U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Atheism and Agnosticism
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-23-2011, 12:11 PM
 
16,083 posts, read 17,876,536 times
Reputation: 15867

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by stillkit View Post
Columbus had faith the world was round. Either that, or he was the world's greatest fool.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzz View Post
Columbus didn't have faith the Earth was round -- he knew it, just as did all people of that time. You do know that people during Columbus's time didn't actually believe the Earth was flat, right?
The Round Earth and Christopher Columbus
Not only did all the people of his time know this, but so did the generations before him and before Magellan.

Who first discovered and proved the earth was round, not flat? How was it proven? - Yahoo! Answers

Quote:
As far as we can tell nobody ever considered the world to be flat. The very earliest writings always describe the world as a dome or an upturned bowl or as a pile of soil or similar descriptions. So we can assume that people never thought the world was flat. That makes sense since anyone who climbed even a small mountain could see quite clearly that the world curves away on all sides. As a result they assumed it was shaped like a dome, with their location near the top
Of course, there are the Flat Earthers even today. Now that is a religion!
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-24-2011, 10:28 AM
 
8,680 posts, read 13,294,701 times
Reputation: 15272
Quote:
Originally Posted by stillkit View Post
I don't know how old you are, but I've known a lot of people who lived their whole lives with that opinion, then got near the end of the road, looked back and said, "What the hell was that all about?"
And when they pee in their pants, they ask themselves the same question.

Quote:
Purpose in life seems to become more imporant upon reflection from the vantage point of old age and opinions change. Don't be surprised if yours does too.
What a wasted life you anticipate, then, if you're not going to consider it until it's nearly over. The truly wise take it upon themselves to figure it out while they are still young enough to make something of it, which is why I'm glad I figured it out back in my mid-30s.

But by all means, live your life in fear of punishment from a spirit, and spend your time worshiping a figment of someone else's imagination. It's your life to squander.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-24-2011, 02:00 PM
 
Location: New Zealand
1,872 posts, read 5,786,451 times
Reputation: 5565
Quote:
Originally Posted by stillkit View Post
No, I didn't know that, but it makes no difference anyhow. Whomever was the first one to set out to prove his theory of a round earth, he either had confidence in his theory or he was a fool.
Okay, so what's your point here? Yes, whoever proved the theory of a round Earth had the idea first. But instead of appealing to a higher authority (e.g. "I say the Earth is round because the Book says so"), they performed experiments to prove it.

Quote:
The point is that he based his convictions upon something outside himself, some evidence to suggest there was more out there than supposed, whether he was right or wrong. He was still basing his actions upon some "higher" authority, someone or something he believed knew more than him.
Sigh, let me try again. The only authority he appealed to was evidence he could see and test himself. Anyone who has at least one eye and lives near a large body of water or even flat land can see that the Earth is curved.

Now are there people who take scientific ideas as a matter of belief? Sure. If someone says, "I accept evolution as true simply because Darwin said so", then that is appealing to a higher authority (Darwin), and it is essentially a belief. Are there people like that out there? I'm sure. But most people who understand and "do" science have a different approach: "I accept evolution as true because Darwin said so and he presented evidence/reasoning to support it (all of which I can see/test for myself), he made predictions based on the truth of evolution, all of which have come true, and many people have tried to find evidence against evolution and have failed so far."

See, this last part is the most important piece. In scientific fields, no idea goes unchallenged, no idea is established based on authority. Every idea is challenged and scientists try to find evidence for and against each others' ideas. I try to understand the evidence underlying scientific ideas, but even if I do not have the knowledge to understand the latest evidence for X, I know that there are many scientists who are trying their best (and indeed staking their careers) to prove X false. I do not have to trust any scientific authority to accept scientific ideas as true, I simply have to accept that science is self-correcting and many, many different people are trying to prove and disprove each idea -- if there is a flaw in something it will eventually come out. Even the greatest scientific "authorities" like Newton and Einstein were mistaken in some of their ideas. Skepticism and doubt are the key drivers to scientific advancement. There is no appealing to a "higher authority", because scientists would love to go down in history as the one who upset the established theories (i.e. the "higher authority" in your view), and are working around the world to find evidence towards that goal.

