Actually, you arrived to your conclusion in a completely different manner than how scientists arrive to their conclusions. They do not make judgments on a whim. They use evidence to support them.
Why do so many theists think they can back up their faith?
- Thread starter Bungalow Bob
- Start date
- Status
Actually, you arrived to your conclusion in a completely different manner than how scientists arrive to their conclusions. They do not make judgments on a whim. They use evidence to support them.
Sye d'Burns
Member
Everybody loves an underdog.
I don't find comfort in the concept of heaven. I think mortality is what gives life its specialness and motivation and the idea of immortality seems boring. I'm still afraid of death, and I'm not a thrillseaker or anything, and the thought of not experiencing the promises of the future beyond my lifespan is sad, but I think being immortal would be worse.
There are non-religious philosophies that can provide meaning, but they are not scientific. Science says little on meaning or even ethics. It can inform a discussion on them, but no more.
What part of it is being dickish? There have been many gods who were able to transfigure themselves. Remember Zeus becoming a swan? In some stories centaurs are the product of gods. This was once written in very holy scripts. Where are those religions today? Where will christianity be a thousand years from now? I'm willing to bet it will be as antiquated as the belief in centaurs. Do you disagree?
hukasmokincaterpillar
Member
Rabbi Simcha Bunam used to say, "Every person should have two pockets. In one, [there should be a note that says] bishvili nivra ha'olam, 'for my sake was the world created.' In the second, [there should be a note that says] anokhi afar va'efer, 'I am dust and ashes.' One must know how to use them, each one in its proper place and right time. For many make the mistake of using them in their opposite applications."
That is to say, too often, when we should be acknowledging our arrogance, we are defending it. And when we should be overcoming our self-denigration, we are confirming it.
Rabbi Jack Moline
That is to say, too often, when we should be acknowledging our arrogance, we are defending it. And when we should be overcoming our self-denigration, we are confirming it.
Rabbi Jack Moline
Sanky Panky
Banned
I don't make my judgement on a whim. It has actually taken me 27 years to look at all the pieces to the puzzle, and arrive at my own most plausible explanation. You give scientists too much credit. They too look at pieces to a puzzle and try to arrive at the most plausible scenario. They don't empirically test or even try to replicate their stories, they just try to look for more corroborating observations (just like me).
Dice
Pokémon Parentage Conspiracy Theorist
1) They almost always direct those posts to atheists.
2) You guys have way more fun and determination in doing that.
3) I don't even read their posts 3/4 of the time. I get more than enough christian stupidity in the rest of my christian life.
4) There is a difference between calling someone a dick when they are being a dick and they know it and crushing someone's ignorant worldview without any sort of empathy for how meaningful it is to them.
It's one way to approach things, one way to ascribe meaning and purpose. We are all made of star stuff, as Carl Sagan would say, but at the end of the road the cold hard depressing reality of non-life is where we're at and where personal meaning grinds to a halt.
I don't begrudge anyone the comfort in believing otherwise ;b
Their judgments must hold up to the scrutiny of their peers. How is your explanation regarded by muslims? By jews?
Sorry edited, its late! lol
echoshifting
Banned
Science and religion used to be such great pals. I wonder if they'll ever kiss and make up...? Probably not. ;(
I hear Texan ones aren't too hard.
ethics can definitely be broken down into a science
just because our understanding is incomplete doesnt mean we should turn to fantasy
existential nihilism is rational
but it doesnt stop us from having temporary worldly purpose
The role of science in the beginning was to find irrefutable evidence of god's creation and the word of the bible. Yeah, didn't turn out so well.
I think being happy and having kids is plenty of meaning, and those are logical desires.
Dice
Pokémon Parentage Conspiracy Theorist
Don't waste my time asking me to define for you how your mocking post was mocking. We all understand why you see them on equal footing. You don't have to be completely disrespectful in the way you go about saying it. Presenting the unicorn argument as it was originally presented is fine, but where you took it from there was rude and you know it. Grow up.
I do not hold religious beliefs in the same regard as you do. This "mocking" was at the very best light hearted and rather tame. I think you are reading far more into it than what is truly there.
Sanky Panky
Banned
Hate to disappoint yet again, but the beauty of faith is that it is a personal thing. and it doesn't have to hold up to scrutiny of my peers. It's what makes me wonder why atheists are so resentful and scrutinize so much.
Oh well, extreme religious people do the same. Carry on.
Name one ethical matter that's an empirically testable claim.
I don't understand this "meaning" stuff. I never felt a need to find meaning. I just want to enjoy a long life and have babies so I can leave something of myself behind when I'm gone. Am I strange for thinking this way?
echoshifting
Banned
That's a bit disingenuous, imho. At times this was perhaps true, but there was a general sense of eagerness to understand the mysteries of the universe, particularly during the height of the Ottoman Empire.
At some point, however, the quest you refer to is definitely what caused things to break down...probably during the renaissance, with a complete breakdown mid-19th/early 20th century with the rise of fundamentalism and the publication of Darwin's Origin of Species. What if science proved god didn't exist? Had it already done so? A terrifying thought to the everyman of the time.
Existentialist recue! = That may be so, but you and I are alive... and we're not exactly moving to kill ourselves. So we might as well enjoy life (as voraciously as possible is best) while we're still alive.
