Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   I Know That God Does Not Exist
Sarah Bellum
Member (Idle past 596 days)
Posts: 826
Joined: 05-04-2019


Message 1457 of 3207 (858935)
07-25-2019 6:40 PM
Reply to: Message 1456 by ringo
07-25-2019 6:10 PM


Re: No evidence = irrational
No, the third person does not forgive. The third person judges, arbitrates, sets the penalty, levies the fine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1456 by ringo, posted 07-25-2019 6:10 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1465 by ringo, posted 07-26-2019 11:37 AM Sarah Bellum has replied

  
Sarah Bellum
Member (Idle past 596 days)
Posts: 826
Joined: 05-04-2019


Message 1469 of 3207 (858977)
07-26-2019 12:17 PM
Reply to: Message 1465 by ringo
07-26-2019 11:37 AM


Re: No evidence = irrational
Oh, I answered that I while back, I think. Your response was to say that because some people find a rationale, nobody can say it's inherently irrational.
But anyway.
The old notions of a thunder god and such were shown to be irrational as our increasing knowledge showed the natural origins of lightning, volcanoes, comets, storms, etc. It's interesting to think that the newer notions of gods were plagued with questions like, "Why is the steeple (or minaret, etc) on a house of god so vulnerable to lightning strikes coming from heaven?"
Now, what is the notion of a god (nowadays, in the West)? A god that rewards us with heaven after death (or punishes, as the case may be)? Interesting, but not falsifiable. A god that created the universe? Interesting, but again not falsifiable: if you say an intelligent being pushed the button that set off the Big Bang, there's no way to prove or disprove this. A god that parted the Red Sea, buried golden-inscribed plates near Palmyra, New York, brought back the dead, swamped the planet in a Noachian Flood, stopped the Sun in its tracks to help Joshua, cured leprosy...? All either obviously false (the worldwide flood is nonsense, geologically) or legends no more rational than those of Prometheus or Atlas.
C. S. Lewis made an attempt at a rationale, in Mere Christianity, but it's merely talented sophistry incited by the hungriest will-to-believe I've ever encountered.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1465 by ringo, posted 07-26-2019 11:37 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1470 by ringo, posted 07-26-2019 12:28 PM Sarah Bellum has replied
 Message 1471 by Faith, posted 07-26-2019 12:52 PM Sarah Bellum has replied

  
Sarah Bellum
Member (Idle past 596 days)
Posts: 826
Joined: 05-04-2019


Message 1476 of 3207 (858999)
07-26-2019 5:15 PM
Reply to: Message 1470 by ringo
07-26-2019 12:28 PM


Re: No evidence = irrational
You've made three assertions, so I'll take each in turn.
Just because one person might believe in unicorns does not mean unicorns exist.
I'm not denigrating the logic of people in the past who may have thought that a volcano was, by analogy, like an enormous forge and so required an enormous and powerful blacksmith (did they really think that way, or was it just a fun story to tell around the campfire?). Would you reason the same way nowadays? Of course not. Such reasoning is irrational.
Believing in something that is not falsifiable is a perfect example of something taken on faith, rather than by reason.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1470 by ringo, posted 07-26-2019 12:28 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1477 by ringo, posted 07-26-2019 5:32 PM Sarah Bellum has replied

  
Sarah Bellum
Member (Idle past 596 days)
Posts: 826
Joined: 05-04-2019


Message 1479 of 3207 (859018)
07-26-2019 8:32 PM
Reply to: Message 1471 by Faith
07-26-2019 12:52 PM


Re: No evidence = irrational
The Flood has numerous problems, among which are that many of the geological strata are volcanic, which floods do not lay down.
C. S. Lewis had some rather odd notions that cannot be described in a few paragraphs. Here's one example. We find everyone, in every culture has a sense of morality. If there is a standard of moral behavior common to mankind, then there must, Lewis argues, be an author and arbiter of that standard.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1471 by Faith, posted 07-26-2019 12:52 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1484 by Faith, posted 07-27-2019 12:37 PM Sarah Bellum has replied

