Worrying about Athiest Friends

LukeF · Jan 13, 2012

okay i see what you're saying... maybe it's best to differentiate between a scientific belief in something and what i see as a religious or superstitious belief in something...

the methodology of science is brilliant. like it really is.. for anything to become accepted in a 'scientific community' it has to withstand the test of time. a scientist proposes a theory or hypnosis and everyone else scrabbles around in an attempt to DISPROVE it. it's a very competitive field, any shoddy research or corner cutting soon becomes apparent. after a long time this 'theory' very hesitantly comes to be known as a fact... this happened with say the theory of gravity.. it took many decades for the theory to take hold as the scientific world gradually came round to the conclusion that Newton was 'onto something'.

so science can obviously be wrong and unreliable. but it's method is fantastic. it freely admits when it's wrong and holds it's hand up when it doesn't understand something. like recently with the Hadron collider experiment in Europe... the scientist collected data which didn't make sense (somehow a particle could travel faster than light) now instead of getting all defensive over their experiment or jumping to conclusions they admitted what they saw they didn't understand and threw the question out to the world's scientific community for suggestions

now religion and 'spiritual phenomena' is different. These often revolve around individual stories and experiences, mostly word of mouth.. people LOOK for evidence to support what they've seen and often ignore or dismiss evidence which contradicts their experience. as i mentioned before i use to be into 'psychic stuff'... i loved it... read up as much as i could about strange and unexplained happenings... it's addictive.. but ultimately only revolves around a certain (unreliable) type of evidence

~~~~~

What sort of evidence are you requiring to believe in God?

to me at least this is a rather big claim.. so naturally i'd like big evidence to support to claim

Why are you requiring it?

because it's nice to be right...??

rainacorn · Jan 13, 2012

LukeF said:

Last thing first- you already think you're right, even without evidence. I don't see how any actual proof one way or the other will satisfy your emotional need for intellectual superiority.

However, there are a few things here-

I think you meant hypothesis and not hypnosis. I only point this out to show you how easy it is to be wrong about something when you aren't completely focused on it. It's a 'stupid mistake.'

Also, the scientific method is not the same as a peer-review process. The scientific method asks for things to be observable and repeatable, an impossibility for some scientific theories. However you did bring up an interesting point- the neutrinos that travel faster than light... maybe. Must repeat the study to know for sure. What are the implications if it does? Do you even know?

Since you brought up scientific constants (in a way), I want to share this lovely bit from Paul Davies (physicist, cosmologist and astrobiologist).

"When physicists probe to a deeper level of the subatomic structure or astronomers extend the reach of their instruments, they expect to encounter additional elegant mathematical order, a faith that has been justified.

You couldn't be a scientist if you thought the universe was a meaningless jumble of odds and ends, haphazardly juxtaposed. You need faith that the universe is governed by dependable, immutable, absolute, universal, mathematical laws of unspecified origin. Faith that these laws won't fail or change."

Christianity attributes those laws to a source- God. It has been subjected to the peer review process and it has stood the test of time. Perhaps you feel all of the evidence for God is circumstantial, but that doesn't mean your doubts are reasonable.

jimmydiggs · Jan 13, 2012

I'll one-up this.

If you deny the existence of God, you lose the logical ability to assert your own existence thereby, removing your ability to deny the existence of God.

How is this so?

The basis upon which we know of our own existence is Cogito Ergo Sum, however, this of course relies upon the most basic laws of logic. These laws of logic, are absolute, transcendent, not dependent on the material world, spacial positioning, and are conceptual by nature. These laws of logic, being conceptual are reflections of a mind, however, it is not our mind given that our mind is finite and these laws of logic would exist without our own existence. Thus, God exists, or you can't know whether you exist or not thus removing your logical ability to deny the existence of God.

mori · Jan 13, 2012

jimmydiggs said:

There are a variety of serious problems with that sort of argument; I don't know any philosopher who takes it seriously these days except as a bit of historical interest. Kierkegaard's critique is probably the best, though Buddhists and Hindus have been saying the same things for a while. Phenomena occur, but none of this points to individual, thinking entities.

