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.
Reply
Old 25th March 2020, 03:54 PM   #1081
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 66,049
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
The important thing isn't getting called out for lying. It's determining whether the person calling you out is part of the in-group, or the out-group.
Unfortunately tribalism is a normal part of human nature. We all struggle with it.
__________________
Self-described nerd.

My mom told me she tries never to make fun of people for not knowing something.
- Randall Munroe
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 25th March 2020, 04:17 PM   #1082
LarryS
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,098
Originally Posted by ynot View Post
Only an insane idiot would look for what they know they can't find.
the foundation of faith in religion is that it can be found
but my question is: can it be found scientifically OR are we limited to perpetual reduction.
LarryS 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 25th March 2020, 04:25 PM   #1083
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 66,049
Originally Posted by ynot View Post
Sure, "only" may be an over-exaggeration, but would you agree with "often", or "more often than not"?
No, I do not.

Originally Posted by ynot View Post
ETA - taken a few moments to think of the many Christians I've known and communicated with in my considerable lifetime. I can't remember a single one wasn't in fear of the prospect of burning in a mythical torture dungeon they call Hell for eternity. Seemed to be a very strong motivation for them to do what they thought their imaginary, invisible, magical, sky-daddy wanted then to do.
While I do not deny that that might very well be in the back of their minds, I do not accept that that will always (or even "often" or "more often than not") be the primary motivator for those people to do good things. I think these people want to do good things for genuinely good reasons, and the hellfire thing is just a cultural background for that. A secondary motivator at best.
__________________
Self-described nerd.

My mom told me she tries never to make fun of people for not knowing something.
- Randall Munroe
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 25th March 2020, 04:43 PM   #1084
Roger Ramjets
Illuminator
 
Roger Ramjets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,346
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
This is the antithesis of how theists act. The theist take the existence of God as an axiom. They claim to KNOW that God exists (despite the fact that there is not a single bit of supporting evidence), claim to KNOW that this God created the universe, and claim to KNOW what existed before creation. For mine, this is just arrogance.
Arrogance of the worst kind. Not only do they claim that their god exists without evidence, they also insist that it is supernatural. So they expect us to change the meaning of the word 'exists' just to satisfy their fantasies.

Well I'm not having it. Either they admit that their 'god' is not supernatural, or that it doesn't exist. There is no other position worth considering.
__________________
We don't want good, sound arguments. We want arguments that sound good.
Roger Ramjets 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 25th March 2020, 05:25 PM   #1085
Thermal
Penultimate Amazing
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 10,035
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
No, wrong, and no special pleading is happening either.

Scientists do not know (and nor do they claim to know) what existed before the big bang. This is is precisely because science asks questions that often, not only have no answers, but lead to more questions for which there appear to be no answers. Scientists do speculate, but speculation is not a claim of knowledge.
Yeah...thats what I said. The Big Bang is the observation. Then, I said, if we speculate how the point...

Never mind. Just reread it.

Quote:
This is the antithesis of how theists act. The theist take the existence of God as an axiom. They claim to KNOW that God exists (despite the fact that there is not a single bit of supporting evidence), claim to KNOW that this God created the universe, and claim to KNOW what existed before creation. For mine, this is just arrogance.
Some surely do. ITT, we have established parameters not consistent with knowledge. Speculation and theorization and all.

Does Invisible Dragon refute a belief, or claimed knowledge about Zeus on MT Olympus or Jehovah chilling in clouds? Yes, and does so handily. I don't think that it is the Swiss Army knife or silver bullet of argument that many treat it as.
__________________

Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect -Mark Twain

Truth is not what you want it to be; it is what it is, and you must bend to its power or live a lie -Miyamoto Musashi
Thermal 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 25th March 2020, 05:35 PM   #1086
ynot
Philosopher
 
ynot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 8,711
Originally Posted by LarryS View Post
the foundation of faith in religion is that it can be found
I know, demonstrates how silly, stupid, insane religion is.

The only thing found by faith is delusion. Faith doesn't find actual gods, it deludes people they have found a god.

Originally Posted by LarryS View Post
but my question is: can it be found scientifically OR are we limited to perpetual reduction.
Well . . .
Originally Posted by LarryS View Post
For starters these properties can not include any parts, components or extensions in time and space.
Properties can not include any measurable quantities or qualities.
This is essentially a description of theoretical non-existence. What the hell is "perpetual reduction" of nothing?
__________________
Paranormal beliefs are knowledge placebos.
Rumours of a god’s existence have been greatly exaggerated.
Make beliefs truths and you get make-believe truths.

