Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 85 (8936 total)
23 online now:
AZPaul3, caffeine, jar, Tangle, Thugpreacha (AdminPhat) (5 members, 18 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: ssope
Upcoming Birthdays: AdminPhat
Post Volume: Total: 861,649 Year: 16,685/19,786 Month: 810/2,598 Week: 56/251 Day: 9/24 Hour: 0/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Tribute Thread For the Recently Raptured Faith
PaulK
Member
Posts: 15372
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 1291 of 1677 (846220)
12-31-2018 3:06 PM
Reply to: Message 1290 by GDR
12-31-2018 2:53 PM


quote:

There has to be an agency for life as we know it, whether it be intelligent or not. The laws of physics and the universe as we perceive exist. Why?

This is just a silly apologetic. For any answer you can go on asking “why”. And that includes a God. It might be different if you have a good reason why a God would exist, but you don’t. So the whole thing goes nowhere. It’s just a waste of time.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1290 by GDR, posted 12-31-2018 2:53 PM GDR has not yet responded

    
GDR
Member
Posts: 4960
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.6


Message 1292 of 1677 (846221)
12-31-2018 3:08 PM
Reply to: Message 1287 by Tangle
12-31-2018 4:05 AM


Tangle writes:

And once again you demonstrate that you don't understand the concept of agency ie it requires an agent. You have no agent - the process does not require one nor does it have one. A random (mindless) process can not, by definition, be guided to produce a defined output. You can not have it both ways. It is either mindless (without agency) or mindful (with agency). Make up your mind.

A process can however be designed with a very high probability that it will produce an outcome that is not narrowly defined. Who says that we have to have 10 fingers and toes. Maybe the process was designed to ultimately produce creatures such as us who are able to love sacrificially, regardless of the particularities of their physical makeup.

Straggler writes:

What a revolting idea - the ends justify the means, no matter how obscene the means. Your god sets up a system of pain, conflict and struggle so that it will be ok in the end? What a vile god you have invented.

Would you rather that you or other life forms didn't exist? The Christian understanding is that the world without the suffering is to come, and for that to happen it seems that this world is necessary as it is for that new world to be born. My best guess is because it requires creatures who have hearts that positively respond to the Golden Rule of sacrificial; love.

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 1287 by Tangle, posted 12-31-2018 4:05 AM Tangle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1294 by Tangle, posted 12-31-2018 3:59 PM GDR has not yet responded

    
GDR
Member
Posts: 4960
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.6


Message 1293 of 1677 (846222)
12-31-2018 3:16 PM
Reply to: Message 1288 by ringo
12-31-2018 10:44 AM


ringo writes:

That doesn't answer the question of why He existed before He created anything.

Time is the way we experience change in this life and it is all we know. I understand God to be outside of time as we experience it, and that He is infinite.

I realize that this is belief without evidence, but to my mind it makes a lot more sense than believing in an infinite regression of processes to produce us. There is a good chance you will disagree.


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 1288 by ringo, posted 12-31-2018 10:44 AM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1299 by ringo, posted 01-02-2019 2:11 PM GDR has responded

    
Tangle
Member
Posts: 7067
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 1294 of 1677 (846227)
12-31-2018 3:59 PM
Reply to: Message 1292 by GDR
12-31-2018 3:08 PM


GDR writes:

A process can however be designed with a very high probability that it will produce an outcome that is not narrowly defined.

That wouldn't be a random mindless process.

Would you rather that you or other life forms didn't exist?

Is your god so lacking in imagination that he can only produce such an absurdly false choice?

The Christian understanding is that the world without the suffering is to come, and for that to happen it seems that this world is necessary as it is for that new world to be born.

That's plainly ludicrous. It's purely an an excuse for an obvious contradiction that disproves the idea of a loving god.

My best guess is because it requires creatures who have hearts that positively respond to the Golden Rule of sacrificial; love.

Why is it necessary to create a world so full of suffering in orde to produce that? And in any case why do it anyway?


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1292 by GDR, posted 12-31-2018 3:08 PM GDR has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1307 by frako, posted 01-02-2019 5:41 PM Tangle has not yet responded

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 4504
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 4.1


(1)
Message 1295 of 1677 (846230)
12-31-2018 8:12 PM
Reply to: Message 1290 by GDR
12-31-2018 2:53 PM


AZPaul3 writes:

You are trying to impose an agency onto something that doesn't exhibit/need one.

GDR writes:

There has to be an agency for life as we know it, whether it be intelligent or not.

How are you defining "agency"? Unless you have some definition of which I am unaware I see no need for one "for life as we know it" or for the structure, content or operation of the universe.

We have no idea how this universe acquired its structure, its stuff or the rules for its operation. So, again, you can hide your god in our ignorance if you so choose.

All I get for life, the universe and everything is 42.

Not very helpful I'm afraid.

Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1290 by GDR, posted 12-31-2018 2:53 PM GDR has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1298 by 1.61803, posted 01-02-2019 11:47 AM AZPaul3 has responded

  
Pollux
Member
Posts: 251
Joined: 11-13-2011


Message 1296 of 1677 (846231)
12-31-2018 9:42 PM
Reply to: Message 1245 by Thugpreacha
12-29-2018 7:40 AM


Demons
Hi Phat,

You believe you saw a case of demon possession.

Assuming for the moment that demon possession exists, there are some things I wonder about.
What is in it for the demon? How is it benefitted?

Presumably God wants to rid people of their demon. Why does He wait until someone else says the right words, sometimes only after they have fasted for a while?

With the Gaderene story, why so many demons in one man? One demon is more than enough for one man, so it seems a waste of demonic resources. And when they were cast into the pigs, what was the point of them causing the pigs to perish? The demons would have to find a new home somewhere anyway?

Any thoughts anyone?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1245 by Thugpreacha, posted 12-29-2018 7:40 AM Thugpreacha has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1297 by Thugpreacha, posted 01-01-2019 2:23 AM Pollux has not yet responded

    
Thugpreacha
Member
Posts: 12792
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 1297 of 1677 (846235)
01-01-2019 2:23 AM
Reply to: Message 1296 by Pollux
12-31-2018 9:42 PM


Re: Demons
...And when they were cast into the pigs, what was the point of them causing the pigs to perish? The demons would have to find a new home somewhere anyway?

Why Did Jesus Kill The Pigs?


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


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1296 by Pollux, posted 12-31-2018 9:42 PM Pollux has not yet responded

  
1.61803
Member
Posts: 2899
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 1298 of 1677 (846270)
01-02-2019 11:47 AM
Reply to: Message 1295 by AZPaul3
12-31-2018 8:12 PM


AZPaul writes:

All I get for life, the universe and everything is 42.


Hi AZ Paul
42 is as good enough answer as any other.

Straggler asked why is there something rather than nothing.

Perhaps the answer is there is no such thing as nothing.
Or there is something because something wants to exist.
Or 42.
I have given up on trying to reconcile God with reality. I choose to believe in God at times because it comforts me. (42) why not! I have nothing but a fragile faith and arbitrary absurdity to wash it down with.


"You were not there for the beginning. You will not be there for the end. Your knowledge of what is going on can only be superficial and relative" William S. Burroughs

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1295 by AZPaul3, posted 12-31-2018 8:12 PM AZPaul3 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1306 by AZPaul3, posted 01-02-2019 5:28 PM 1.61803 has responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 17281
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.5


(1)
Message 1299 of 1677 (846272)
01-02-2019 2:11 PM
Reply to: Message 1293 by GDR
12-31-2018 3:16 PM


GDR writes:

Time is the way we experience change in this life and it is all we know. I understand God to be outside of time as we experience it, and that He is infinite.


That still doesn't answer the question. Time isn't really relevant. If you can ask why the chemicals exist, it's just as valid to ask why God exists.

GDR writes:

... to my mind it makes a lot more sense than believing in an infinite regression of processes to produce us.


But you are the one who's introducing an infinite regression. I'm perfectly willing to stop at chemicals that "just exist". You are the one who wants to put God before the chemicals. I'm just pointing out that that introduces the infinite regression. Where did the God come from? And wherever He came from, where did the "wherever" come from? Etc.

If we're going to stop somewhere, we might as well stop at something that actually exists - i.e. chemicals.


And our geese will blot out the sun.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1293 by GDR, posted 12-31-2018 3:16 PM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1300 by Thugpreacha, posted 01-02-2019 2:46 PM ringo has responded
 Message 1311 by GDR, posted 01-09-2019 8:33 PM ringo has responded

  
Thugpreacha
Member
Posts: 12792
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 1300 of 1677 (846278)
01-02-2019 2:46 PM
Reply to: Message 1299 by ringo
01-02-2019 2:11 PM


At the risk of sounding metaphorical, imagine if you were an inventor and created an intelligent robot. The Bot was programmed according to human specs, and once it became "alive" and active it began asking questions. One question it asked was ehy it existed. It then later asked why you existed, IF you existed, and what made you the Creator. The robots entire frame of reference was with itself...it simply could not imagine that you had created it.
ringo writes:

If we're going to stop somewhere, we might as well stop at something that actually exists - i.e. chemicals.

Why does everything have to be framed as existing or not existing according to your notebook of evidenced elements? Why must humans define Gods personality and parameters?

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


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1299 by ringo, posted 01-02-2019 2:11 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1301 by ringo, posted 01-02-2019 2:52 PM Thugpreacha has responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 17281
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 1301 of 1677 (846280)
01-02-2019 2:52 PM
Reply to: Message 1300 by Thugpreacha
01-02-2019 2:46 PM


Phat writes:

At the risk of sounding metaphorical, imagine if you were an inventor and created an intelligent robot. The Bot was programmed according to human specs, and once it became "alive" and active it began asking questions. One question it asked was ehy it existed. It then later asked why you existed, IF you existed, and what made you the Creator. The robots entire frame of reference was with itself...it simply could not imagine that you had created it.


