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)
 
Old 04-16-2012, 10:35 PM
 
40,103 posts, read 26,767,323 times
Reputation: 6050

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by orogenicman View Post
Before you can claim that the universe is conscious, you have to demonstrate that it is, in fact, conscious. Suggesting that it is conscious because we are conscious (or visa versa) is circular reasoning, a logical fallacy, one that doesn't actually demonstrate anything.
Actually you have a greater burden showing that the universe was devoid of consciousness given the existence of consciousness. But we are only talking about the LOGIC of it. The premise is a brute fact taken to be true in a logical syllogism and the predicate conclusion has to logically follow from it. So from a LOGIC point of view my position is the LOGICAL one. Yours is NOT. Get it yet?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-16-2012, 11:03 PM
 
3,424 posts, read 2,749,324 times
Reputation: 3318
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
Actually you have a greater burden showing that the universe was devoid of consciousness given the existence of consciousness. But we are only talking about the LOGIC of it. The premise is a brute fact taken to be true in a logical syllogism and the predicate conclusion has to logically follow from it. So from a LOGIC point of view my position is the LOGICAL one. Yours is NOT. Get it yet?
You appear to be stringing words together to make sentences, but for the life of me, it looks like complete gibberish.

You are arguing from several logical fallacies, notably circular reasoning, and the slippery slope. It is circular reason, as pointed out previously, and a slippery slope because the former does not necessarily follow from the latter. What you appear to be doing is ignoring 300 years of scientific discovery so you can have your religious cake and eat it.

Human beings (and other sentient animals) are demonstrably living organisms. Science has never discovered a sentient being that isn't a living organism. In order for you to claim that the universe is alive and conscious (which assume that it is also self-aware), you must demonstrate that it is alive and composed of anything other than hard radiation, neutrinos and quarks in a vaccuum that is completely detrimental to all living organisms. Again, YOU claim that the universe is alive and conscious. It is your claim to support, not mine to refute.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-16-2012, 11:32 PM
 
Location: Queensland, Australia
48 posts, read 37,180 times
Reputation: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by orogenicman View Post
You appear to be stringing words together to make sentences, but for the life of me, it looks like complete gibberish.

You are arguing from several logical fallacies, notably circular reasoning, and the slippery slope. It is circular reason, as pointed out previously, and a slippery slope because the former does not necessarily follow from the latter. What you appear to be doing is ignoring 300 years of scientific discovery so you can have your religious cake and eat it.

Human beings (and other sentient animals) are demonstrably living organisms. Science has never discovered a sentient being that isn't a living organism. In order for you to claim that the universe is alive and conscious (which assume that it is also self-aware), you must demonstrate that it is alive and composed of anything other than hard radiation, neutrinos and quarks in a vaccuum that is completely detrimental to all living organisms. Again, YOU claim that the universe is alive and conscious. It is your claim to support, not mine to refute.

Imagine what we will discover in the next 300 years! Or thousand years! I'm sure we have all noticed how man's progress both scientifically and technologically is accelerating exponentially.

Who's to say that we are not doing the same thing on a spiritual level. That whole "we only use 10% of our brain thing". Suppose for a moment that there is a Universal Consciousness which with our current limitations we can't confirm or deny, but it flows through each and every one of us and subconsciously carries forward knowledge and thought through each generation so we don't have to keep covering old ground.

In the spirit of the thread, I think if we are all honest we all have doubts, and that is on both sides of the fence. I think those that proffess the loudest probably have the greatest doubts in there own beliefs.

I'm sure the truth will be made clear when we are ready to receive it...or not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-16-2012, 11:48 PM
 
40,103 posts, read 26,767,323 times
Reputation: 6050
Quote:
Originally Posted by orogenicman View Post
You appear to be stringing words together to make sentences, but for the life of me, it looks like complete gibberish.
Clearly trying to get you to understand the logic problem you face is just beating a dead horse. You are focused on the God issue and arguments (fallacies and such) and not on the logical consistency of my position and the logical inconsistency of yours re: consciousness.
Quote:
You are arguing from several logical fallacies, notably circular reasoning, and the slippery slope. It is circular reason, as pointed out previously, and a slippery slope because the former does not necessarily follow from the latter. What you appear to be doing is ignoring 300 years of scientific discovery so you can have your religious cake and eat it.
I ignore nothing and accept it all. Your position exceeds the bounds of the known information and is illogical on its face (if you only understood what that means).
Quote:
Human beings (and other sentient animals) are demonstrably living organisms. Science has never discovered a sentient being that isn't a living organism. In order for you to claim that the universe is alive and conscious (which assume that it is also self-aware), you must demonstrate that it is alive and composed of anything other than hard radiation, neutrinos and quarks in a vaccuum that is completely detrimental to all living organisms. Again, YOU claim that the universe is alive and conscious. It is your claim to support, not mine to refute.
First all of our investigations operate on less than 5% of the universe. The remaining 95+% is beyond our science. To make ANY conclusions on the basis of the less than 5% is to reverse the concept of statistical probabilities on its head. Second . . . as evidenced by ourselves . . . not all components of a conscious being are involved in the production of consciousness. In fact the majority of our functioning cells have nothing whatsoever to do with consciousness. Why would you expect a universe-wide being to be any different? We could be just one cellular species of cosmic "neurons" among trillions (or more) scattered throughout the cosmos producing the all encompassing God consciousness whose field establishes our reality.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-16-2012, 11:52 PM
 
3,424 posts, read 2,749,324 times
Reputation: 3318
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fasaga View Post
Imagine what we will discover in the next 300 years! Or thousand years! I'm sure we have all noticed how man's progress both scientifically and technologically is accelerating exponentially.