Last edited by ynot; 25th March 2020 at 06:06 PM.
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 25th March 2020, 05:54 PM   #1087
Apathia
Philosopher
 
Apathia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 5,575
Originally Posted by Thor 2 View Post
Apart from our appetite for babies we atheists are quite harmless I think, so Apathia may be struggling to answer this.

Apathia's questions leave me somewhat stunned however. Is Apathia an under rock dweller perhaps?

I draw attention to Steven Weinberg's famous quote:

"Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion."
I've had the opportunity to mingle with many a theist. Whether a given theist is pushy dogmatic and carrying a club, has been a matter of personality. And yes. I have met bitter atheists who had axes to grind. Again, personality.

BTW That's a wonderful quote. It takes any ideology that regards itself and its "truth" as being more important than people to get people to excuse cruelty in the name of morality.
__________________
"At the Supreme Court level where we work, 90 percent of any decision is emotional. The rational part of us supplies the reasons for supporting our predilections."
Justice William O. Douglas

"Humans aren't rational creatures but rationalizing creatures."
Author Unknown
Apathia 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 25th March 2020, 06:27 PM   #1088
Lithrael
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,713
Apathia, my go to example for harm to/by an otherwise kind person due to theism (as described earlier in the thread) the anguish caused by being gay or having a gay loved one, when your lifelong community is participating in a religion that says you must stop that and be straight instead and the only reason you might not be able to do that is if you don’t really want to or don’t really have faith, and if you don’t really want to be straight or don’t really have faith you don’t belong in the community.

This can happen to people who are not hateful at all. They just think their religious community is right about gay stuff being a loogie in the face of god.

ETA: places where family/the community accepts ‘shopping around’ for a church whose ideas suit you better, may not have this problem or have it so badly. I’ve seen it worst in those churches where everyone is really invested in looking good to the church leaders/community etc, been in it for generations, and feel they’d be crushed by ever leaving.

ETA: another example: the exacerbating effect of “God said this land is ours” on territorial conflicts. We’d definitely still have the conflicts without that but with it, they seem to become downright intractable.

Last edited by Lithrael; 25th March 2020 at 06:46 PM.
Lithrael 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 25th March 2020, 07:03 PM   #1089
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 13,670
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Yeah...thats what I said. The Big Bang is the observation. Then, I said, if we speculate how the point...

Never mind. Just reread it.
No, see, you're still missing the essential point, even though you just gave yourself a big clue..."we speculate"

Scientists do not claim to know what existed pre the BB, they only speculate about it.

Thiests not only claim that they DO know, they claim that are right about it, despite the fact that they have no evidence. Their claimed knowledge is based entirely on some words written in some ancient books of dubious provenance.

This is the essential difference between science and theism. Science requires evidence and rigorous testing of hypotheses before accepting speculation as fact, while theism doesn't care about evidence, and uses faith to skip straight to acceptance of unevidenced claims as fact.

IMO, Sagan says it better than anyone else...

“If the general picture of an expanding universe and a Big Bang is correct, we must then confront still more difficult questions. What were conditions like at the time of the Big Bang? What happened before that? Was there a tiny universe, devoid of all matter, and then the matter suddenly created from nothing? How does that happen? In many cultures it is customary to answer that God created the universe out of nothing. But this is mere temporizing. If we wish courageously to pursue the question, we must, of course ask next where God comes from. And if we decide this to be unanswerable, why not save a step and decide that the origin of the universe is an unanswerable question? Or, if we say that God has always existed, why not save a step and conclude that the universe has always existed?”


Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Some surely do. ITT, we have established parameters not consistent with knowledge. Speculation and theorization and all.
Have we?


Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Does Invisible Dragon refute a belief, or claimed knowledge about Zeus on MT Olympus or Jehovah chilling in clouds? Yes, and does so handily. I don't think that it is the Swiss Army knife or silver bullet of argument that many treat it as.
I disagree. IMO, it is a silver bullet analogy that can be applied to any unevidenced claim. Sagan uses it for the "existence of gods" argument and as anyone who has read TDHW will know, he also uses the same analogy to debunk alien visitation and abduction (in the same chapter IIRC). The "dragon in my garage" is an extension of his aphorism, "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence"