Sounds to me you have a deliberate doublestandard towards hating the stupid atheists and quietly ignoring the stupid Christians. Also "you guys"? I'm not an atheist...which also sounds to me you really prefer things to be us vs. them, black and white and no shades of grey.
What's beautiful and what has meaning depends on what's been reinforced and your personal experience. We know how we develop these behaviors. The philosophical discussion comes when you start discussing universalism. Is there a meaning apart from your experience? Is there a universal "correct" ethics? I'd say no.
Ethical behaviors are a group behaviors that increase survivability in a group. Different groups come up with their own ethics, but some appear across groups. The incest taboo appears in all cultures, and that has strong biological reasons (incest lowers variability, increases chances of genetic disease).
I interpret that as a weakness in the thought process of religious people. What good is a religion if the world as a whole cannot agree on one interpretation? At least science is looking for the ultimate answers and the evidence to back up their claims. This is your life, your road to go down. You do not see a problem with how you interpret what so many billions have interpreted differently throughout history. As long as you are comfortable, more power to you.
Dice
Pokémon Parentage Conspiracy Theorist
Okay, well maybe just try to focus on not asking questions in the context of personal belief that don't apply to anyone in the thread when you know they haven't applied to anyone for centuries. It gives a mean vibe that doesn't really help discussion in any way whatsoever.
Ignis Fatuus
Banned
I really don't see where he crossed some hitherto untested line of propriety.
you can see the progress of societies along side the development of cultures and ethics
there was a time when knowledge was considered of utmost importance to ethics
and wanting what is best for yourself and your kin is quite well explained with biology
I don't think ethical ideas are themselves scientific.
However, the fact that humans have developed an ethical code of conduct is a logical evolutionary development that arose from the need to govern social interactions in such a way that group survival improves. Humans survive better when part of a larger group of humans. Humans can only work together if they have some basic rules about not hurting each other. We have mirror neurons that give us empathy to make us feel bad when we harm others to discourage us from harming others, so we can maintain group harmony for survival enhancement.
We got smart enough to put these ideas into words. The basic premise of ethics comes down to being about harming others in your group or out of your group versus personal gain or your group's gain.
bigboss370
Member
soo are atheists against theists because they think theists are at odds with science? what about religious people who believe in science as much as the next guy? what about religious scientists?
didn't Einstein believe in (a) God as well? o_o
didn't Einstein believe in (a) God as well? o_o
Einstein was a deist.
People seem to conflate "belief in a God" and "Belief in (MY) God with PROPER values, which just so happen to be my prejudices."
his god was life itself
bigboss370
Member
i said a God. He was firmly against atheism...
Agreed, my god is the little voice that speaks inside my head while i go about my life. Me and my god have been together since i learned how to talk, saying that i wonder what the voice was in my head done before i could talk.. was it just random noises ?
I wonder if a dog barks inside its head.
hukasmokincaterpillar
Member
Sanky Panky
Banned
It's the opposite of weakness, if you have absolute certainty that your faith is true. As long as religion is faith-based, people's views will be influenced by the environment that surrounds them. So many environments and life experiences will mean different interpretations. I simply chose to believe in the one where God equals love and wisdom to sacrifice for others. It makes sense to me that this would make the world a better place.
When did I say anything about Einstein promoting atheism?
Dice
Pokémon Parentage Conspiracy Theorist
As I said, Christians don't direct questions/comments to me, so they pretty much don't exist to me in terms of discussion in these threads. If they started asserting themselves in my direction, I would engage them.
Stop looking for trouble. "Us vs Them" is clearly the atmosphere that these threads always take. It has nothing to do with personal perception and all to do with who is directing what sort of questions to what other particular sort of person. If you are an agnostic or theist or whatever and like ripping poor arguments from Christians to shit, you go and have fun with that, but realize that you are an exception in these threads even though the world as large is far more diverse.
At odds with science is the main point for me personally, yes. But on a practical level, the influence of religion on science education and government policy worries me a great deal because people who essentially believe things for no reason are trying to teach that illogical way of thinking to children, and are making government policies that control society. If politicians thought logically and scientifically, you could actually use reasonable arguments and evidence to sway their policies away from gut-reactions and tradition. What a world that would be.
Some people have a problem with religion for wars, etc. but I don't. We are good at making wars with or without religion. We naturally form in-groups and out-groups and develop hostilities based on these divisions, no matter what the grouping variable is.
You're the one perpetuating that. You look the other way when your "side" does something stupid, but gladly join in on hating the side you disagree with.
He seemed more like a poetic agnostic to me. But people give Einstein way too much credit in these discussions. He's like the ultimate appeal to authority go to guy in these discussions.
Was he a deist? Admittedly I haven't read a lot of literature on Einstein's beliefs, but what I have read made it seem like he was deifying the forces of the natural universe rather than believing in an intelligent creative force.
bigboss370
Member
you didn't.
cutmeamango
Banned
Isn't that pretty much the position of the catholics after all these years?
Like that creationist thingy it seems something about protestants from the other side of the ocean....
Not even remotely. Einstein used the term God as a metaphor for the laws of physics. He later stated to have regretted that because the words were used to imply that he was religious, which he wasn't.
- Status