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 6th December 2018, 09:04 AM   #3561
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 14,759
Originally Posted by David Mo View Post
Philosophy has long since given up on supplanting science. It seems that you stayed in Thomas Aquinas. Keep up to date.
Yeah it stopped trying to supplant science and started just trying to keep it in its wheelhouse. I don't see that as an improvement.

No wait let me speak your language. "The Great Philosopher Fizzlebuck Warmouth the 3rd said in 1874..."
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en

"Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
JoeMorgue 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 6th December 2018, 09:11 AM   #3562
Porpoise of Life
Illuminator
 
Porpoise of Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 4,538
Tommy and David appear to view people who agree with Hawking's observation that the laws of nature as we know them leave no room for the kinds of gods we find in our religions as dogmaticists stuck in their own paradigm.
Oh, how shortsighted of them to claim that science has disproven God! Don't they know that science isn't absolute and has limits? They are no better than the theists they decry! Poor souls, stuck like rats in a maze, not realizing that the essence of cheese is not confined to the plywood walls of their mental prison! (a metaphorical type of plywood, probably made from metaphorical pine, and I suppose the cheese is an allegory or something) Do the marvels of philosophy elude them? Do they take the shadows on the cave wall for reality? I, who see those vexing shades for the illusion they are, must educate these lost souls on the nature of reality!

In their zeal to teach us the error of our ways, they throw out mental rigor with the bathwater. Claiming that any conditional claim must secretly be a universal claim, and blurring the boundaries of philosophy to such a degree they're basically left with 'anything goes if you define your terms right, don't you seeee?'.

It's boring, condescending, and intellectually lazy.
Porpoise of Life 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 6th December 2018, 09:12 AM   #3563
The Sparrow
Graduate Poster
 
The Sparrow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Central Canada
Posts: 1,615
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn.
Splurgnop!
The Sparrow 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 6th December 2018, 09:26 AM   #3564
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 76,413
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Save the pearl clutching. When your entire shtick is "I get to talk down to the plebeians because I am an ENLIGHTENED PHILOSOPHER" it comes across as trying too hard.
It's also rude, which makes his request ironic.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... 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 6th December 2018, 09:28 AM   #3565
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 14,759
And again I want to point out that yet again a discussion about God has been drug down to the "Lay waste to the entire concept of knowledge" level by our usual suspects.

Scorch the Earth! seems to be the only defense of God left.
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en

"Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
JoeMorgue 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 6th December 2018, 09:34 AM   #3566
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 14,759
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
It's also rude, which makes his request ironic.
In his head I bet he's wearing a toga and is in Plato's "finger raised pose" from the School of Athens painting while we're all squatting in a circle around him.
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en

"Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal

Last edited by JoeMorgue; 6th December 2018 at 09:36 AM.
JoeMorgue 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 6th December 2018, 09:36 AM   #3567
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 28,134
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
In his head I bet he's wearing a toga and is in Plato's "finger raised pose" from the School of Athens painting while we're all squatting in a circle around him.
...raising a different finger.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers 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 6th December 2018, 10:29 AM   #3568
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,376
Originally Posted by Porpoise of Life View Post
Tommy and David appear to view people who agree with Hawking's observation ... as dogmaticists stuck in their own paradigm.
And often go to comical lengths, such as stuffing straw-man arguments into their mouths, to make this seem true. I thought it would take more effort to elicit from Tommy an admission that he's willfully writing both sides of the argument.

Quote:
I, who see those vexing shades for the illusion they are, must educate these lost souls on the nature of reality!
That puts on the table the hypothesis that the exercise is not so much to educate the masses as to play "educator" for its value otherwise. The meme "keyboard warrior" also fits the bill. Certain statements such as, "You can't pin me down," and "Swoop in for the kill," hint at these extracurricular roles. It's reinforced when every discussion inevitably converges toward the same few comfortable pet principles, irrespective of original topic.

I note that this dynamic does not operate in more rigorous philosophy, such as in journals and academia.