  
Sarah Bellum
Member (Idle past 596 days)
Posts: 826
Joined: 05-04-2019


Message 1480 of 3207 (859019)
07-26-2019 8:48 PM
Reply to: Message 1477 by ringo
07-26-2019 5:32 PM


Re: No evidence = irrational
I think you've lost yourself in sophistry here. You write "We're not talking about belief in a idea. We're talking about the idea itself and the reasoning behind it." I'll go back to one example I've described to you at least one time before. Someone who thinks a volcano contains a forge with a powerful being in it may be making a rational deduction by the standards of their time: they see a human working a forge that smokes and spits sparks so they, by analogy, imagine a bigger forge under the mountain. (I have no idea if that is how the ancient Greeks came to have the idea of Hephaestus, but that's neither here nor there). It is not rational by our standards, however, because we know where the logic is flawed. (If you can't see where the logic is flawed, then . . . why don't you worship Hephaestus?)
Now you may say the various pieces are "rational" in the sense that there is such a thing as a blacksmith, a forge, sparks, smoke and so on. But if you put those "rational" pieces together illogically you can no longer make a claim that your reasoning is rational.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1477 by ringo, posted 07-26-2019 5:32 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1481 by Phat, posted 07-27-2019 8:20 AM Sarah Bellum has replied
 Message 1482 by ringo, posted 07-27-2019 11:42 AM Sarah Bellum has replied

  
Sarah Bellum
Member (Idle past 596 days)
Posts: 826
Joined: 05-04-2019


Message 1487 of 3207 (859069)
07-27-2019 8:10 PM
Reply to: Message 1482 by ringo
07-27-2019 11:42 AM


Re: No evidence = irrational
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?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1482 by ringo, posted 07-27-2019 11:42 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1495 by ringo, posted 07-28-2019 2:10 PM Sarah Bellum has replied

  
Sarah Bellum
Member (Idle past 596 days)
Posts: 826
Joined: 05-04-2019


Message 1488 of 3207 (859076)
07-28-2019 12:07 AM
Reply to: Message 1481 by Phat
07-27-2019 8:20 AM


Re: The Idea Of A Creator In General Is Rational
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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1481 by Phat, posted 07-27-2019 8:20 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1490 by AlexCaledin, posted 07-28-2019 2:38 AM Sarah Bellum has replied

  
Sarah Bellum
Member (Idle past 596 days)
Posts: 826
Joined: 05-04-2019


Message 1489 of 3207 (859078)
07-28-2019 12:24 AM
Reply to: Message 1484 by Faith
07-27-2019 12:37 PM


Re: No evidence = irrational
Here's one from the Institute for Creation Research Excessively Old "Ages" For Grand Canyon Lava Flows | The Institute for Creation Research
quote:
The deeply buried Cardenas Basalt occurs among the oldest strata of Grand Canyon. This basalt has been assigned to the Precambrian strata of the Unkar Group, which contains the lowest and hence oldest strata of the Grand Canyon. Some geologists have suggested an "age" of more than one billion years.
The western Grand Canyon lava flows [Cenozoic] are among the youngest formations of the Grand Canyon. The youngest flows came from volcanoes on the Uinkaret Plateau north of the Colorado River.
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).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1484 by Faith, posted 07-27-2019 12:37 PM Faith has not replied

  
Sarah Bellum
Member (Idle past 596 days)
Posts: 826
Joined: 05-04-2019


Message 1491 of 3207 (859082)
07-28-2019 8:44 AM
Reply to: Message 1490 by AlexCaledin
07-28-2019 2:38 AM


Re: The Idea Of A Creator In General Is Rational
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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1490 by AlexCaledin, posted 07-28-2019 2:38 AM AlexCaledin has not replied

