|
Author
|
Topic: If you believe in god, you have to believe in leprechauns.
|
coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 499 days) Posts: 3645 From: Indianapolis, IN Joined: 03-29-2004
|
|
Message 7 of 150 (164722)
12-02-2004 5:10 PM
|
Reply to: Message 3 by Ben!
12-02-2004 4:28 PM
|
|
bencip19 writes: Belief in God, at its very core, is irrational. Period.
During the Renaissance, a philosopher/logician used logic to prove the existence of God (yes, capital "G"!). Unfortunately, I can't remember his name right now and the book I have that gives his logical proof is at home. I'll try to find something in the library later on. Anyway, although later logicians found some flaws in his proof, it is still a very convincing piece of work. I'm surprised I haven't seen many theists use it for their argument.
Hate world. Revenge soon!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 3 by Ben!, posted 12-02-2004 4:28 PM | | Ben! has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 8 by mikehager, posted 12-02-2004 5:17 PM | | coffee_addict has replied | | | Message 23 by Ben!, posted 12-03-2004 3:50 AM | | coffee_addict has not replied | | | Message 55 by Yaro, posted 12-03-2004 7:44 PM | | coffee_addict has not replied |
|
coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 499 days) Posts: 3645 From: Indianapolis, IN Joined: 03-29-2004
|
|
|
Message 12 of 150 (164756)
12-02-2004 7:08 PM
|
Reply to: Message 8 by mikehager
12-02-2004 5:17 PM
|
|
Re: A proof of God
It's been a long time since I read the argument, but it basically goes like this. Please note that this is an oversimplification of it. I'll post a better version when I find the book. 1) The greatest thing in the universe must exist. 2) God is the greatest thing in the universe. 3) Therefore, God must exist.
From your tone, it sounds like you don't know that I'm an atheists 
Hate world. Revenge soon!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 8 by mikehager, posted 12-02-2004 5:17 PM | | mikehager has not replied |
|
coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 499 days) Posts: 3645 From: Indianapolis, IN Joined: 03-29-2004
|
|
|
Message 13 of 150 (164758)
12-02-2004 7:09 PM
|
Reply to: Message 8 by mikehager
12-02-2004 5:17 PM
|
|
Re: A proof of God
{edited: double post} This message has been edited by Lam, 12-02-2004 07:11 PM
Hate world. Revenge soon!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 8 by mikehager, posted 12-02-2004 5:17 PM | | mikehager has not replied |
|
coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 499 days) Posts: 3645 From: Indianapolis, IN Joined: 03-29-2004
|
Rosie Cotton writes: Faith is the knowlege of things which are not seen which are true. You don't need proof to have faith. All you need is a burning feeling and you know it's true.
How can you tell the difference between hallucination and revelation from god if there is absolutely no physical evidence?
No. Is evolution logical? no.
http:// EvC Forum: Evolution: Science or Religion? http:// EvC Forum: The Religious Nature of Evolution, or Lack Thereof Either of these threads you can discuss the illogical part of the theory of evolution. Added by edit. Also, a logician you are not. Would you like to show the logical proof that shows evolution is illogical? Yes, I want the math part, step by step. This message has been edited by Lam, 12-03-2004 03:49 PM
Hate world. Revenge soon!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 31 by Rosie Cotton, posted 12-03-2004 2:07 PM | | Rosie Cotton has not replied |
|
coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 499 days) Posts: 3645 From: Indianapolis, IN Joined: 03-29-2004
|
Re: Otay...
HisPrincess writes: Assuming that there IS no God, can you answer the question, Why are we here? What is our purpose in life?
Don't know, don't care. Why, is it important?
Also, if there was no God, I find it hard to explain nature. Everything around us. Such as DNA. How can something so complex come from nothing?
In no particular order: http:// EvC Forum: Evolution (and Increase in Complexity) Replicated in Lab http:// EvC Forum: How does Complexity demonstrate Design http:// EvC Forum: New complexity observed? http:// EvC Forum: Behe's Irreducible Complexity Is Refuted http:// EvC Forum: Evolution and complexity http:// EvC Forum: complexity as evidence for creator http:// EvC Forum: Intelligent Design and Irreducible Complexity Questions http:// EvC Forum: Evolution of complexity/information http:// EvC Forum: Natural selection forced complexity to increase? http:// EvC Forum: Irreduceable Complexity http:// EvC Forum: Irreducible complexity- the challenges have been rebutted (if not refuted) http:// EvC Forum: Irreducible Complexity Just click on any of the links above and join with the conversation.
And try and answer this question also,
How can something be created out of nothing?
Huh? Just answer this, how can something like god be created out of nothing?
Hate world. Revenge soon!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 72 by HisPrincess, posted 12-08-2004 4:04 PM | | HisPrincess has not replied |
|
coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 499 days) Posts: 3645 From: Indianapolis, IN Joined: 03-29-2004
|
Re: Otay...
Danny writes: Evolution has nothing to do with it. Who cares if I came her or I was put here? Either way I'm here. Might as well make the most of it. Yup, why go around telling people that they are going to hell when you can make the most of your life and everyone else's life?
Hate world. Revenge soon!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 75 by Dan Carroll, posted 12-08-2004 4:32 PM | | Dan Carroll has not replied |
|
coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 499 days) Posts: 3645 From: Indianapolis, IN Joined: 03-29-2004
|
Re: Otay...
Haha. Listen, I think that the students who come out on a daily basis to tell their fellow students to convert can really use the time to do homework and stuff. Heck, if they want to serve humanity so much, they should just fly to Africa and help with the AIDS pandemic rather than keep trying to make me join in.