The OP is miffed that atheists use this analogy against all attempts to argue for the existence gods, or that gods "might" exist. He plainly feels that using the analogy is unfair, ostensibly because it is off topic and a thread hijack, but I think we all know the real reason, and it is that he can't argue against it.
__________________
"Covid-19 doesn't care whether you are a Republican or a Democrat; its an equal opportunity killer" - Joy Reid

If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list. This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky 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 25th March 2020, 07:18 PM   #1090
Apathia
Philosopher
 
Apathia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 5,575
Originally Posted by Lithrael View Post
Apathia, my go to example for harm to/by an otherwise kind person due to theism (as described earlier in the thread) the anguish caused by being gay or having a gay loved one, when your lifelong community is participating in a religion that says you must stop that and be straight instead and the only reason you might not be able to do that is if you don’t really want to or don’t really have faith, and if you don’t really want to be straight or don’t really have faith you don’t belong in the community.

This can happen to people who are not hateful at all. They just think their religious community is right about gay stuff being a loogie in the face of god.

ETA: places where family/the community accepts ‘shopping around’ for a church whose ideas suit you better, may not have this problem or have it so badly. I’ve seen it worst in those churches where everyone is really invested in looking good to the church leaders/community etc, been in it for generations, and feel they’d be crushed by ever leaving.

ETA: another example: the exacerbating effect of “God said this land is ours” on territorial conflicts. We’d definitely still have the conflicts without that but with it, they seem to become downright intractable.
Excellent examples. Thanks.
__________________
"At the Supreme Court level where we work, 90 percent of any decision is emotional. The rational part of us supplies the reasons for supporting our predilections."
Justice William O. Douglas

"Humans aren't rational creatures but rationalizing creatures."
Author Unknown
Apathia 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 25th March 2020, 07:20 PM   #1091
Thor 2
Philosopher
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 5,986
Originally Posted by Apathia View Post
I've had the opportunity to mingle with many a theist. Whether a given theist is pushy dogmatic and carrying a club, has been a matter of personality. And yes. I have met bitter atheists who had axes to grind. Again, personality.

BTW That's a wonderful quote. It takes any ideology that regards itself and its "truth" as being more important than people to get people to excuse cruelty in the name of morality.
Originally Posted by Lithrael View Post
Apathia, my go to example for harm to/by an otherwise kind person due to theism (as described earlier in the thread) the anguish caused by being gay or having a gay loved one, when your lifelong community is participating in a religion that says you must stop that and be straight instead and the only reason you might not be able to do that is if you don’t really want to or don’t really have faith, and if you don’t really want to be straight or don’t really have faith you don’t belong in the community.

This can happen to people who are not hateful at all. They just think their religious community is right about gay stuff being a loogie in the face of god.

ETA: places where family/the community accepts ‘shopping around’ for a church whose ideas suit you better, may not have this problem or have it so badly. I’ve seen it worst in those churches where everyone is really invested in looking good to the church leaders/community etc, been in it for generations, and feel they’d be crushed by ever leaving.

ETA: another example: the exacerbating effect of “God said this land is ours” on territorial conflicts. We’d definitely still have the conflicts without that but with it, they seem to become downright intractable.

Yes Lithrael, somewhat surprisingly Apathia just doesn't seem to get it.

It's not about bad atheists versus bad theists, it's about good people doing bad things because of religious motivation. Good atheists don't have a dogma to motivate them to do the bad stuff.

Your example about gays being persecuted is a good one - as an example of how it still goes on in modern times. There are a few others but they are not as severe as those in the past, and not so far in the past either, when you look at the persecution of the Jews sanctioned by the churches.

I have a nephew who does this "Praying the gay away" **** and he honestly believes he is doing good. He is not a bad guy - he just believes literally in Biblical scripture.
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard.
Thor 2 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 25th March 2020, 07:27 PM   #1092
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 66,049
I think a lot of people who misunderstand or otherwise have a problem with the dragon in the garage analogy would be well served by actually reading at least the chapter it was introduced in, and preferably the entire book.

Looking at you, psionl0. I'm sure somebody will be willing to loan you a copy if you ask nicely. Unfortunately, my own copy is signed by a number of skeptical luminaries including James Randi, Dick Smith, the entire SGU crew and others, so you can't have that.
__________________
Self-described nerd.

My mom told me she tries never to make fun of people for not knowing something.
- Randall Munroe
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 25th March 2020, 07:28 PM   #1093
Thermal
Penultimate Amazing
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 10,035
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
No, see, you're still missing the essential point, even though you just gave yourself a big clue..."we speculate"

Scientists do not claim to know what existed pre the BB, they only speculate about it.

