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.
I've noticed lately Mystic that you are yelling in your posts a lot and using a lot of exclamation points. Just saying......you are not chill like you used to be. What has happened?
People I care about are misreading me and my posts and drawing erroneous conclusions from them. It is and has been very frustrating and is not getting any better. It is my communication problem, I know, but it has started to distress me more than it used to. Senioritis, I guess.
People I care about are misreading me and my posts and drawing erroneous conclusions from them. It is and has been very frustrating and is not getting any better. It is my communication problem, I know, but it has started to distress me more than it used to. Senioritis, I guess.
LOL Senioritis? I don't think so, we've both been here a long time but we're not ready to be put out to pasture just yet. Ok I surrender, I've heard a couple of other posters say the same thing about misreading posts and they had to leave for a while too. I am pointing out what I see that sometimes we don't see ourselves. I would expect the same courtesy.
I know I'm a hard pill to swallow but I calls it like I sees it, sometimes I'm not seeing so clearly.
But most people have the belief unicorns do not exist because of evidence. That some people do believe without evidence does not refute the claim that people also believe thing because of evidence.
Do tell, what evidence is there that unicorns do not exist?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Diogenes
No, I am suggesting most beliefs are based on knowledge of some kind. The question is how credible is that knowledge?
I disagree, all that is required for a belief, is an idea, a concept. That is not to say some amount of knowledge can't be additive to that idea/concept, but I do not see how it is required.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Diogenes
Sometimes it is. But how many of your beliefs are in lieu of knowledge?
I have no beliefs. I either have knowledge or I don't. I may have a level of confidence based on historical data. I.e. I have confidence that if I let go of my coffee cup it will fall to the floor, because every previous experience in kind, has had that result, but it is not a belief there is data.
Agnostics are simply saying they do not have the knowledge to make a claim either way, but once they say they do not believe, that is a claim in one direction. An agnostic who says 'they do not have the knowledge to make a claim, but gods do not probably exist' have moved from their either/or, 50/50 position, even if it is just a little bit.
I would say if you lack the relevant knowledge, then you would have no opinion so long as you do not make a claim.
BINGO That is my whole point gnostic is measure of knowledge or lack thereof (a-gnostic), theism is a measure of belief (Requires a claim). A-theism is devoid of a claim and therefore simply a lack of belief. Anti-Theism is a Negative claim(god does not exist), that DOES require the Burden of proof. Each person may assess the data or lack thereof with varying measures of confidence, but that does not constitute an actual belief/claim.
Now looking back at the gnostics, it is pretty easy to see they thought that they possessed knowledge, that was simply in error, and one COULD make the argument as relates to the meaning of the the word gnostic, that it is about belief in having knowledge rather than actually having that knowledge, that I would happily concede. But really that takes us back full circle to religious people BELIEVING they have knowledge of God, making all of them gnostic, OR All of them NOT having genuine KNOWLEDGE (only belief of said knowledge) and thereby ALL being AGNOSTIC. (I suppose if one or more groups turned out to be correct, they would be the 3rd option, but hardly worth using as a word definition).
Until science is able to prove that the universe exists as a result of natural processes alone, it is difficult to make an argument that you need a vast knowledge of science to be an atheist.
Why use science? Either there was once absolutely nothing (including gods), and therefore no rules to determine how absolutely nothing behaves, or there was an eternal something. No complex, intelligent gods that somehow just knew things required to explain existence.
You also need to prove the universe exists as a result of complex gods doing god magic?
And it has been science providing answers for the last 2000+ years, it has always been natural forces, never a god did it. That does not look like it is going to change in the near future.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fusion2
Vast is not vast enough - yet. Or, even if you have a vast knowledge of science, that you cannot be a theist. We are struggling to explain consciousness regardless of the vast knowledge of our cumulative collective understanding of it over large fields of study, let alone one single individual's knowledge.
Explaining consciousness is also a problem for a god doing it, as it does not explain consciousness. And as AI (neural networks) can model aspects of consciousness, it would appear to be a product of brain structure, as neuroscience and biological studies strongly suggest.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fusion2
What I think science has done for atheists and agnostics is it has called into question the requirement for a god to have created the universe. We know it is 14 billion years old, we know that it was much much smaller at that point and much much hotter. What triggered inflation is still up in the air. We know as well that complex systems start as simpler one's. Could even the most complicated systems be explained by our ever growing vast knowledge - possible but we aren't there.
It would also be reasonable to conclude that Science may continue to fill in the gaps and further prove that this, what we are in does not require a magic hand. Or it may lead us down paths to more questions.
That all said, there is also nothing stopping a 'creator' if you will to have simply had a magic hand at this so called natural process. Who created creator, alternatively which process triggered the big bang? Are we in a single universe or are there endless bubbles of universes in a multiverse
?
So called natural processes are just properties and behaviors of existence. If you assert a god, then that too must have inherent properties and behaviors, so why should existence itself not have them?
You have NOT met any burden of proof you admit can never be provided. You have assumed you KLNOW what our Reality actually IS and that it is NOT God, period. Your alternative labels for it are based on nothing but preference and consent, NOT "evidence."
Oh dear, your usual excuses.
Yes we have met the burden of proof, a universe full of natural forces, and NO evidence for any gods doing it. I have not presumed that at all, and I am basing what our reality is on what we know. Your alternative labels for it are based on nothing but preference and consent, not mine, and repeating your very silly excuses.
You need to provide the extra evidence for an intelligent god, otherwise we have no reason to believe in one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD
You have assigned all "evidence" to "Not God" ONLY because the presence or absence of consciousness itself can NOT be directly measured by science!
A lot of professionals would disagree with this oft repeated excuse of yours.
So called natural processes are just properties and behaviors of existence. If you assert a god, then that too must have inherent properties and behaviors, so why should existence itself not have them?
Excellent point. Even if we decided to use the word god in lieu of "natural" or "existence", that god would not have demonstrated the same attributes as the gods in all the world religions.
Do tell, what evidence is there that unicorns do not exist?
Have you seen a live unicorn? Because that is what one would expect if unicorns did not exist. Also, where would they live, and what would they eat?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyno
I disagree, all that is required for a belief, is an idea, a concept. That is not to say some amount of knowledge can't be additive to that idea/concept, but I do not see how it is required.
True, but that does not negate the fact that most beliefs are based on evidence. You know that bridge has not collapsed every other time you have walked across it, therefore you believe it will not collapse this time. Do you believe you have closed the front door to your house or flat? If so, why? Why do you fly? Travel in cars and buses? Cross the street? Because you have done these all before and lived to tell the tale, so you will do them again because you believe these activities are usually safe. Your life is full of beliefs, almost all based on prior knowledge.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyno
I have no beliefs. I either have knowledge or I don't. I may have a level of confidence based on historical data. I.e. I have confidence that if I let go of my coffee cup it will fall to the floor, because every previous experience in kind, has had that result, but it is not a belief there is data.
I have a bag of 10 balls, 9 green, 1 red. I pick a ball at random. Do you believe I have a green ball or a red ball? Your belief IS a confidence level, the latter is just usually more precise. All you are doing is calling belief 'data'.
BINGO That is my whole point gnostic is measure of knowledge or lack thereof (a-gnostic), theism is a measure of belief (Requires a claim).
So their belief that the options are equally as likely (which their argument implicitly entails) is not a belief?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyno
A-theism is devoid of a claim and therefore simply a lack of belief.
As an atheist, do you believe gods do not exist?
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.
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.
