ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags atheism , stephen hawking

Reply
Old 22nd October 2018, 07:56 PM   #281
qayak
Penultimate Amazing
 
qayak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 12,836
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
Concepts of the good and assigning values of good to things is philosophy, not science.
As you are aware from the discussion of the subject from years ago, I disagree with your statement and many others do as well. Many years ago you could say that ethics and morals were philosophical because science hadn't gotten around to it yet. However, that can't be said anymore. Because philosophy moves so slowly scientists have been forced into aspects of it because of the swift advancement of scientific discoveries and they have begun assigning values. We also use a crude ethics/moral value system in our courts for sentencing.
__________________
"How long you live, how high you fly
The smiles you'll give, and tears you'll cry
And all you touch, and all you see
Is all your life will ever be."
qayak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2018, 07:58 PM   #282
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 69,933
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
....But I have yet to see anybody's proposed experiment on how to determine if gods exist or not.
That's because you are in denial. We don't need to do that experiment unless you can show one shred or sliver of evidence that gods exist. Otherwise we should be concerned with any and everything one can imagine such as invisible pink unicorns.
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2018, 08:03 PM   #283
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 69,933
Originally Posted by ynot View Post
...Unsubstantiated claims and definitions are of no value to science.
Nor are they of value in the real world except the part about the god beliefs which can be investigated using the scientific process in fields like archeology and sociology.
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 22nd October 2018 at 08:04 PM.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2018, 09:56 PM   #284
qayak
Penultimate Amazing
 
qayak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 12,836
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Nor are they of value in the real world except the part about the god beliefs which can be investigated using the scientific process in fields like archeology and sociology.
. . . and psychology.
__________________
"How long you live, how high you fly
The smiles you'll give, and tears you'll cry
And all you touch, and all you see
Is all your life will ever be."
qayak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2018, 10:05 PM   #285
dann
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,031
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
There is no known scientific test that can determine whether any gods exist.

Aren't crucifixion and resurrection considered to be proof that Jesus was an actual God?!
It must be possible to design a scientific test based on that assumption ...
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx
dann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2018, 10:18 PM   #286
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 3,296
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Which religion is that? That is of course a rhetorical question as his is not a god people actually believe in so has nothing to do with how the word god is used when believers use that word. He liked the comfort of his cultural religion but realised that the god that involved was of course a god that does not exist so tried to get the best of both worlds.

We shall have to agree to disagree - the whichness of the why isn't at all interesting to me.
Of course not - fiction is fiction after all, and I like fiction, but I try not to confuse fiction with reality. Which is why I know Zeus doesn't exist.
I get it. You only want to discuss the existence of God with people of low intellectual level.
But if the existence of God is a problem that can be solved scientifically also the solution will serve for the defense of God made by educated people. Or is it only for those who do not think too much? That they don't interest you doesn't seem like a reason to me.

And the best way to know if a question is scientific is to go to the science departments of the universities and consult scientific journals. Which one do we go to?
David Mo is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2018, 10:30 PM   #287
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 3,296
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
What makes you think we haven't seriously thought about the god question? Most atheists I know, know more about the Christian religion than most Christians I know. And most atheists know a lot about other religions, philosophy and science.
I was referring to the fact that all the scientist claims cannot be probed by the experimental method. How can they be "scientific"? This is what merite to be thought.

Last edited by David Mo; 22nd October 2018 at 11:08 PM.
David Mo is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2018, 10:32 PM   #288
ynot
Philosopher
 
ynot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,838
Originally Posted by dann View Post
Aren't crucifixion and resurrection considered to be proof that Jesus was an actual God?!
It must be possible to design a scientific test based on that assumption ...
Scientific tests are based on credible evidence, not "considered to be proof" and "assumption". Why is that so hard for some people to understand?
__________________
Paranormal beliefs are knowledge placebos.
Rumours of a god’s existence have been greatly exaggerated.
ynot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2018, 10:44 PM   #289
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 3,296
Originally Posted by qayak View Post
You need to define your use of proven and science in this context.
Science: The human knowledge based on the experimental method, also known as "hypothetical-deductive". I am not speaking of formal sciences now.

Poof: Evidence or argument establishing a fact or the truth of a statement. In science the proof is based on the hypothetical-deductive method.
David Mo is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2018, 10:49 PM   #290
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 3,296
Originally Posted by qayak View Post
The existence of gods is a scientific question every bit as much as the existence of the Higgs boson is a scientific question. And science answered the god question awhile ago.
What scientific department is charged to? In what scientific journal are publied the results of the scientific refutation of gods? HOw can be scientific a problem that is not scientifically studied?