Thiests not only claim that they DO know, they claim that are right about it, despite the fact that they have no evidence. Their claimed knowledge is based entirely on some words written in some ancient books of dubious provenance.
I dunno. I've been around churches all my life, and never once do I recall hearing about knowing. I heard a lot about faith, and belief, though. Never knowledge..

Quote:
This is the essential difference between science and theism. Science requires evidence and rigorous testing of hypotheses before accepting speculation as fact, while theism doesn't care about evidence, and uses faith to skip straight to acceptance of unevidenced claims as fact.
I hear theists claiming they believe and have faith, and tell the story of Doubting Thomas, and how blessed be he that believes without proof, and how faith will move mountains, and all that. I think I have more than average exposure to religious folk, and 'fact' isn't something that comes up much.

Quote:
IMO, Sagan says it better than anyone else...

“If the general picture of an expanding universe and a Big Bang is correct, we must then confront still more difficult questions. What were conditions like at the time of the Big Bang? What happened before that? Was there a tiny universe, devoid of all matter, and then the matter suddenly created from nothing? How does that happen? In many cultures it is customary to answer that God created the universe out of nothing. But this is mere temporizing. If we wish courageously to pursue the question, we must, of course ask next where God comes from. And if we decide this to be unanswerable, why not save a step and decide that the origin of the universe is an unanswerable question? Or, if we say that God has always existed, why not save a step and conclude that the universe has always existed?”
Beautifully written. And similar to what I said earlier, about the two premises being essentially equal, with theism adding the extra step of implying/requiring intelligence. The difference is, science is moving into theist territory by concluding the universe has always existed. That is an utterly unevidenced premise, would you agree? If not, what is the evidence that the universe has always existed?

Quote:
Have we?
We have. Repeatedly.


Quote:
I disagree. IMO, it is a silver bullet analogy that can be applied to any unevidenced claim. Sagan uses it for the "existence of gods" argument and as anyone who has read TDHW will know, he also uses the same analogy to debunk alien visitation and abduction (in the same chapter IIRC). The "dragon in my garage" is an extension of his aphorism, "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence"

The OP is miffed that atheists use this analogy against all attempts to argue for the existence gods, or that gods "might" exist. He plainly feels that using the analogy is unfair, ostensibly because it is off topic and a thread hijack, but I think we all know the real reason, and it is that he can't argue against it.
Invisible Dragon is certainly a powerfully persuasive argument. I confess, though, that I have not followed psionI0's arguments closely enough to read into the finer points. Seemed to go off on a lot of tangents, more of a free range thing.

<snip>


Edited by Loss Leader:  Edited for Rule 11. Do not discuss forum moderation in a substantive thread.
__________________

Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect -Mark Twain

Truth is not what you want it to be; it is what it is, and you must bend to its power or live a lie -Miyamoto Musashi

Last edited by Loss Leader; 25th March 2020 at 10:06 PM.
Thermal 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 25th March 2020, 07:54 PM   #1094
Lithrael
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,713
Thor: Yeah.

All these troubles are definitely worst when it’s about the importance of being seen as cleaving hard to a specific community. Excommunication or even just the disdain of your community wouldn’t be such a threat if it didn’t mean being cut off from everything that was important to you. Dishonor on your parents and your cow and all that.

Communities that practice honor killings seem to have the distilled version of this going on, and yet it’s a counterexample where that zeal seems to come more from the community tradition itself rather than from god’s commands (except in the generic ‘god says do as your elders say’ kind of way) though the religious authorities involved generally condone it. While some honor killings show all the glee of righteously punishing a sinner, others are full of heartbreak at having to punish some arbitrary failure with death, or become a pariah in a community you can’t leave.

Last edited by Lithrael; 25th March 2020 at 07:58 PM.
Lithrael 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 25th March 2020, 08:08 PM   #1095
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 66,049
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
I dunno. I've been around churches all my life, and never once do I recall hearing about knowing. I heard a lot about faith, and belief, though. Never knowledge..
I think it depends on the church. My own church talked about knowledge of the divine all the time.
__________________
Self-described nerd.

My mom told me she tries never to make fun of people for not knowing something.
- Randall Munroe
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 25th March 2020, 09:04 PM   #1096
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 15,919
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
There is no God. There is no dragon in my garage. There is no teapot orbiting Saturn. There is no beer in a fridge with no beer. These are all equal statement.
They are not actually. They form two distinct categories.