Quote:
In their zeal to teach us the error of our ways, they throw out mental rigor with the bathwater.
Deconstruction for its own sake.

Quote:
It's boring, condescending, and intellectually lazy.
And frequently aimed away from improving overall understanding of the topic at hand or of the world in general, and toward showing how brilliant they must be individually. Nine times out of ten I've observed these discussions devolve quickly to a semblance of ego reinforcement. After one arrives there, it tends to preclude the "instructor" ever admitting error. And at that point we're (in)effectively done.
JayUtah 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 6th December 2018, 10:30 AM   #3569
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,376
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Scorch the Earth! seems to be the only defense of God left.
You missed the opportunity to say, "I say we take off and nuke the concept from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."
JayUtah 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 6th December 2018, 10:31 AM   #3570
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 14,759
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
You missed the opportunity to say, "I say we take off and nuke the concept from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."
This thread doesn't deserve my pop culture references.
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en

"Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
JoeMorgue 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 6th December 2018, 12:00 PM   #3571
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 28,134
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
This thread doesn't deserve my pop culture references.
ITYM "You want the pop culture references? You can't handle the pop culture references!"

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers 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 6th December 2018, 12:02 PM   #3572
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,376
You want a pop culture reference? I can get you a pop culture reference by three o'clock.
JayUtah 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 6th December 2018, 12:23 PM   #3573
Dancing David
Penultimate Amazing
 
Dancing David's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: central Illinois
Posts: 39,326
Originally Posted by LarryS View Post
I am referring to the Big Bang itself (not prior or after). It requires all matter and energy and laws of nature (created) in one instant - or more accurately, with zero passage of time.
No it doesn't, that is your assertion, it is not part of the theory to say what the initial condition that led to the BBE was.

If you took some time you would realize there are a plethora of speculative theories.

None of which say that it was 'created'.

Now pop science articles and shows, yes.

Alan Guth and string theory along with others, no.

There is no instant at the BBE, there is no 'time' it is just starting...
__________________
I suspect you are a sandwich, metaphorically speaking. -Donn
And a shot rang out. Now Space is doing time... -Ben Burch
You built the toilet - don't complain when people crap in it. _Kid Eager
Never underestimate the power of the Random Number God. More of evolutionary history is His doing than people think. - Dinwar
Dancing David 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 6th December 2018, 12:34 PM   #3574
Dancing David
Penultimate Amazing
 
Dancing David's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: central Illinois
Posts: 39,326
Originally Posted by LarryS View Post
No, this is what I am referring to. If the following are true:
energy and matter can neither be created nor destroyed, and
laws of nature are fixed
then the entire Big Bang, creation of the total energy and matter, all the laws of nature, occurred in 0 time.
That is your unsupported assertion, the BBE does not say that.

Creation implies time, time does not exist until after the BBE in our universe.

You keep asserting that teh theory requires or implies something, it doesn't.

What 'caused' the BBE, we don't know.
What conditions existed 'around' the BBE we don't know.

there is plenty of speculation but the answer is we don't know
__________________
I suspect you are a sandwich, metaphorically speaking. -Donn
And a shot rang out. Now Space is doing time... -Ben Burch
You built the toilet - don't complain when people crap in it. _Kid Eager
Never underestimate the power of the Random Number God. More of evolutionary history is His doing than people think. - Dinwar
Dancing David 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 6th December 2018, 03:57 PM   #3575
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 70,410
Originally Posted by David Mo View Post
You won't find any of the above statements in a scientific journal.
They may be based on scientific data, but they are not scientific.


