your species) are gonna live forever. Plan as if you could be gone tomorrow.
Taq writes:
Overall, Christian apologetics seems to have a problem with the subjectivity of the human experience. I have often seen phrases like, "in atheism, there is no real purpose in life," as if a subjective purpose is not real.
This is charging up my neurons a bit. I will have to think about what you just said.
Taq writes:
In my own experience as an atheist, I have become very comfortable with the subjective. I don't need the universe to have an intrinsic purpose in order to find my own purpose in life, and subjective morality works quite well for me (and for society). I am able to understand and embrace both my objective skeptical side and my very subjective and fallible human side. The human experience is one big contradiction after another, and I think it's a great ride.
Do you see subjectivity in truth? Traditionally, I attempted to validate belief as an objective truth. This was made possible only because I became a believer and focused on *that* emotional objectivity. Im trying to understand this concept of what a subjective truth actually would be.

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 (1894).
When both religious and non-religious people reach the same conclusions then you know religion isn't the reason.--Percy
Democrats should not be the only party. Respect the two-party system. -Phat, in December 2022
We see Monsters where Science shows us Windmills.~Phat, remixed

This message is a reply to:
 Message 571 by Taq, posted 01-19-2023 7:10 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 576 by Taq, posted 01-20-2023 5:31 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9296
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.2


(2)
Message 576 of 580 (905249)
01-20-2023 5:31 PM
Reply to: Message 575 by Phat
01-20-2023 3:23 PM


Re: A Taqtical advantage
Phat writes:
Do you see subjectivity in truth? Traditionally, I attempted to validate belief as an objective truth.
I see objectivity as the path to truth. The subjective part is the human experience. For example, I love my parents and siblings. This isn't an objective truth, but it is a very subjective emotion that I hold very dear. It is one of the most important parts of the human experience and being a human. Experiencing a beautiful sunset, listening to an amazing Bach concerto, and admiring a great painting are all subjective experiences, but they are all important parts of life.
Something can be subjective and still be very important. It doesn't make it a truth, but it can be a vital part of our lives. Subjective emotions are real, even if they aren't objective truths.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 575 by Phat, posted 01-20-2023 3:23 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2202
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 577 of 580 (905282)
01-22-2023 12:04 AM
Reply to: Message 558 by Taq
01-09-2023 10:43 AM


Dredge writes:
... except no one has discovered a natural cause for the changes in life-forms evident in the fossil record.
Taq writes:
​Here it is:
Human Genetics Confirms Mutations as the Drivers of Diversity and Evolution – EvoGrad – EvoGrad
The differences between species have been shown to be due to the natural mechanisms we see creating mutations in living populations.
Taq the con-man is at it again ...
This is about the 3rd time you've presented the same argument by Steve Schaffner. You seem to be running out of ideas.
Schaffner's argument is just a theory ... it doesn't prove that science has discovered what process was responsible for the changes in life-forms evident in the fossil record. News flash: A theory is not a discovery.
Furthermore, Schaffner's argument doesn't extend to the evolution of different phyla ... it merely relates to the alleged common ancestor of humans and chimps.
And guess what, dum-dum? It's impossible for anyone to discover what process was responsible for the changes in life-forms evident in the fossil record ... although that fact doesn't deter Darwinoid charlatans like you from claiming otherwise.
Incidentally, the EvoGrad blog(?) you cited is a joke ... the Darwinoid author states that he chooses to remain anonymous, so his credibility goes down the drain right there.
Then he declares that he's an atheist ... which means his views on evolution will be characterised by extreme bias, delusional fantasies, pseudo-science, false claims and almost certainly, outright lies.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 558 by Taq, posted 01-09-2023 10:43 AM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 580 by Taq, posted 01-23-2023 10:39 AM Dredge has not replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2202
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 578 of 580 (905283)
01-22-2023 12:12 AM
Reply to: Message 553 by Tanypteryx
01-07-2023 1:44 PM


I think you're taking this insect thing way too far. It's all well and good to study insects ... and to even give yourself the taxonomic name of an insect genus ... but to actually start thinking like an insect, well that's not a good idea at all.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 553 by Tanypteryx, posted 01-07-2023 1:44 PM Tanypteryx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 579 by Tanypteryx, posted 01-22-2023 12:17 PM Dredge has not replied

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 3758
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 579 of 580 (905290)
01-22-2023 12:17 PM
Reply to: Message 578 by Dredge
01-22-2023 12:12 AM


Tanypteryx writes:
Sludge writes:
... except no one has discovered a natural cause for the changes in life-forms evident in the fossil record.
Sure they have, but no one has discovered evidence of your imaginary god poofing anything, just a far-fetched bronze age myth made up by a bunch of goat fuckers.
Sludge writes:
All you clowns have is flawed theory based on a far-fetched nineteenth-century idea.
And hundreds of museums and libraries stuffed with supporting evidence for a robust 21st century theory.
Sludge writes:
I think you're taking this insect thing way too far. It's all well and good to study insects ... and to even give yourself the taxonomic name of an insect genus ... but to actually start thinking like an insect, well that's not a good idea at all.
Very imaginative.

Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned!

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq


This message is a reply to:
 Message 578 by Dredge, posted 01-22-2023 12:12 AM Dredge has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9296
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.2


(2)
Message 580 of 580 (905318)
01-23-2023 10:39 AM
Reply to: Message 577 by Dredge
01-22-2023 12:04 AM


Dredge writes:
This is about the 3rd time you've presented the same argument by Steve Schaffner. You seem to be running out of ideas.

Schaffner's argument is just a theory ... it doesn't prove that science has discovered what process was responsible for the changes in life-forms evident in the fossil record. News flash: A theory is not a discovery.
Funny how you can't address the actual observations. It seems all you can muster is "Nuh uh!".
Do you know how the scientific method works? Do you know what hypothesis testing is? You seem to be arguing against the very practice of doing science.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 577 by Dredge, posted 01-22-2023 12:04 AM Dredge has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2022 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2023