You can examine the garage and say "I found no dragons. You can examine the fridge and say "I found no beer". You can't do that with your other two statements.
__________________
"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 25th March 2020, 09:06 PM   #1097
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 15,919
Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post
I could be wrong, but I thought that the answer is: we don't know. We have no evidence of before the BB, so we can only say what is after the BB. Everything before is pure speculation. I don't think that is special pleading. That is pointing out the limits of our current knowledge.
An accurate depiction of my position that is completely devoid of straw. Thank you.
__________________
"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 25th March 2020, 09:07 PM   #1098
Thermal
Penultimate Amazing
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 10,035
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
I think it depends on the church. My own church talked about knowledge of the divine all the time.
Were they talking in the gnostic sense of knowing 'in your heart', or literally factual assertions?
__________________

Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect -Mark Twain

Truth is not what you want it to be; it is what it is, and you must bend to its power or live a lie -Miyamoto Musashi
Thermal 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 25th March 2020, 09:18 PM   #1099
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 66,049
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Were they talking in the gnostic sense of knowing 'in your heart', or literally factual assertions?
Both, of course. Conflating the two was a significant part of the problem. What you felt in your heart was a literal fact. God and the Holy Spirit absolutely gave gifts. Demons absolutely existed and Jesus Christ's name could literally banish them.

They were very insistent that these were absolutely objectively real things that they felt in their hearts.
__________________
Self-described nerd.

My mom told me she tries never to make fun of people for not knowing something.
- Randall Munroe
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 25th March 2020, 09:24 PM   #1100
Thermal
Penultimate Amazing
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 10,035
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
Both, of course. Conflating the two was a significant part of the problem. What you felt in your heart was a literal fact. God and the Holy Spirit absolutely gave gifts. Demons absolutely existed and Jesus Christ's name could literally banish them.

They were very insistent that these were absolutely objectively real things that they felt in their hearts.
I wonder if churches frame their assertions differently, depending on how much pull they have in their greater community. If they are aware that they are subject to skepticism, they focus on faith, but if they are the big fish in town, then it's a fact, Jack?
__________________

Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect -Mark Twain

Truth is not what you want it to be; it is what it is, and you must bend to its power or live a lie -Miyamoto Musashi
Thermal 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 25th March 2020, 09:26 PM   #1101
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 66,049
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
I wonder if churches frame their assertions differently, depending on how much pull they have in their greater community. If they are aware that they are subject to skepticism, they focus on faith, but if they are the big fish in town, then it's a fact, Jack?
Maybe. This certainly wasn't one of the biggest churches at the time, but eventually it was absorbed into the country's biggest megachurch. That was well after I left, of course.
__________________
Self-described nerd.

My mom told me she tries never to make fun of people for not knowing something.
- Randall Munroe
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 26th March 2020, 05:15 AM   #1102
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 19,860
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
I dunno. I've been around churches all my life, and never once do I recall hearing about knowing. I heard a lot about faith, and belief, though. Never knowledge..
You are telling us that you paid no attention in church as well? OK, then.

Nobody here can help you with that.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon 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 26th March 2020, 05:25 AM   #1103
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 23,785
And again the reason we're having this so very deep discussion with all it's side discussions and hijacks about God and not about the dragon in my garage is?

Someone?

Anyone?
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue 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 26th March 2020, 05:55 AM   #1104
Ulf Nereng
Thinker
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Norway
Posts: 140
We need to have some respite from discussing Covid-19. This topic is fun in comparison.
Ulf Nereng 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 26th March 2020, 06:39 AM   #1105
sphenisc
Philosopher
 
sphenisc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 5,162
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
And again the reason we're having this so very deep discussion with all it's side discussions and hijacks about God and not about the dragon in my garage is?

Someone?

Anyone?
There reason I'm not discussing the dragon is because it's imaginary. And it's not a hypothesis for any observation. But mainly because it's imaginary.
__________________
"The cure for everything is salt water - tears, sweat or the sea." Isak Dinesen
sphenisc 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 26th March 2020, 06:45 AM   #1106
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 42,813
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
The Dragon initiating time and space is a new dimension here. I don't recall reading that in Sagan or this thread. So now we have a Dragon which fits into a small corner of its creation, and you personally know of its locale? That's a pretty far cry from an incomprehensible and unknowable Unmoved Mover. Almost straw-ishly diminutive, Monica.