You're in denial and you are using an incredibly flimsy argument "won't find that specific wording in a scientific journal."
__________________
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 6th December 2018, 04:24 PM   #3576
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,376
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post


You're in denial and you are using an incredibly flimsy argument "won't find that specific wording in a scientific journal."
Yeah, I've always loved that argument. "If you're telling me my statement is wrong according to some area of study, you have to find where in its literature someone anticipated the exact wrong argument I've made, and refutes it." The literature in any particular field is not a laundry list of refutations of all the ways laymen can misunderstand something.
JayUtah 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 6th December 2018, 05:26 PM   #3577
BadBoy
Graduate Poster
 
BadBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,352
Originally Posted by LarryS View Post
I am referring to the Big Bang itself (not prior or after). It requires all matter and energy and laws of nature (created) in one instant - or more accurately, with zero passage of time.
I think Lawrence Krause said that all matter and energy add up to 0, which is why we have something from nothing. You didn't need a something there to create the universe from.

So there was no time when energy and matter were created as such.

My understanding is also that the laws of physics were not "created" but are emergent properties of the reality we live in.
__________________
Go sell crazy someplace else we're all stocked up here
BadBoy 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 6th December 2018, 05:37 PM   #3578
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,549
The whole of science can be viewed as a refutation of god ideas. The sun is driven across the sky by a chariot god: nope. Ok, god set the earth as the center of the universe: nope. Fine, god miraculously heals people: nope. Well, prayer works: nope.

We can go on and on about all the concrete things god is supposed to be able to do in our lives, the world and the universe at large and show science that refutes “god did it.” Not one supposed god-effect has escaped this.

All that’s left is god stuff we can’t possibly measure, detect or otherwise interact with. That stuff can be dismissed on two grounds: 1)All the other god-stuff has been refuted and 2)if we can’t observe an effect than who cares about a supposed source of the effect?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 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 6th December 2018, 06:26 PM   #3579
BadBoy
Graduate Poster
 
BadBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,352
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
The whole of science can be viewed as a refutation of god ideas. The sun is driven across the sky by a chariot god: nope. Ok, god set the earth as the center of the universe: nope. Fine, god miraculously heals people: nope. Well, prayer works: nope.

We can go on and on about all the concrete things god is supposed to be able to do in our lives, the world and the universe at large and show science that refutes “god did it.” Not one supposed god-effect has escaped this.

All that’s left is god stuff we can’t possibly measure, detect or otherwise interact with. That stuff can be dismissed on two grounds: 1)All the other god-stuff has been refuted and 2)if we can’t observe an effect than who cares about a supposed source of the effect?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It's amusing how the Christian God is made to looks like a dude much of the time.

I mean I suppose Jesus had a gall bladder and an appendix, athletes foot and belly button fluff. Did he ever laugh at himself after stumbling while putting on his kacks in the morning or get mad after stubbing his toe. It must have been just fine for him to possess this perfectly designed human body for a while. Did he ever lock himself out or say the wrong thing in a crowded room.

Even if a long dynasty of god like dudes did/does exist, one of which happened to do something either intentionally or by mistake that created this universe, what's to stop us postulating that our evolved existence was not just pure chance, a corollary but inevitable consequence of this type of universe. Hell the "creator" may not even know we exist - it may not even still exist itself (if he ever existed at all).

(I dont think it could have been fairies or pixies though because their magic is not good enough. They are like class B type of Magical beings. It's like the difference between Superman and Iron-man. Iron-man could never turn back time - plus he needs mechanical stuff to make his s%$t happen at all).
__________________
Go sell crazy someplace else we're all stocked up here

Last edited by BadBoy; 6th December 2018 at 06:33 PM.
BadBoy 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 6th December 2018, 08:14 PM   #3580
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 70,410
Originally Posted by BadBoy View Post
It's amusing how the Christian God is made to looks like a dude much of the time....
It's in Genesis. The men that wrote the book, or that started telling stories that were passed down decided a god should look like them, so they wrote that god made men look like God. Clever innit? Women were relegated to being made from man parts so we are the lesser beings. Convenient innit?

But fortunately, that's all a load of manmade fiction.
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 6th December 2018 at 08:24 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 6th December 2018, 08:18 PM   #3581
fuelair
Cythraul Enfys
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 57,831
Originally Posted by BadBoy View Post
I think Lawrence Krause said that all matter and energy add up to 0, which is why we have something from nothing. You didn't need a something there to create the universe from.