Who's to say that we are not doing the same thing on a spiritual level. That whole "we only use 10% of our brain thing". Suppose for a moment that there is a Universal Consciousness which with our current limitations we can't confirm or deny, but it flows through each and every one of us and subconsciously carries forward knowledge and thought through each generation so we don't have to keep covering old ground.

In the spirit of the thread, I think if we are all honest we all have doubts, and that is on both sides of the fence. I think those that proffess the loudest probably have the greatest doubts in there own beliefs.

I'm sure the truth will be made clear when we are ready to receive it...or not.
Science has made more discoveries in the past 100 years than it has made in the last 1,000 years combined. And its discovery rate is not linear, it's logarithmic, as you've poiinted out. But I have to tell you that in all of those discoveries, nothing has ever been unambiguously demonstrated that suggests that there is anything remotely resembling paranormality or the supernatural, despite what the Sy Fy channel may advertize to the contrary. And so my position is that as time passes, the probability of such a thing ever being discovered to be true approaches zero.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-17-2012, 12:07 AM
 
Location: Queensland, Australia
48 posts, read 37,180 times
Reputation: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by orogenicman View Post
Science has made more discoveries in the past 100 years than it has made in the last 1,000 years combined. And its discovery rate is not linear, it's logarithmic, as you've poiinted out. But I have to tell you that in all of those discoveries, nothing has ever been unambiguously demonstrated that suggests that there is anything remotely resembling paranormality or the supernatural, despite what the Sy Fy channel may advertize to the contrary. And so my position is that as time passes, the probability of such a thing ever being discovered to be true approaches zero.

You are absolutely correct, however, mathematically speaking, while the probability approaches zero, it can never be zero - so there will always be a chance of one day, some concrete evidence of something supernatural being proved to everyones satisfaction. In the mean time, "may the force be with you."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-17-2012, 12:22 AM
 
Location: Columbia, California
6,662 posts, read 26,322,070 times
Reputation: 5096
Quote:
Originally Posted by firstborn888 View Post
That is, doubts about your atheism? Ever?
Nope, none at all. I out grew the easter bunny, Santa and jesus

How about yourself? You ever have doubts? Believe in zombie christ, world floods, flaming bushes that talk.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-17-2012, 02:04 AM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
1,530 posts, read 2,606,534 times
Reputation: 907
3
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
No, Arequipa . . . I am trying to stop YOU from claiming that logic is doing what it is incapable of doing . . . supporting your materialistic naturalism as regards the EXISTENCE of Consciousness and intelligence, etc. Ask yourself which is the more logical premise . . . that the universe is conscious and therefore we have consciousness . . . or the universe is not conscious therefore we have consciousness? Logic is NOT your friend on this issue.

The logical presupposition is the the universe is conscious (i.e. God) therefore we have consciousness . . . NOT your illogical one that the universe is NOT conscious therefore we have consciousness.
This makes no sense. Whether or not the universe is conscious has nothing to do with whether or not we are. We are conscious because we have brains that are capable of complex thoughts and self-awareness. If your logic leads you to believe that that indicates that the universe is conscious, then your logic is flawed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-17-2012, 03:07 AM
 
39,203 posts, read 10,880,280 times
Reputation: 5096
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fasaga View Post
You are absolutely correct, however, mathematically speaking, while the probability approaches zero, it can never be zero - so there will always be a chance of one day, some concrete evidence of something supernatural being proved to everyones satisfaction. In the mean time, "may the force be with you."
Of course, but it simply foolish as well as illogical, to take a particular one of a million unproven possible speculations and say that particular speculation is something we should all take seriously. This is actually the illogic based on Faith. Unfortunately it too often passes for 'common sense' thinking.

If and when something supernatural is proven to everyone's satisfaction, then I shall happily place an informed 'faith' in it. Until then, I don't, and it is logically correct that I shouldn't.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-17-2012, 03:21 AM
 
3,424 posts, read 2,749,324 times
Reputation: 3318
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fasaga View Post
You are absolutely correct, however, mathematically speaking, while the probability approaches zero, it can never be zero - so there will always be a chance of one day, some concrete evidence of something supernatural being proved to everyones satisfaction. In the mean time, "may the force be with you."
Think of it this way. Say you are on a jury in a trial of a person accused of murder. During the trial, evidence is brought to bare on the subject's guilt. But despite the fact that 30 cameras caught the defendent in the act from 30 different camera angles, that all the forensic evidence points to his guilt, that 50,000 people at the stadium saw the murder occur on the large screen monitor, and the defendent admits to his guilt, you are the one hold out in finding him guilty because you believe that the infinitely small probability that he may be found innocent by some unknown evidence discovered at a later date is enough to reserve judgement.

In the exact same way, the probability, based on existing evidence, that there is some intelligence guiding our every move, governing all that exists is equallly infintesimally small, and yet you hold out hope that one day some evidence will be found to confirm your unsupported suspicion to the contrary.

You wouldn't do this in any other aspect of your life, so why do it in this one instance? It simply makes no rational sense.
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