The testable nature description has been done though. From it's most elemental premise, a prime mover would be unknowable. Unlike the Dragon, no one begins to speculate what such a thing would even be like, or be knowable at all.
Now I'm thoroughly lost. Why did you introduce the PM into this conversation? I thought you were giving an example of a claim that couldn't be tested, but should still be provisionally accepted. Is that still what you're trying to do here?
theprestige 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 26th March 2020, 06:53 AM   #1107
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 23,785
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
I get your beer analogy. Its great to demonstrate observation of the tangible. But the Dragon question is not 'does God exist' ? It has to do with applicability of a particular analogy.
If something is "intangible" in literally every single way then it doesn't exist.

God isn't "intangible." He doesn't exist.

This isn't a holograph that you can see but not touch or the wind that you can feel but not see or etc, etc, and so forth.

It's something you can't see, hear, touch, taste, feel, detect, measure, gauge, and has no effects.

This isn't an unknown variable where we still have to fill in the blanks. This is a unknown made up of nothing but unknown variables.

God isn't an equation where it's there's a variable of X we have to account for. He's an equation where both sides are equal and both sides are nothing but undefined variables.

That's why the dragon in my garage IS the same thing as God.

Look at it this way. Let's alter the scenario.

Same setup. I tell you that a fire breathing dragon live in my garage. But this time when we walk out to my garage and I open the door the second the door opens we still don't see a dragon but we wear a deafening roar. The interior of my garage is absolutely scorched and burning. My poor Dodge has been crushed by some huge weight. Clawed, three finger footprints the size of a serving platter have been tracked all over the dusty garage floor. A plume of fire appears out of thin air and moves about. And when all the ruckus knocks over a bag of potting soil sitting on a shelf and causes a big cloud of dust to launch into the air we clearly see the outline of a winged creature.

Okay at this point we can both agree that something is going on in my garage and what we are seeing is at least consistent with "Invisible Dragon." "A dragon lives in my garage and the dragon is invisible" might not be fact or even theory depending on how technical and pedantic one wants to get, but it's at the very least well within the realm of viable hypothesis.

Believers/apologist think that's where the God discussion is. That there's all these unexplained things that God is a viable hypothesis to. They are wrong. And no this is not an invitation to have every sad piece of "Well can your precious science explain..." vomited at me. I have all of them pretty much memorized already.

This is not a case of looking into a garage, seeing a bunch of stuff that needs explaining, and coming to the conclusion that a dragon in your garage explains everything. Even if that was 100% across the board wrong and everything was caused by something other than a dragon, it's at least an intellectually honest and defensible position.

No, this is a case of looking into a garage, seeing no reason why the existence of a dragon would even occur to you, and not only still looking for it but demanding that everyone else keep looking for it as well and pitching hissy fits whenever anyone says "There is no dragon in this garage."

This is what you and Psion and practically all other religious believers/apologists just don't get. It's not a matter of I'm not satisfied with answers to the God question. I'm not satisfied with why the question is even being asked.

Because that's the elephant in the room here.

If someone actually, in real life, took you out to a perfectly normal garage that obviously didn't have a dragon in it and tried to to start a "civil debate" about the existence of a dragon in it your response would not be the cheerfully sit there and actually debate it with him. Your response would vary somewhere between assuming he had an ulterior motive for even asking or thinking he lost his goddamn mind.

And if he keep making you try to prove to him a dragon didn't exist to his satisfaction... well that wouldn't be very civil of him would it? How long could he insist you "have a civil debate about the possibility of a dragon in my garage" before you got a little snippy with him?

Now are you getting it?

The garage is the whole of reality, the dragon is God, and you're the guy calling me rude (or forceful or whatever I don't care) because I won't keep having this discussion "civilly" with you.

You're kind of right. Because it's already uncivil that I'm even being asked to have it. (And no anyone in the peanut gallery that isn't an invitation for any "WeLL jUSt don'T reAD tHE thREAd!" comments).

This isn't even a matter of I have the moral high ground until the day I can say "God doesn't exist" without knowing for a metaphysical certainty someone is going to pitch the fit that Psion did. This isn't even a matter of I have the moral high ground until the day I can say "God doesn't exist" without even the possibility of someone pitching the fit that Psion did.