Hate world. Revenge soon!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 77 by mike the wiz, posted 12-08-2004 4:46 PM | | mike the wiz has not replied |
|
coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 499 days) Posts: 3645 From: Indianapolis, IN Joined: 03-29-2004
|
robinrohan writes: Does that seem reasonable to you?
Define "reasonable." Is it reasonable that the Earth is a sphere rather than flat? Why? Is it reasonable that heavier objects fall at the same acceleration toward Earth as lighter objects? Why? Is it reasonable that it is impossible to know both the position and momentum of a subatomic particle at the same time? Why? Is it reasonable that chimps are closest to humans regarding genetics? Why?
Hate world. Revenge soon!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 94 by robinrohan, posted 12-09-2004 2:05 AM | | robinrohan has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 98 by robinrohan, posted 12-09-2004 2:20 AM | | coffee_addict has replied |
|
coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 499 days) Posts: 3645 From: Indianapolis, IN Joined: 03-29-2004
|
That's the point. The fact of the matter is we do not know what's what regarding the big bang and before that. You are trying to use logic (really bad logic at that) to talk about the big bang. I was trying to demonstrate that your method is the same as trying to determine these things (sphere nature of the Earth, Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, etc.) using your logic. It doesn't work that way.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 98 by robinrohan, posted 12-09-2004 2:20 AM | | robinrohan has replied |
|
coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 499 days) Posts: 3645 From: Indianapolis, IN Joined: 03-29-2004
|
It is illogical because you are using our very very limited guess-timate of the big bang and apply common sense (derived by day to day experience) to it. A: Everything/every effect we know of has a cause. B: The big bang is thought to be an effect. C: Therefore, the big bang must have had a cause. Now, consider the following. A: No mammals that we know of lay eggs. B: Animal "X" is a mammal. C: Therefore, animal "X" does not lay eggs. Of course, we know that premise A is false because we know that there are mammals that lay eggs (take the platypus for example). However, premise A would seem to be correct if you were living in Europe in the 1600's. Catch my drift?
Hate world. Revenge soon!
|
coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 499 days) Posts: 3645 From: Indianapolis, IN Joined: 03-29-2004
|
robinrohan writes: And that every effect have a cause.
This ain't even close to what you called "logically necessary." Quantum mechanics shows that there are things that happen without cause.
Hate world. Revenge soon!
|
coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 499 days) Posts: 3645 From: Indianapolis, IN Joined: 03-29-2004
|
Ok... then tell me, from logic, why is it necessary that every effect must have a cause.
Hate world. Revenge soon!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 104 by robinrohan, posted 12-09-2004 3:09 AM | | robinrohan has not replied |
|
coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 499 days) Posts: 3645 From: Indianapolis, IN Joined: 03-29-2004
|
robin writes: 1. The Big Bang was the first event in space and time.
We don't freaking know this for a fact.
2. Something triggered it.
Assumption.
3. That which triggered it is not in space and time.
Based on an assumption and limited, if not wrong, fact.
4. Saying that an event might not have a cause is like saying that 2+2 might not make 4, or that a statement that contradicts itself might be true.
How the hell did you relate the two?
5. As regards formalism versus common sense: It is true that common sensical notions about the world sometimes turn out to be false (quantum physics, for example), but that does not mean that quantum physics violates some basic logical principle. It's perfectly logical, or it wouldn't be true (this is "formalism," which I accept). It's just that we can't visualize the situation in the quantum world. It's our imaginative sense-functions that are limited here, not our logical abilities.
Quantum physics ain't common sense.
6. Therefore, the provability of whether or not there is a God and the provability of whether or not there are leprechauns are not on the same level. There might be leprechauns but there is no reason to suppose there are any, not a shred of evidence. The First Cause, however, assuming the validity of the Big Bang theory, is another matter entirely. The Red Shift, the background radiation, and all the rest of this theory point to the conclusion that there is or was a First Cause--i.e., that the universe came into being.
Let's assume for a moment that you are right. Can't I just as easily say that leprechauns have always existed, that they exist out of space time, and that they "caused" the universe?
7. One does not have to call the First Cause "God," of course, but it fits the definition--something outside space and time that causes the universe to come into being. Many religious philosophers from many different religions have said for thousands of years that God is in a sense "nothing" and in a sense does not "exist." What they mean is not that there is no God, but that God does not exist in space and time, and our imaginations cannot visualize anything else.
I propose that we call your imaginary first cause "immaterial pink unicorn." You still haven't answered my previous request. Please show me why you think all things must have causes?
Hate world. Revenge soon!
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 115 by robinrohan, posted 12-09-2004 12:16 PM | | coffee_addict has not replied |
|
coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 499 days) Posts: 3645 From: Indianapolis, IN Joined: 03-29-2004
|
|
|
Message 128 of 150 (166814)
12-10-2004 12:32 AM
|
Reply to: Message 127 by crashfrog
12-10-2004 12:23 AM
|
|
froggie writes: If you're so worried about it, use a different term.
I propose we use "Jaba the Hut".
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 127 by crashfrog, posted 12-10-2004 12:23 AM | | crashfrog has not replied |
|
coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 499 days) Posts: 3645 From: Indianapolis, IN Joined: 03-29-2004
|
Re: Which cause & effect?
I don't know what 1.61803 meant when he said that, but my thought on this is this. According to the string theory, the universe exists in at least 11 dimensions. Space/time is only 4 dimensions.
Hate world. Revenge soon!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 140 by robinrohan, posted 12-10-2004 1:05 PM | | robinrohan has not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2