  
Sarah Bellum
Member (Idle past 596 days)
Posts: 826
Joined: 05-04-2019


Message 1497 of 3207 (859111)
07-28-2019 2:46 PM
Reply to: Message 1495 by ringo
07-28-2019 2:10 PM


Re: No evidence = irrational
quote:
It doesn't matter. We're talking about the reasoning, not the premises.
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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1495 by ringo, posted 07-28-2019 2:10 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1498 by ringo, posted 07-28-2019 2:52 PM Sarah Bellum has replied

  
Sarah Bellum
Member (Idle past 596 days)
Posts: 826
Joined: 05-04-2019


Message 1500 of 3207 (859121)
07-28-2019 4:02 PM
Reply to: Message 1498 by ringo
07-28-2019 2:52 PM


Re: No evidence = irrational
ringo writes:
I didn't claim their reasoning was sound. I said it could have been sound.
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'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:
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
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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1498 by ringo, posted 07-28-2019 2:52 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1505 by ringo, posted 07-29-2019 11:52 AM Sarah Bellum has replied

  
Sarah Bellum
Member (Idle past 596 days)
Posts: 826
Joined: 05-04-2019


Message 1520 of 3207 (859245)
07-30-2019 8:22 AM
Reply to: Message 1505 by ringo
07-29-2019 11:52 AM


Re: No evidence = irrational
I've posted this before (message 1469 EvC Forum: I Know That God Does Not Exist). You may have read it. Here it is again. If you disagree with it, please tell me your reasons.
sarah bellum writes:
The old notions of a thunder god and such were shown to be irrational as our increasing knowledge showed the natural origins of lightning, volcanoes, comets, storms, etc. It's interesting to think that the newer notions of gods were plagued with questions like, "Why is the steeple (or minaret, etc) on a house of god so vulnerable to lightning strikes coming from heaven?"
Now, what is the notion of a god (nowadays, in the West)? A god that rewards us with heaven after death (or punishes, as the case may be)? Interesting, but not falsifiable. A god that created the universe? Interesting, but again not falsifiable: if you say an intelligent being pushed the button that set off the Big Bang, there's no way to prove or disprove this. A god that parted the Red Sea, buried golden-inscribed plates near Palmyra, New York, brought back the dead, swamped the planet in a Noachian Flood, stopped the Sun in its tracks to help Joshua, cured leprosy...? All either obviously false (the worldwide flood is nonsense, geologically) or legends no more rational than those of Prometheus or Atlas.
C. S. Lewis made an attempt at a rationale, in Mere Christianity, but it's merely talented sophistry incited by the hungriest will-to-believe I've ever encountered.
You claim since the Greeks knew about logic they may not have thought their belief in gods was irrational. Perhaps. I've already told you, I have no idea what their thought processes were, whether they were reasoning by analogy (Hephaestus is a powerful blacksmith in a really big forge) or whether they were just telling stories (the way we do with Spiderman and Deadpool) or whether they had a faith-based approach. How is their thought process relevant? If they reasoned that women shouldn't be allowed to vote, should we accept their reasoning?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1505 by ringo, posted 07-29-2019 11:52 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1525 by Tangle, posted 07-30-2019 10:59 AM Sarah Bellum has replied
 Message 1529 by ringo, posted 07-30-2019 11:46 AM Sarah Bellum has replied

  
Sarah Bellum
Member (Idle past 596 days)
Posts: 826
Joined: 05-04-2019


Message 1527 of 3207 (859267)
07-30-2019 11:10 AM
Reply to: Message 1525 by Tangle
07-30-2019 10:59 AM


Re: No evidence = irrational
Perhaps. Ringo's thinking is rather murky. The idea of a deity is both wrong (though I must add, for completeness, that perhaps one day evidence will be discovered that there is a deity, so in the future the idea of a deity may well be right, just as someday unicorns may be found in some unexplored jungle in the Amazon rainforest or Arunachal Pradesh) and irrational. But Ringo seems to attach some importance to the fact that the ancient Greeks had gods.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1525 by Tangle, posted 07-30-2019 10:59 AM Tangle has not replied