This is a matter of I have the moral high ground until the day I would never even have to say "God doesn't exist" anymore then "There's no dragon in my garage" in any real context of my day to day life because the question and the topic would never even come up because nobody would be making excuses to keep bringing it up. Or they would actually have a valid and logical reason for doing so. We are nowhere near either of those points. So again, I'm not entertaining the constant "Okay atheist let's stop and acknowledge your big mean poopie headiness" because as the existence of this very topic already puts that needle on the side of the scale.

Now I have said some harsh things. Thermal, Psion, anyone else listening. Here are your pearls. If you need to clutch them please do so. Clutch them as hard as you can. Clutch them until they turn into diamonds. Then use the diamonds to buy a bridge and use the bridge to get over it.

Because we're in a callout thread about just one single example of a thousand years of being asked to prove there's isn't a dragon in garage that obviously doesn't have a dragon.

Given that, I'm comfortable with how civil I'm being.

Quote:
I ask that we put the gloves down for a sec.
I am more than happy to do so.... if you show the slightest hint that you understand what "gloves" you have on.

Again I will not remain argumentatively civil forever against proud wrongness, fauxed obtuseness, and people parading tired old cliches debunked a thousand times. Sad little "Okay but if we came from monkeys then why are there still monkey" style religious apologetics are rude by their very nature of being asked at this point.

This is why I will not be addressing the rest of your post. It's been done. Aquinas came up with 5 different variations on the stupid "Okay it's turtles all the way down so let's just stop at one turtle and call it God" nonsense a long time ago and it's been discussed. I will not discuss it again.

Put away "Baby's First Book of Religious Apologetics" and stop reading it to me. No, the prime mover / first cause / watchmaker God doesn't make sense. No evolution doesn't violate thermodynamics. Yes, science has found transitional fossils. No, Darwin didn't convert on his death bed. No, Hitler wasn't an atheist. No, the world is not "so finely tuned" as to need a creator. No, evolution is not "just a theory." Yes, "Half an eye" is actually pretty useful. No, God is not hidden in "everything science can't explain." I'm not getting drawn into debates that were already old and cliche when I was born.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC

Last edited by JoeMorgue; 26th March 2020 at 07:27 AM.
JoeMorgue 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 26th March 2020, 06:54 AM   #1108
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 23,785
Originally Posted by sphenisc View Post
There reason I'm not discussing the dragon is because it's imaginary. And it's not a hypothesis for any observation. But mainly because it's imaginary.
And what observation is God a hypothesis for exactly?

And please refer to the "Baby's First Book of Religious Apologetics" list in my last post before answering.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue 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 26th March 2020, 07:50 AM   #1109
Apathia
Philosopher
 
Apathia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 5,575
Originally Posted by Thor 2 View Post
Yes Lithrael, somewhat surprisingly Apathia just doesn't seem to get it.
What I don't get is that a person who believes in God (Theist, Deist, Mystical Non-Theist, or just an Agnostic) is mentally impaired, mentally ill, and morally corrupt.

I object to this nonsense with the same degree that I object to what many Christians say about Atheists being inherently bad.

Yes. I recognize that dogmatically held idealized beliefs and assertions of any sort can result in putting beliefs over persons and subjecting persons to prejudice and cruelty.

It takes some effort not to go "Ze's a ____, therefore Ze's inferior.'
__________________
"At the Supreme Court level where we work, 90 percent of any decision is emotional. The rational part of us supplies the reasons for supporting our predilections."
Justice William O. Douglas

"Humans aren't rational creatures but rationalizing creatures."
Author Unknown
Apathia 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 26th March 2020, 08:20 AM   #1110
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 23,785
Originally Posted by Apathia View Post
What I don't get is that a person who believes in God (Theist, Deist, Mystical Non-Theist, or just an Agnostic) is mentally impaired, mentally ill, and morally corrupt.
This is one of the key argument that always comes up in the "Atheist are being mean" subtopic, the idea that we're being "mean" by calling religious people "crazy" (or some variations thereoff.)

Let me be 100% clear here. Do you have any idea how much easier my life would be if I could just wipe my hands of the whole thing and go "They're just nuts, mystery solved?"

But that's not the case. I have to create a mental headspace where demonstrably not crazy people say demonstrably crazy things and that kind of compartmentalization is a lot harder for me to understand.

That's why this is so frustrating for me, how quickly everybody gets that "Of course it is absurd to keep looking for a dragon in a garage without a dragon" and then without missing a beat or grinding a gear go right back to looking for a God.

Part of me wishes I could just call religious people crazy and be done with it. Morality and civility aside it would at least create a logical and consistent world view.

