The World without Religion

quote:

---

Originally posted by robinrohan:
From a practical standpoint, to be agnostic is to act as though God did not exist. Atheism seems to me dogmatic. There is no proof that God does not exist. Of course, there's also none that he does. Agnosticism is not a "cop-out." It's the most reasonable position to take.

---

I don't think any atheist would say they could prove that God did not exist - he's a slippery customer by definition - I personally find the concept quite absurd. To be agnostic about it to me is like being agnostic about Santa Claus, the Jolly Green Giant or the Munchkins.PE------------------
It's good to have an open mind, but not so open that your brains
fall out. - Bertrand Russell

[QUOTE]Originally posted by forgiven:
[B][QUOTE]Originally posted by Primordial Egg:
I don't think any atheist would say they could prove that God did not exist - he's a slippery customer by definition - I personally find the concept quite absurd. To be agnostic about it to me is like being agnostic about Santa Claus, the Jolly Green Giant or the Munchkins.PE[/B][/QUOTE]the only real problem here comes about when something like an actual debate takes place between an atheist and a theist... we've all seen, heard, or taken part in those... i think the theist is warranted in asking the atheist for proofs for her beliefs... see, if a person says "God does not exist" then that person is making a truth claim, the same as the person who says, "God exists"... an atheist making a truth claim should be held to the same standards the theist is held to...this is why a lot of people have stopped saying they're atheist (in the strong sense from above)... they'd rather shift the burden of proof to the theist while not being forced to support their beliefs, their truth claims[/B][/QUOTE]Unfortunately for atheists, its impossible to disprove a negative - thats why I resort to comparisons with fictional characters...its more like demonstrating my viewpoint by puuting forward a logically identical argument which looks absurd (logically even if I could prove SC didn't exist (which I can't) this would not then mean that God didn't exist). It is true to say that I "know" God doesn't exist in the same way that I "know" Santa Claus doesn't exist but my thought processes have arrived at this due to a lack of positive evidence rather than some affirmative negative evidence.Just to clarify - strictly speaking an atheist is one who lacks a God belief. You can therefore have atheistic agnostics (don't know if there is a God, therefore lack a God belief) and theistic agnostics (think God(s) exist(s) but is(are) essentially unknowable).Weak atheism is simply not having a God belief.
Strong atheism is believing that God is a falsehood.I'd say I oscillate between weak and strong. I can't prove that God doesn't exist, no. But then I can't prove that Santa doesn't exist either.Now if we were to agree on the premise that the Invisible Pink Unicorn didn't exist, I could probably fashion an argument....PEedited typos
------------------
It's good to have an open mind, but not so open that your brains
fall out. - Bertrand Russell[This message has been edited by Primordial Egg, 11-24-2002]

quote:

---

Primordial, there are all sorts of reasons for claiming that God exists:

---

I don't doubt you, but are there any good ones? Your questions below are (deliberately) challenging and provocative, although even if I were to answer "I don't know" to any of them (which is in fact a first approximation to what I will be doing), it still provides absolutely no justification for believing in God. The God of the Gaps fallacy creeps in to all sorts of places (many on this forum) without either protagonist even neccessarily being aware of it, so I want to be careful we avoid that. After all, I don't know who's going to win the next World Cup - it doesn't mean there's a God (are Gods).That said, you could write volumes on the topics you raise (maybe I couldn't, but one could ). I'll keep my answers brief, tentative and subject to change, evidence permitting.

quote:

---

1. What started the Big Bang?

---

Don't know Nor, do I suspect does anyone else. See my thread on Cosmological Natural Selection to see how this universe has started for a suggestion.See also Hawking's ideas that spacetime need not necessarily have had a beginning, in the same way that a sphere doesn't have a beginning (see also Julian Barbour's notions of time being an illusion as well).Quantum fluctuations happen withoput cause and the singularity at the beginning did occupy zero volume and zero duration - so could it really have been said to exist? What is causality anyway? Does it require time?What do YOU think started the Big Bang?

quote:

---

2. Why do we have a conscience? (don't play the Freudian card--I forbid you).

---

Why can chimps feel shame? (I'll look up the reference for this later) I suggest its due to the fact we're social animals and have certain inbuilt behaviours that even we don't completely understand yet. To better understand this question though, I need to determine that we can pin down what we mean by conscience or the question is nebulous.

quote:

---

3. Why through human history has every civilization believed in God?

---

Heh - this is a naughty one Why have most civilisations throughout history conducted human sacrifice?My answer is still very tentative yet but is tied in to my answer to (2) - we have evolved certain behaviours (avoidance of incest is a good example) and sought to rationalise in the only way we knew how - invoking the supernatural.i realise explanation above is far too glib and simplistic, but its a tremendously complicated question which takes in anthropology, neuroscience, sociology, politics and psychology. I'm reading a book on this at the minute, which I've promised Delshad I'll review for him - called "Religion Explained: The Evolutionary Origins of Religious Thought" (when I say reading, I mean catching timy snippets of it on the train on my way to work):http://www.amazon.co.uk/...aps_books_1_2/202-1234592-3935007I PROMISE to post my thoughts on this book when I eventually finish it.

quote:

---

4. How did matter create mind (my personal favorite)?

---

I can tell it is and to be honest with you, its not a question I fully understand - why shouldn't qualia be produced by physical machanisms - are you suggesting that some hidden non-physical process is going on leading to qualia, or that since sensation is difficult to describe, God must exist? What about when certain areas of the brain are artificially stimulated to produce feelings of spiritual ecstasy? Talking of which, doesn't taking a recreational drug (matter) change your thinking (mind)? It doesn't seem at all implausible.Not really sure where you're going with this.Apologies, I haven't answered these questions in full as they're way too deep. The important thing to note is that I do not reject God as a potential solution to any of them, he simply carries the same weight as an explanation involving the Invisibe Pink Unicorn.How do YOU answer your questions?PE------------------
It's good to have an open mind, but not so open that your brains
fall out. - Bertrand Russell

that wasn't a response to me was it?PE------------------
It's good to have an open mind, but not so open that your brains
fall out. - Bertrand Russell