LukeF · Jan 13, 2012

However you did bring up an interesting point- the neutrinos that travel faster than light... maybe. Must repeat the study to know for sure. What are the implications if it does? Do you even know?

yeah i think it's fascinating.. i've read about a few of the possible theories but no i don't know what the latest conclusions have been

You couldn't be a scientist if you thought the universe was a meaningless jumble of odds and ends, haphazardly juxtaposed. You need faith that the universe is governed by dependable, immutable, absolute, universal, mathematical laws of unspecified origin. Faith that these laws won't fail or change."

God is one explanation. there are others. the universe indeed looks 'designed', but it has designed itself. the universe has been in existence for along time now... we're just looking at it from a small time window. The 'odds and ends' that failed to work have long ago been replaced by 'odds and ends' that do work. This doesn't need a God to guide this self correction process, it just requires alot of time..

Also, the scientific method is not the same as a peer-review process.

maybe scientific 'approach' would have been a better way of phrasing it...? sorry

Last thing first- you already think you're right, even without evidence. I don't see how any actual proof one way or the other will satisfy your emotional need for intellectual superiority.

okay well to pull an example out of the air lets take evidence for the power of prayer... i'm happy to endorse the power of prayer if it's been tested.

take a given number of patients in a dozen or so hospitals. and split them into four groups. (of say 300 each). and congregations in a number of churches will be asked to pray for groups of patients. The patients themselves have a variety of afflictions etc

1st group- gets prayed for and gets informed that they're been prayed for.
2nd group- gets prayed for and not told that they're been prayed for.
3rd group- doesn't get prayed for but told they are. (to take into consideration placebo effect)
4th group- left as a control

if there is significant improvement in the health of the right patients then surely prayer must work?? does this seem reasonable?? a lot of time and money and energy is invested in prayer. it'd be nice to know if/how well it works for everyone's sake...

LukeF · Jan 13, 2012

and in answer to 'jimmydiggs'... yeah i've heard plenty of little 'word games' that have phrased themselves in such a way to prove or disprove God..

If you deny the existence of God, you lose the logical ability to assert your own existence thereby, removing your ability to deny the existence of God.

this would be true, you're right.

but like i said at the start of this line of messages. i don't 'deny the existence of God'.

i just 'don't believe there is a God.'

do you see the difference?

jimmydiggs · Jan 13, 2012

mori said:

Cogito Ergo Sum is really quite simple. I don't see how you don't recognize the validity of it.

As a former CC user put it...

Credo_Ut_Intelligam said:

jimmydiggs · Jan 13, 2012

LukeF, do you believe you exist?

mori · Jan 13, 2012

jimmydiggs said:

The problem is definitely subtle. Fortunately, we have a good example here.

The problem here - you are thinking. It posits, for no reason whatsoever, that a you is doing the thinking. This assumes the classes of persons is meaningful and nonempty, that persons are responsible for observation, etc.

Again, the user is using personal pronouns before their validity has been demonstrated. Let me make the argument more ridiculous: I-the-omnipotent am thinking. Therefore, I-the-omnipotent exists. Here, I've added another property to the personal pronoun, but it's clearly false. I'm saying that in using the word "you," you've tacked on a large, hidden list of these modifiers, none of which has been demonstrated.

I'd point you to Hume's bundle theory if you want a more coherent critique and alternative explanation.

mori · Jan 13, 2012

To give an example of the sort of hidden modifier I'm talking about, by the way, note that the thing called "you" owns thoughts. By apparently and merely occurring in one apparent sphere of existence, thoughts are attributed to some thing out there called "you." That requires explanation.

And yes, I'm using the word apparent a lot here. Unfortunately, Descartes' argument can't rise above appearances.

Tethered · Jan 13, 2012

How much evidence one demands should be proportionate to the amount you expect to invest in.
You don't demand evidence when someone tells you about their day, because that requires nothing of you, but you would when someone asks you to give them a $10,000 loan to start a business (after all, that's months of work)

LukeF · Jan 14, 2012

LukeF, do you believe you exist?

i believe i am the imagination of myself.

LukeF · Jan 14, 2012