*shrug* Is there a point to all of that?

Phat writes:

Why does everything have to be framed as existing or not existing according to your notebook of evidenced elements?


If something doesn't exist, why would I care about it?

Phat writes:

Why must humans define Gods personality and parameters?


You tell me. You spend more time defining God than I do.

And our geese will blot out the sun.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1300 by Thugpreacha, posted 01-02-2019 2:46 PM Thugpreacha has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1302 by Thugpreacha, posted 01-02-2019 3:52 PM ringo has responded

  
Thugpreacha
Member
Posts: 12792
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 1302 of 1677 (846284)
01-02-2019 3:52 PM
Reply to: Message 1301 by ringo
01-02-2019 2:52 PM


Was There Awareness Or Was He Entirely Made Up?
ringo writes:

If something doesn't exist, why would I care about it?

In the robot analogy, the only things that the robot *knows* exist are things programmed into its database, much as scientific evidence becomes real to you via evidence. The robot has no concept of belief, for belief is illogical. Lacking any need for God the way that I do, you patiently wait for programmable evidence.
You spend more time defining God than I do.
I have a need to know Him. You seem unconcerned with God emotionally except to criticize the characters' behavior in the book. You have no frame of reference regarding a Being that you pray to or talk with. There is no need for any emotional acceptance or connection. Critics would, in fact, accuse believers of making this character up to fill their emotional need. I am simply pointing out that from my frame of reference, God as a character became real to me but I consciously did not make him up...I became aware of His presence.

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


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1301 by ringo, posted 01-02-2019 2:52 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1303 by ringo, posted 01-02-2019 3:58 PM Thugpreacha has responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 17281
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 1303 of 1677 (846286)
01-02-2019 3:58 PM
Reply to: Message 1302 by Thugpreacha
01-02-2019 3:52 PM


Re: Was There Awareness Or Was He Entirely Made Up?
Phat writes:

In the robot analogy, the only things that the robot *knows* exist are things programmed into its database, much as scientific evidence becomes real to you via evidence. The robot has no concept of belief, for belief is illogical. Lacking any need for God the way that I do, you patiently wait for programmable evidence.


So, in the analogy, where do theists fit in? According to their own theology, they're made by the same manufacturer as the robots. When they see things that aren't there, is that a bug?

Phat writes:

You have no frame of reference regarding a Being that you pray to or talk with.


Nobody does. Believers just believe they do.

And our geese will blot out the sun.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1302 by Thugpreacha, posted 01-02-2019 3:52 PM Thugpreacha has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1304 by Thugpreacha, posted 01-02-2019 4:15 PM ringo has responded

  
Thugpreacha
Member
Posts: 12792
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 1304 of 1677 (846287)
01-02-2019 4:15 PM
Reply to: Message 1303 by ringo
01-02-2019 3:58 PM


Re: Was There Awareness Or Was He Entirely Made Up?
So, in the analogy, where do theists fit in?
Theists represent a robot that has had a subjective experience (or more than one.) The robot has no hard data evidence, but it does have an internal memory of having heard a voice, seen an unexplained event, or had a problem resolved through no interaction with anyone else.
Nobody does.(Have a frame of reference) Believers just believe they do.

So a question: How would a programmer program the concept of belief into the robot? How, in other words, would the robot connect the dots of multiple subjective experiences and form a hypothesis of a given belief?

In addition, some robots may be programmed with skepticism based on researching the data of many skeptics. The robot basically retains what it is fed. The human, in contrast, retains what they want to retain or what feels best.

Edited by Phat, : No reason given.


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


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1303 by ringo, posted 01-02-2019 3:58 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1305 by ringo, posted 01-02-2019 4:32 PM Thugpreacha has not yet responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 17281
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 1305 of 1677 (846290)
01-02-2019 4:32 PM
Reply to: Message 1304 by Thugpreacha
01-02-2019 4:15 PM


Re: Was There Awareness Or Was He Entirely Made Up?
Phat writes:

The robot has no hard data evidence, but it does have an internal memory of having heard a voice, seen an unexplained event, or had a problem resolved through no interaction with anyone else.


So answer the question. When a computer/brain has a memory that doesn't coincide with reality, is that a bug?

Phat writes:

How, in other words, would the robot connect the dots of multiple subjective experiences and form a hypothesis of a given belief?


It shouldn't, should it? If your computer "connected the dots" and took you to Porn R Us instead of EvC, would that be a good thing? You'd be telling it, "No! I want to go to EvC!" and it would be saying, "But I really, really, really believe you want to go to Porn R Us."

Phat writes:

In addition, some robots may be programmed with skepticism based on researching the data of many skeptics.


Skepticism is the basis of all programming. Programmers take nothing for granted. They have to assume that everthing WILL go wrong and be prepared for that. Nobody wants a computer that goes off on its own subjective tangents.

And our geese will blot out the sun.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1304 by Thugpreacha, posted 01-02-2019 4:15 PM Thugpreacha has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019