In contrast, skepticism and doubt are the first things we are required to sacrifice on the altar of faith and religion -- we must believe (without evidence) because god said so (and in fact tests us to see if we are pious enough to believe without evidence -- the most faithful are the ones who still believe in the face of contrary evidence).

If you still do not see the difference between how/why we rely on scientific ideas versus how we appeal to a higher authority in religion, I seriously do not know what else anyone can say to bridge this massive gap in your understanding of how science works.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-24-2011, 05:33 PM
 
8,468 posts, read 13,641,437 times
Reputation: 7538
Quote:
Originally Posted by stillkit View Post
Columbus had faith the world was round. Either that, or he was the world's greatest fool.
False. You still don't understand the difference between having faith and simply suspecting something. If I eat a bowl of peanuts and my skin starts developing a rash 30 minutes later, I may suspect that the peanuts were the cause, but I don't have faith that they were. Do you see the distinction?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ilovemycomputer90 View Post
That's no different than Christians appealing to the Bible or neocons turning to a strong executive branch. Liberals are turning to the government to address various issues, whether it's health care, energy, education, etc. Your argument about religious conservatives can easily apply to liberals. Now of course I don't think political, economic, and social views are always dictated by spiritualism, I'm just rolling with the argument you've put forth.
The difference is that liberals are asking government to do the things that you and I can't do on our own, like protect our water supply or keep the air we breath clean. If I could do those things myself, I wouldn't ask for the government's help. In fact, that's why government was established, to protect us from the things we can't protect ourselves from. But conservatives are asking it to go much further, like telling people who they can and can't marry. I've yet to hear a liberal say we should never question our leaders and yet I hear conservatives say this all the time. Also, I never said political, economic and social views are dictated by spiritualism. What I said was that some people are ultimately looking to someone or something else for the answers, be that God, the government, or big corporations. Some of us are more content with looking in the mirror instead of automatically deferring to someone else.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stillkit View Post
Whomever was the first one to set out to prove his theory of a round earth, he either had confidence in his theory or he was a fool.
There's nothing foolish in trying to prove something you suspect. You seem to think you have to have confidence in something before venturing to prove whether it's true. But that's silly. If I suspect that a certain food is dangerous, do I have to wait until I'm confident before I can test whether that's true? Of course not. If that were the litmus test, just imagine where modern medicine would be today. So many of the advancements that have been made just in the last century weren't based on someone being confident of something, merely curious about it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stillkit View Post
The point is that he based his convictions upon something outside himself, some evidence to suggest there was more out there than supposed, whether he was right or wrong. He was still basing his actions upon some "higher" authority, someone or something he believed knew more than him.
Why do you assume it's outside of himself? If I suspect that smoking is hazardous to my health, does it follow that some outside power suggested it to me? Of course not. That suggests that human beings are morons who can't think for themselves, that they need something external to give them reason to question anything. Here's a novel idea. Maybe humans can actually form independent thoughts and dare to wonder whether the Earth really is flat, whether smoking really is safe, and whether God really does exist.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stillkit View Post
I don't know how old you are, but I've known a lot of people who lived their whole lives with that opinion, then got near the end of the road, looked back and said, "What the hell was that all about?"
Then the fault lies with them for not finding meaning sooner. Everyone has some regret in life. Maybe you didn't have kids. Maybe you didn't get married. Maybe you didn't travel the world or climb Mt. Everest. Who knows? The point is that you shouldn't have to look to some external power to tell you what your life is supposed to mean.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzz View Post
In contrast, skepticism and doubt are the first things we are required to sacrifice on the altar of faith and religion -- we must believe (without evidence) because god said so (and in fact tests us to see if we are pious enough to believe without evidence -- the most faithful are the ones who still believe in the face of contrary evidence).
This is one of the biggest beefs I have with organized religion. Imagine if someone told you to believe that the Earth is flat and that no matter what evidence you see to the contrary, you must hold steadfast in your belief that the Earth is flat. Your entire religion has a built-in method of preventing anyone from questioning it which ensures that it'll continue. How convenient. Sounds like a virus.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-24-2011, 08:38 PM
 
Location: Texas
14,078 posts, read 17,652,720 times
Reputation: 7720
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzz View Post
Okay, so what's your point here? Yes, whoever proved the theory of a round Earth had the idea first. But instead of appealing to a higher authority (e.g. "I say the Earth is round because the Book says so"), they performed experiments to prove it.