do you mind if i throw out a question about people's opinions on other monotheistic religions?

i had this conversation with a Muslim housemate i use to have... he responded that it was like people interpreting the same God but in different ways. Different 'styles' of worship.

but to me this took away all exclusiveness to his Holy text? why the Quran then, why not pick up the Bible?

Saul_Durian · Jan 14, 2012

Personally, I think being agnostic is the only real way to go.

rainacorn · Jan 14, 2012

LukeF said:

Surely you see how all other explanations are even more lacking in evidence than the God theory, yes?

For what you've laid out here to be true, you would have to prove that it has designed itself. You would also need to prove that there is in fact no God to prove that it is a self-correction process that does not need a God.

You are putting your faith into something with absolutely no proof whatsoever. It just makes logical sense to you. That being the case, your earlier statement that 'it would be nice to believe in God' leads me to ask- what is stopping you? You (yes, you, personally) are not requiring evidence to believe in something...so if you really think it would be a nice idea to have faith in that over something else, then there is literally no reason not to.

I suspect what is really holding you back is the social pressure that insists all atheists are brilliant and all theists are morons.

LukeF · Jan 14, 2012

Personally, I think being agnostic is the only real way to go.

respect to you

I suspect what is really holding you back is the social pressure that insists all atheists are brilliant and all theists are morons.

yeah i've been picking up on all the little hints you've been giving on my arrogance/certainty etc... but if i was supporting your arguments i guess i'd be called 'passionate' or 'enthusiastic'. so i'm not taking any of this to heart. obviously.

Surely you see how all other explanations are even more lacking in evidence than the God theory, yes?

THE UNIVERSE OPERATES PERFECTLY WELL WITHOUT A GOD. the advances of science over the years has pushed the need for God's guiding intervention into nothing.. there is literally no room for God anymore from an explanatory perspective. The way you've phrased your above question is making the presumption that there is a God and atheists are being rather awkward and trying to prove that there isn't. Since birth i've viewed the world on the pretext that there ISN'T a God... so surely it would be for believers to offer me the evidence rather than my job to go around refuting all the claims. The burden of proof does NOT lie with me.

so to return to your question, yes. Therefore ALL other arguments for me must have more evidence than the 'God explanation'. These 'other' explanation are not wacky conspiracy theories or tentative ideas... they are science, and answered obtained through observing the world around us in a clear and hopefully rational way.

what is stopping you? You (yes, you, personally)

i don't (deep down inside) secretly believe there is a God. I'm not in self denial. I'm not resisting any truths. I openly and honestly confess that i see no reason to believe in God. You can't judge or criticize me for that... because... well... i can't help it can i?

apples · Jan 15, 2012

You just can't grasp the idea of a higher being, just like I can't grasp the idea of no higher being. That's all. Lets just call it even on the logical measurement. Obviously, some people have faith in the validity of the bible while others have faith in the validity of the works of scientists.

All arguments aside, I believe in loving the people around me, wishing the best for everyone; I believe there is a heaven and a hell, so I pray that those I love will go to heaven.

jonnoboy · Jan 15, 2012

aww welcome Luke, I think its good, that you feel comfortable in joining us Christians on here so longs as you remain respectfull, and of course we will respect you aswell!

Apples, Pray for them man!! Pray Pray Pray!!

jonnoboy · Jan 15, 2012

Just reading back, This is the trouble when an athiest comes onto a christian site, no di-respect to you Luke, welcome, however guys, this will only start arguments. Myself as a christian, I dont give two hoots what other people belive in, stop trying to defend christianty to him, cos he won't change, and you have to respect Luke for it.... However Luke, it always begs the question why does someone who says they are an athiest come onto a christain website without trying to cause an arguement, I hope that is NOT what ur here for!

Jonno

Kyouken · Jan 15, 2012

jonnoboy said:

Maybe some atheists come here for other reasons, know what I'm sayin'

?

Worrying about Athiest Friends

LukeF

Guest

rainacorn

Guest

jimmydiggs

Guest

mori

Guest

LukeF

Guest

LukeF

Guest

jimmydiggs

Guest

jimmydiggs

Guest

mori

Guest

mori

Guest

Tethered

Guest

LukeF

Guest

LukeF

Guest

Saul_Durian

Banned

rainacorn

Guest

LukeF

Guest

apples

Guest

jonnoboy

Guest

jonnoboy

Guest

Kyouken

Guest