Think a little about that, please.
David Mo is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2018, 10:53 PM   #291
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 3,296
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
It's about observable evidence.
What observable evidence scientifically shows that gods don't exist? Where is published? A particular example of scientific journal, please.
David Mo is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2018, 10:54 PM   #292
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 59,113
Originally Posted by dann View Post
Aren't crucifixion and resurrection considered to be proof that Jesus was an actual God?!
It must be possible to design a scientific test based on that assumption ...
How do you think we might go about designing a scientific test of whether a particular human was crucified and resurrected 2,000 years ago?
__________________
Wake up, you cardboard.
- Pixie of Key
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2018, 10:58 PM   #293
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 3,296
Originally Posted by ynot View Post
The "experiment" of thousands of years of looking for any evidence of gods actually existing without any positive outcome.

Same "experiment" by which we conclude extinct species don't exist any more (but unlike any claimed god at least we know they once did)
I beg your pardon. I can show thousand of scientific journals about extint species. In what scientific journal is published those "tousand years of evidence" about god? A specific answer, please.
David Mo is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2018, 11:02 PM   #294
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 3,296
Originally Posted by Jodie View Post
As David Hume said,"No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such a kind, that its falsehood would be more miraculous, than the fact, which it endeavors to establish."

So we just appeared out of thin air aware enough to be having this conversation by accident? Isn't that a ridiculous conclusion?
I did't know that Hume was a scientist! No, he was not and his opinion is a philosophical opinion. And note that the inexistence of miracles doesn't show the inexistence of God. And all this is philosophy.

I am a little tired of people that are not able to distinguish science from philosophy. Please attend a philosophy of science course where they will explain the difference to you.

Last edited by David Mo; 22nd October 2018 at 11:06 PM.
David Mo is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2018, 11:41 PM   #295
Cheetah
Graduate Poster
 
Cheetah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,058
Since anyone can just define god so as to be unobservable (either all the time or only when anyone is looking) the question "Does god exist?" is stupid.
No person in their right mind would insist that [insert fictional character] is real since no concrete evidence fan be found for it's non existence.


But there is a question I think science can answer:

Why do god(s) exist?

Two options:
  1. They are real - Since proving the non-existence of a god is impossible and all evidence for it's existence has been negative I'll let you reach your own conclusion on this option (just make it rational ).
  2. They are made up - This one has been conclusively answered. Seeking to explain the functioning of the natural world is part and parcel of human nature. Giving these explanations agency, is also part and parcel of human nature. We are social animals, that is how we instinctively interpret the world. We constantly perceive agency, even in inanimate objects we know possess none.
Given the above, in my mind there is only one rational explanation.
__________________
"... when you dig my grave, could you make it shallow so that I can feel the rain" - DMB
Cheetah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd October 2018, 12:00 AM   #296
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 83,885
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
Argument by analogy. I don't agree that your analogy is apt. Unless you have surveyed the entirety of the universe and all liquids are immediately evident to your senses.
Why would one need to do that to disprove the existence of the gods people claim to believe in?
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd October 2018, 01:59 AM   #297
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 13,387
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Why would one need to do that to disprove the existence of the gods people claim to believe in?
That is what Stephen Hawking has claimed to have done - scientifically.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd October 2018, 02:12 AM   #298
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 13,387
Originally Posted by David Mo View Post
I am a little tired of people that are not able to distinguish science from philosophy.
Considering that the mere mention of the words "quantum mechanics" gives most members here a headache, I don't know what else you expected. Did you think that the scientifically illiterate were going to keep their mouths shut?
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd October 2018, 02:24 AM   #299
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 83,885
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
That is what Stephen Hawking has claimed to have done - scientifically.
If he has so what? You and I are not Hawking.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd October 2018, 02:28 AM   #300
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 83,885
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
you're philosophizing again.

There is no known scientific test that can determine whether any gods exist.
Here you go - there is a "scientific test" that shows Zeus does not exist.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd October 2018, 02:31 AM   #301
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 83,885
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
What do you consider to be good? And how did you arrive at that conclusion?
The society and culture I was brought up in alongside with inherent behaviour traits from the evolution of humans that presumably have helped my genes to survive at least to me. (But my genes are pretty pissed off they've screwed up their chance of being passed on.)
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd October 2018, 02:36 AM   #302
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 83,885
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
I never said they did. That's precisely why I'm arguing that "no gods exist" is NOT a scientific conclusion.



Either gods exist or they don't. Agreed? A or Not-A. And whether A or Not-A is the true state of being is independent of whether we think the correct answer is A or Not-A. Is that agreed? Having no evidence for A is not the same thing as having evidence for Not-A. Is that agreed?