  
Sarah Bellum
Member (Idle past 596 days)
Posts: 826
Joined: 05-04-2019


Message 1531 of 3207 (859272)
07-30-2019 12:08 PM
Reply to: Message 1529 by ringo
07-30-2019 11:46 AM


Re: No evidence = irrational
I don't know the thought processes of the ancient Greeks concerning this matter. You ask me to analyze something that I've told you is both irrelevant to our discussion, nor am I familiar with. It's a red herring, as if I'd demanded that you comment on Li Po and those who accused him of treason.
If you don't like this explanation for why the idea of a deity is irrational, please tell me where you disagree.
sarah bellum writes:
The old notions of a thunder god and such were shown to be irrational as our increasing knowledge showed the natural origins of lightning, volcanoes, comets, storms, etc. It's interesting to think that the newer notions of gods were plagued with questions like, "Why is the steeple (or minaret, etc) on a house of god so vulnerable to lightning strikes coming from heaven?"
Now, what is the notion of a god (nowadays, in the West)? A god that rewards us with heaven after death (or punishes, as the case may be)? Interesting, but not falsifiable. A god that created the universe? Interesting, but again not falsifiable: if you say an intelligent being pushed the button that set off the Big Bang, there's no way to prove or disprove this. A god that parted the Red Sea, buried golden-inscribed plates near Palmyra, New York, brought back the dead, swamped the planet in a Noachian Flood, stopped the Sun in its tracks to help Joshua, cured leprosy...? All either obviously false (the worldwide flood is nonsense, geologically) or legends no more rational than those of Prometheus or Atlas.
C. S. Lewis made an attempt at a rationale, in Mere Christianity, but it's merely talented sophistry incited by the hungriest will-to-believe I've ever encountered.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1529 by ringo, posted 07-30-2019 11:46 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1532 by ringo, posted 07-30-2019 12:15 PM Sarah Bellum has replied

  
Sarah Bellum
Member (Idle past 596 days)
Posts: 826
Joined: 05-04-2019


Message 1536 of 3207 (859281)
07-30-2019 1:00 PM
Reply to: Message 1532 by ringo
07-30-2019 12:15 PM


Re: No evidence = irrational
If you wish to describe the thinking of the Ancient Greeks on the subject of religion, feel free. I'm not stopping you.
You asked why I think the idea of a deity is irrational. I've posted an answer. Here it is again.
sarah bellum writes:
The old notions of a thunder god and such were shown to be irrational as our increasing knowledge showed the natural origins of lightning, volcanoes, comets, storms, etc. It's interesting to think that the newer notions of gods were plagued with questions like, "Why is the steeple (or minaret, etc) on a house of god so vulnerable to lightning strikes coming from heaven?"
Now, what is the notion of a god (nowadays, in the West)? A god that rewards us with heaven after death (or punishes, as the case may be)? Interesting, but not falsifiable. A god that created the universe? Interesting, but again not falsifiable: if you say an intelligent being pushed the button that set off the Big Bang, there's no way to prove or disprove this. A god that parted the Red Sea, buried golden-inscribed plates near Palmyra, New York, brought back the dead, swamped the planet in a Noachian Flood, stopped the Sun in its tracks to help Joshua, cured leprosy...? All either obviously false (the worldwide flood is nonsense, geologically) or legends no more rational than those of Prometheus or Atlas.
C. S. Lewis made an attempt at a rationale, in Mere Christianity, but it's merely talented sophistry incited by the hungriest will-to-believe I've ever encountered.
If you don't like this answer, then tell me what you don't like about it, but please stop pretending that I haven't answered your question.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1532 by ringo, posted 07-30-2019 12:15 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1537 by ringo, posted 07-30-2019 1:05 PM Sarah Bellum has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024