Sigh, let me try again. The only authority he appealed to was evidence he could see and test himself. Anyone who has at least one eye and lives near a large body of water or even flat land can see that the Earth is curved.

Now are there people who take scientific ideas as a matter of belief? Sure. If someone says, "I accept evolution as true simply because Darwin said so", then that is appealing to a higher authority (Darwin), and it is essentially a belief. Are there people like that out there? I'm sure. But most people who understand and "do" science have a different approach: "I accept evolution as true because Darwin said so and he presented evidence/reasoning to support it (all of which I can see/test for myself), he made predictions based on the truth of evolution, all of which have come true, and many people have tried to find evidence against evolution and have failed so far."

See, this last part is the most important piece. In scientific fields, no idea goes unchallenged, no idea is established based on authority. Every idea is challenged and scientists try to find evidence for and against each others' ideas. I try to understand the evidence underlying scientific ideas, but even if I do not have the knowledge to understand the latest evidence for X, I know that there are many scientists who are trying their best (and indeed staking their careers) to prove X false. I do not have to trust any scientific authority to accept scientific ideas as true, I simply have to accept that science is self-correcting and many, many different people are trying to prove and disprove each idea -- if there is a flaw in something it will eventually come out. Even the greatest scientific "authorities" like Newton and Einstein were mistaken in some of their ideas. Skepticism and doubt are the key drivers to scientific advancement. There is no appealing to a "higher authority", because scientists would love to go down in history as the one who upset the established theories (i.e. the "higher authority" in your view), and are working around the world to find evidence towards that goal.

In contrast, skepticism and doubt are the first things we are required to sacrifice on the altar of faith and religion -- we must believe (without evidence) because god said so (and in fact tests us to see if we are pious enough to believe without evidence -- the most faithful are the ones who still believe in the face of contrary evidence).

If you still do not see the difference between how/why we rely on scientific ideas versus how we appeal to a higher authority in religion, I seriously do not know what else anyone can say to bridge this massive gap in your understanding of how science works.

I'd like to stay and hash this out with y'all, but I do disaster relief with the Southern Baptist's and we're on standby for major flooding in NE Oklahoma. I'm a first responder for damage assessment, so if y'all don't see me around for the rest of the week, you'll know I got the call and left in a hurry.

It's been good, though. C ya.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2011, 02:16 PM
 
Location: Texas
14,078 posts, read 17,652,720 times
Reputation: 7720
I didn't get the call...yet. But, I think I'll exit this thread anyhow. We're just going around in circles.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2011, 02:35 PM
 
8,468 posts, read 13,641,437 times
Reputation: 7538
Quote:
Originally Posted by stillkit View Post
I didn't get the call...yet. But, I think I'll exit this thread anyhow. We're just going around in circles.
No. The rest of us understand how science works and what the meaning of the word faith is. You're the only one who's still confused.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2011, 02:58 PM
 
Location: Texas
14,078 posts, read 17,652,720 times
Reputation: 7720
Quote:
Originally Posted by DennyCrane View Post
No. The rest of us understand how science works and what the meaning of the word faith is. You're the only one who's still confused.
And, y'all are confused about issues of Faith.

But, be that as it may, we're still just repeating ourselves over and over, so it looks as though the thread has run its course.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2011, 03:11 PM
 
Location: New Zealand
1,872 posts, read 5,786,451 times
Reputation: 5565
Quote:
Originally Posted by stillkit View Post
And, y'all are confused about issues of Faith.
You assume we know little/nothing about faith. I was a VERY devout follower for 20 years before becoming first agnostic and now an atheist. I finished the religious texts cover to cover several times by the time I graduated high school. Contrary to what you think, I am quite familiar with the issues and arguments of faith.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2011, 06:24 PM
 
8,468 posts, read 13,641,437 times
Reputation: 7538
Quote:
Originally Posted by stillkit View Post
And, y'all are confused about issues of Faith.

But, be that as it may, we're still just repeating ourselves over and over, so it looks as though the thread has run its course.
The only thing that's run it's course is your inability to defend your arguments. The thread and the underlying issue it raises is still alive and well. As for faith, I suggest you learn what it means cause you clearly don't have a clue.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Atheism and Agnosticism
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top