And yes, if gods interacted with reality then science --if you could devise the right experiment or observation method -- could investigate. But I have yet to see anybody's proposed experiment on how to determine if gods exist or not. So far all we've got is "we came up with alternate explanations for certain phenomena once claimed to be caused by gods", which is not in any way to my mind an experiment at all, much less a conclusive one.
Which gods is the question you have to answer first of all. The gods that most people in the world claim to believe in certainly don't exist as anything but fictional concepts, just like we can say Harry Potter doesn't exist as a real person but as a fictional character he certainly does exist.

Is there some other "entity/being/concept" that we can imagine could exist - yes there is but why use the label "god" for that? I say we keep the label "god" for those beings that the religious folk say they believe in.

It confuses conversations to use the same word for very different things.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd October 2018, 02:42 AM   #303
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 3,296
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
Considering that the mere mention of the words "quantum mechanics" gives most members here a headache, I don't know what else you expected. Did you think that the scientifically illiterate were going to keep their mouths shut?
I was hoping for what's going on. I'm just saying that I'm a little tired of the same thing.

I don't think quantum mechanics has much to do with the existence of God.
David Mo is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd October 2018, 02:45 AM   #304
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 83,885
Originally Posted by David Mo View Post
I get it. You only want to discuss the existence of God with people of low intellectual level. ...snip...
No I want to discuss the existence of gods that people say they believe in.

Gods that no one believes in really don't really interest me. Actually to be 100% accurate they do interest me - as I do like fantasy books that come up with new and weird concepts for gods but they are only interesting in terms of being entertainment.

If you want to discuss any of those fictional concepts really happy to do so but remember that's just riffing on entertainment and we need to move to one of the entertainment sections of the forum.

Originally Posted by David Mo View Post
But if the existence of God is a problem that can be solved scientifically also the solution will serve for the defense of God made by educated people. Or is it only for those who do not think too much? That they don't interest you doesn't seem like a reason to me.
Which god are you asking about the existence of? I provide a link a post or two above that shows how we can show that Zeus does not exist. Unless you tell me which one of the many gods people do believe in you are talking about when you use the word "god" it's very hard to have any meaningful discussion.

Originally Posted by David Mo View Post
And the best way to know if a question is scientific is to go to the science departments of the universities and consult scientific journals. Which one do we go to?
Again I gave you a link you can use to prove that Zeus does not exist.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd October 2018, 02:46 AM   #305
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 3,296
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Here you go - there is a "scientific test" that shows Zeus does not exist.
Oh, I'm sorry. I'm not here to hear jokes. I was serious when I was asking for a scientific journal.
Be so kind to explain what you want to say.
David Mo is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd October 2018, 02:48 AM   #306
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 83,885
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
How do you think we might go about designing a scientific test of whether a particular human was crucified and resurrected 2,000 years ago?
Build a time machine! Hawking was all over that!
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd October 2018, 02:48 AM   #307
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 83,885
Originally Posted by David Mo View Post
Oh, I'm sorry. I'm not here to hear jokes. I was serious when I was asking for a scientific journal.
Be so kind to explain what you want to say.
What joke?
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd October 2018, 02:54 AM   #308
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 3,296
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
No I want to discuss the existence of gods that people say they believe in.


Again I gave you a link you can use to prove that Zeus does not exist.
Rousseau believed in God; Descartes believed in God; Newton believed in God; Antony Flew believed in God and so on.

I have not ever seen any scientific experiment that shows that they are wrong. I have philosophical reasons to think they are wrong. Dawkins has philosophical reasons, Russell had philosophical reasons; Sam Harris has philosophical reasons... Perhaps you know an article that shows that God doesn't exist published in a peer reviewed scientific journal. It would be a great surprise.

Your link doesn't work.

Last edited by David Mo; 23rd October 2018 at 02:55 AM.
David Mo is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd October 2018, 03:08 AM   #309
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 5,946
Any definition of God a person can put forward can usually be knocked down through rational argument.
__________________
Opinion is divided on the subject. All the others say it is; I say it isn’t.
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd October 2018, 03:33 AM   #310
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 46,440
Originally Posted by ynot View Post
I would rather people designing and building planes listen to what science has to say about what methods and materials are good/best to use than listen to what philosophy has to say.

Many people say strategy of warfare is a science - https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=St...chrome&ie=UTF-8

That a hammer is more “of value” to drive in a nail than a marshmallow is a reality, not “a philosophical position”.