Now another way of looking at this, if we want to get all technical-smechnical about it, is... what are we supposed to call them?

At a certain point if you keep looking through my garage for the dragon that's not there and there's no reason to think is there just calling you neutrally and benignly "wrong" doesn't cut it anymore and I'm sorry our language just doesn't have a quick, pithy word or phrase for "Maybe not crazy but is certainly putting a totally illogical and baffling amount of effort into being wrong about something for no reason they can adequately explain."

That's why sometimes atheist do just have to use language that refers to religious people as crazy but it does go beyond just being factually wrong about something.

In many cases just saying "Religious people are wrong" turns the whole thing right back into the "Civil Debate Between Equals, just a difference of opinion, fiddle dee dee" stage which, again, is a problem.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue 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 26th March 2020, 08:23 AM   #1111
sphenisc
Philosopher
 
sphenisc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 5,162
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
And what observation is God a hypothesis for exactly?

And please refer to the "Baby's First Book of Religious Apologetics" list in my last post before answering.
Which God?
__________________
"The cure for everything is salt water - tears, sweat or the sea." Isak Dinesen
sphenisc 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 26th March 2020, 08:24 AM   #1112
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 23,785
Originally Posted by sphenisc View Post
Which God?
*Headdesk* Goddamn another one.

Do you all get a copy of the same script or something?

This is like that episode of TNG where the get stuck in the time loop.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue 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 26th March 2020, 08:42 AM   #1113
sphenisc
Philosopher
 
sphenisc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 5,162
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
*Headdesk* Goddamn another one.

Do you all get a copy of the same script or something?

This is like that episode of TNG where the get stuck in the time loop.
Yes
__________________
"The cure for everything is salt water - tears, sweat or the sea." Isak Dinesen
sphenisc 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 26th March 2020, 08:44 AM   #1114
Steve
Philosopher
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,881
Originally Posted by sphenisc View Post
Which God?
Start with the specific one you have in mind when you choose to name it with a capital G.
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve 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 26th March 2020, 08:46 AM   #1115
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 23,785
My favorite religious apologetics will always be the ones that are functionally identical to trolling.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue 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 26th March 2020, 08:52 AM   #1116
sphenisc
Philosopher
 
sphenisc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 5,162
Originally Posted by Steve View Post
Start with the specific one you have in mind when you choose to name it with a capital G.
That would be the one referred to in the question I was responding to. As I don't know which one was intended by the questioner and they've evaded giving a straight answer, then I don't know.
__________________
"The cure for everything is salt water - tears, sweat or the sea." Isak Dinesen
sphenisc 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 26th March 2020, 08:54 AM   #1117
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 23,785
Originally Posted by sphenisc View Post
That would be the one referred to in the question I was responding to. As I don't know which one was intended by the questioner and they've evaded giving a straight answer, then I don't know.
"Define the thing you don't think exists so I can properly come up with an excuse why it might."
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue 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 26th March 2020, 08:54 AM   #1118
P.J. Denyer
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 6,491
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
I don't think it does. It proves their god doesn't protect them from snakebite. The police are supposed to protect me from criminals, but if I get murdered in my bed tonight that doesn't prove the police don't exist.
I think it was Lyall Watson who wrote that you can't prove that goats can't fly by throwing them off a tower, all you can prove is that a particular goat could not, or chose not to fly.
__________________
"I know my brain cannot tell me what to think." - Scorpion

"Nebulous means Nebulous" - Adam Hills
P.J. Denyer 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 26th March 2020, 08:56 AM   #1119
Steve
Philosopher
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,881
Originally Posted by sphenisc View Post
That would be the one referred to in the question I was responding to. As I don't know which one was intended by the questioner and they've evaded giving a straight answer, then I don't know.
Then why stop at Joe Morgue's quote? He was responding to a previous comment. You need to follow the discussion all the way back to understand the context.
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve 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 26th March 2020, 08:56 AM   #1120
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 23,785
Originally Posted by P.J. Denyer View Post
I think it was Lyall Watson who wrote that you can't prove that goats can't fly by throwing them off a tower, all you can prove is that a particular goat could not, or chose not to fly.
So how many goats do we have to throw off how many towers before it's "Goat's can't fly" and not "Well I'm of the opinion that personally speaking I hold the opinion that given our current evidence I choose to hold the belief that goats cannot fly but I can't be sure wishy washy wishy washy out clause out clause..."
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue 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
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 05:01 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, 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.