|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,792 Year: 4,049/9,624 Month: 920/974 Week: 247/286 Day: 8/46 Hour: 0/3 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: I Know That God Does Not Exist | |||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 438 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
I don't think that's true. Rationality is objective. The rationale behind an idea should be clear to everybody, whether they accept/believe the idea or not. Accepting an idea is based on the premises behind the idea, not on the reasoning. the belief becomes rational if one accepts it. Of course, it is still possible to be irrational about any part of the process.All that are in Hell, choose it. -- CS Lewis That's just egregiously stupid. -- ringo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Sarah Bellum Member (Idle past 622 days) Posts: 826 Joined: |
But there's nothing wrong with their premises, is there? Volcanoes smoke and glow and emanate heat. Forges do the same. Blacksmiths work in forges. Reasoning logically they (we will assume they reasoned, for the sake of argument, rather than taking it on faith, since I have no idea of their real thoughts on the matter) developed the idea of Hephaestus. What's wrong, the logic or the premises?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Sarah Bellum Member (Idle past 622 days) Posts: 826 Joined: |
Since all of the things that supposedly had a "creative intelligence" behind them, from ancient aliens helping the Pharaohs build pyramids to the evolutionary development of our species, turned out not to have anything supernatural involved, I tend to think there was nothing supernatural involved.
But I'm willing to be convinced if there is evidence out there.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Sarah Bellum Member (Idle past 622 days) Posts: 826 Joined: |
Here's one from the Institute for Creation Research Excessively Old "Ages" For Grand Canyon Lava Flows | The Institute for Creation Research
quote:The ICR are arguing about the ages of the strata, but they are not claiming the lava was anything other than strata laid down over sedimentary layers (with later sedimentary layers on top).
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
AlexCaledin Member (Idle past 439 days) Posts: 64 From: Samara, Russia Joined: |
How is the Supernational being involved? - Quite simple. The Supernatural is performing the Choice of the actual variant of the strictly "natural" development.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Sarah Bellum Member (Idle past 622 days) Posts: 826 Joined: |
Used to be some deity was mucking about, perpetually getting her hands dirty with forming humans out of dust or slicing out a rib and somehow changing a Y-chromosome to X while cloning that first human. Now the religionists are having their Supreme Being develop the specs of Kepler's Law or fiddle with the charge on the electron way way back billions of years ago when there was nobody around to witness it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18338 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
ringo writes: This is normally a logical statement. The premise brought up often by atheists and agnostics is that any "God" worth His salt(and light) should reveal Himself to all and not just some. The intellectual batle lines are drawn. One side flies the flag of faith. The other side flies the flag of evidence. The rationale behind an idea should be clear to everybody, whether they accept/believe the idea or not.Matt Dillahunty haggles it out with an unprepared and confused Christian caller on one of his many shows: Matt does mention that every bit of evidence ever obtained is the result of personal experience. Many Christians, myself included, would argue that we have satisfactory evidence based on our personal experience but our critics, you among them, would counter with the idea that subjective personal experience is not evidence--that evidence must be objective. And round and round we go. Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. ~RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain " ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo
Subjectivism may very well undermine Christianity.In the same way that "allowing people to choose what they want to be when they grow up" undermines communism.~Stile
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 420 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Phat writes: Many Christians, myself included, would argue that we have satisfactory evidence based on our personal experience but our critics, you among them, would counter with the idea that subjective personal experience is not evidence--that evidence must be objective. Not quite yet again Phat. We don't say it is not evidence but rather it is only evidence that you believe what you claim. There is no way your personal experience can be evidence that can be tested or validated or reproduced or duplicated by all others. Personal experience is evidence but evidence of little or no value beyond the individual involved where other evidence, evidence that can be tested and confirmed independently is of value beyond just the individual.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18338 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
But scripture even alludes to the fact that not all will understand, whereas the evidence based skeptics claim that in order to be valid, the understanding must be seen by all.
Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. ~RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain " ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo
Subjectivism may very well undermine Christianity.In the same way that "allowing people to choose what they want to be when they grow up" undermines communism.~Stile
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 438 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Sarah Bellum writes:
It doesn't matter. We're talking about the reasoning, not the premises. Whether the premises are right or wrong does not affect the reasoning. You can have good reasoning from good premises or bad premises.
But there's nothing wrong with their premises, is there? Sarah Bellum writes:
That's what I've been trying to pry out of you. If you think there was something wrong with their reasoning, what the hell was it? What's wrong, the logic or the premises?All that are in Hell, choose it. -- CS Lewis That's just egregiously stupid. -- ringo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 438 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Thugpreacha writes:
I'm not talking about the premises at all. I'm talking about the reasoning. The premise brought up often by atheists and agnostics is...All that are in Hell, choose it. -- CS Lewis That's just egregiously stupid. -- ringo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Sarah Bellum Member (Idle past 622 days) Posts: 826 Joined: |
quote:But wait, you said before that good reasoning combined with bad premises could lead to incorrect conclusions. Since there aren't any thunder gods or volcano gods etc. and you claim their reasoning is sound you must have some argument with their premises.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 438 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Sarah Bellum writes:
Yes. Logic 101.
... you said before that good reasoning combined with bad premises could lead to incorrect conclusions. Sarah Bellum writes:
I didn't claim their reasoning was sound. I said it could have been sound. I'm still waiting... and waiting... and waiting... for you to point out what you think was wrong with their reasoning. Since there aren't any thunder gods or volcano gods etc. and you claim their reasoning is sound you must have some argument with their premises.All that are in Hell, choose it. -- CS Lewis That's just egregiously stupid. -- ringo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 420 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Phat writes: But scripture even alludes to the fact that not all will understand, whereas the evidence based skeptics claim that in order to be valid, the understanding must be seen by all. Oh good grief!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That too does not even rise to the level of word salad. It's at best a classic Harold Hill parody.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Sarah Bellum Member (Idle past 622 days) Posts: 826 Joined: |
ringo writes: So this has all been a futile exercise in useless speculation? All because you want to pretend that the idea of a deity is not irrational, under some weird, convoluted conditions? I didn't claim their reasoning was sound. I said it could have been sound. I've been assuming, for the sake of argument, that the people who believed in the thunder gods, the volcano gods, etc. were reasoning logically, by their standards. Here's what I wrote, if you forget: sarah bellum writes: It doesn't matter what their thinking processes were! The idea of a deity is not a rational one, as I hope I've demonstrated, and no appeal to the intelligence or the rationality of neolithic people will change that.
we will assume they reasoned, for the sake of argument, rather than taking it on faith, since I have no idea of their real thoughts on the matter
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024