Sorry but you're talking philosobabble.
Please show me where I suggested using philosophy rather than science in the field of aerodynamics. It has always been my argument that science is best for scientific questions and philosophy best for philosophical questions. I was speaking of ethical good. I can't believe you are unable to distinguish between an ethical proposition and a physics one.
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd October 2018, 03:33 AM   #311
dann
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,031
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Again I gave you a link you can use to prove that Zeus does not exist.

It just shows that he doesn't live there anymore. People (and gods, I guess, and ducks, both real and imaginary) move.
And that's the problem with characters of fiction. You just write a new story. You can't really subject Donald Duck to anything other than analysis and interpretation. It would be absurd to try to use science.
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx
dann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd October 2018, 03:34 AM   #312
dann
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,031
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
I can't believe you are unable to distinguish between an ethical proposition and a physics one.

I can!
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx
dann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd October 2018, 03:35 AM   #313
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 46,440
Originally Posted by qayak View Post
As you are aware from the discussion of the subject from years ago, I disagree with your statement and many others do as well. Many years ago you could say that ethics and morals were philosophical because science hadn't gotten around to it yet. However, that can't be said anymore. Because philosophy moves so slowly scientists have been forced into aspects of it because of the swift advancement of scientific discoveries and they have begun assigning values. We also use a crude ethics/moral value system in our courts for sentencing.
Is killing someone wrong? What is the scientific basis for your answer?
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd October 2018, 03:39 AM   #314
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 46,440
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
The society and culture I was brought up in alongside with inherent behaviour traits from the evolution of humans that presumably have helped my genes to survive at least to me. (But my genes are pretty pissed off they've screwed up their chance of being passed on.)
Which is an explanation of why you may hold the ethics you do. But are those ethics right? Do you agree with them?
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd October 2018, 03:42 AM   #315
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 83,885
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
Is killing someone wrong? What is the scientific basis for your answer?

Problem with your question is that it seems a very simple question however it isn't, it's just our everyday language often contains huge amount of assumptions and baggage that we all usually understand so don't bother unpicking it.

And I would say for most people not avowed total pacifists the only answer to your very vague question is "it depends" whether they want to "use" science, the uncollected sayings of Agnes Nutter or the creed of the RCC to come up with an answer.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd October 2018, 03:43 AM   #316
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 46,440
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
That's because you are in denial. We don't need to do that experiment unless you can show one shred or sliver of evidence that gods exist. Otherwise we should be concerned with any and everything one can imagine such as invisible pink unicorns.
That doesn't sound very scientific: prove a thing exists before we devise an experiment to prove it exists. You're relying on the unprovability of deity, which is what you're arguing against .
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd October 2018, 03:46 AM   #317
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 46,440
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Problem with your question is that it seems a very simple question however it isn't, it's just our everyday language often contains huge amount of assumptions and baggage that we all usually understand so don't bother unpicking it.

And I would say for most people not avowed total pacifists the only answer to your very vague question is "it depends" whether they want to "use" science, the uncollected sayings of Agnes Nutter or the creed of the RCC to come up with an answer.
Like all ethical questions it's a philosophical position. You are reluctant to 'unpick the baggage' because you'd have to admit that.
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd October 2018, 03:54 AM   #318
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 83,885
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
Which is an explanation of why you may hold the ethics you do. But are those ethics right? Do you agree with them?
"right" is nothing more than a human behaviour hidden behind everyday language, it has no meaning outside actual human behaviour. There is no "right" in the universe outside the context of how a human behaves (behaviour does not just mean external behaviour but also covers internal behaviour).

We like to think these folk-fictions are meaningful but they are no more an accurate description of reality than saying the sun rises every morning and sets every night. As we know the sun does not rise nor sets - yet we still use those words because they are useful, we just have to be careful to remember that as Didactylos wrote - the turtle moves no matter what we might want the world to be.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd October 2018, 04:01 AM   #319
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 83,885
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
That doesn't sound very scientific: prove a thing exists before we devise an experiment to prove it exists. You're relying on the unprovability of deity, which is what you're arguing against .
Not really, it's simple saying "show us the evidence ". If someone tells me they have a way of predicting the lottery I'll say "show me the evidence" before I believe them it's the same for the gods the religious folk believe in. Once the evidence is shown then we have something to discuss but until the evidence is presented we have nothing to discuss. Don't forget many of the religious do believe they have evidence and are usually more than willing to share that evidence.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd October 2018, 04:03 AM   #320
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 83,885
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
Like all ethical questions it's a philosophical position. You are reluctant to 'unpick the baggage' because you'd have to admit that.
Not at all. But I am now most intrigued, what part of philosophy gives me to tools/means/whatever to determine if something is right or not?

ETA: Or just show me how you determine what is right or wrong via philosophy
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:55 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.