So there was no time when energy and matter were created as such.

My understanding is also that the laws of physics were not "created" but are emergent properties of the reality we live in.
I have a friend (right wing and religious but..). who has a giant problem with the idea that the laws of physics were not created but were figured out (and are still being so discovered/figured out) by humans, not handed down by some godthing(s)…………………..
__________________
There is no problem so great that it cannot be fixed by small explosives carefully placed.

Wash this space!

We fight for the Lady Babylon!!!
fuelair 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 6th December 2018, 09:12 PM   #3582
BadBoy
Graduate Poster
 
BadBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,352
Originally Posted by fuelair View Post
I have a friend (right wing and religious but..). who has a giant problem with the idea that the laws of physics were not created but were figured out (and are still being so discovered/figured out) by humans, not handed down by some godthing(s)…………………..
I don't really understand what it mean for the laws to be "created" anyway. The laws are just facts about how the natural world appears to behave in a consistent way.


So in other words, did God create the universe, then the earth, then created gravity, then created the laws of gravity which decided how strong the force is and how distance affects that force?

Seems crazy, but in line with a creation myth. Unfortunately scientists use language that can be jumped on and interpreted incorrectly by creationists all the time. Like DNA Code, and Physical Laws of the Universe and the fact the Dawkins keeps saying how particular animals grew stuff and lost stuff (and skips the whole natural selection thingy, which he assumes is taken for granted in those type of statements) as if humans just decided to get rid of their tails one day.
__________________
Go sell crazy someplace else we're all stocked up here
BadBoy 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 6th December 2018, 11:05 PM   #3583
fuelair
Cythraul Enfys
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 57,831
Originally Posted by p0lka View Post
1. Did stephen hawking say there's no possibility of god?
2. Who made stephen hawking the expert on god?
I have always been certain where always means since I was old enough to realize it was a useless and pointless idea. there were no god/gods/personlike creators re: the Universe and us. That was around 5 or 6 and nothing I have read or seen has given me reason to change.
__________________
There is no problem so great that it cannot be fixed by small explosives carefully placed.

Wash this space!

We fight for the Lady Babylon!!!
fuelair 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 7th December 2018, 12:24 AM   #3584
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 3,481
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Yeah it stopped trying to supplant science and started just trying to keep it in its wheelhouse. I don't see that as an improvement.

No wait let me speak your language. "The Great Philosopher Fizzlebuck Warmouth the 3rd said in 1874..."
You're a failure as an impressionist.
David Mo 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 7th December 2018, 12:44 AM   #3585
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 3,481
Originally Posted by Porpoise of Life View Post
Tommy and David appear to view people who agree with Hawking's observation that the laws of nature as we know them leave no room for the kinds of gods we find in our religions as dogmaticists stuck in their own paradigm..
I beg you once again not to attribute to me ideas that I do not have. Everything you have written is a meaningless farce.

I find the opinion that science proves that gods do not exist very respectable, albeit wrong. It has been held by many respectable philosophers and some scientists with philosophical interests.
I accused of dogmatism the way some people defend that idea in this forum. This is showed by the fact that, for lack of reasons, they have taken on the path of insults, personal disqualifications and farce.

Hawking —that is neither a good theologian nor philosopher— is in an evident mistake. The Christian god is supposed to be outside and within the world. A beginning of time in the Big Bang would not affect those who believe in the Creator, since time could be created from outside it.

Since you don't seem to understand what I'm writing (this is not condescension, it is a fact) I clarify that I don't defend the position of Christians, but I say that Hawking's is not conclusive on this point.
David Mo 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 7th December 2018, 12:52 AM   #3586
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 3,481
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post


You're in denial and you are using an incredibly flimsy argument "won't find that specific wording in a scientific journal."
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
Yeah, I've always loved that argument. "If you're telling me my statement is wrong according to some area of study, you have to find where in its literature someone anticipated the exact wrong argument I've made, and refutes it." The literature in any particular field is not a laundry list of refutations of all the ways laymen can misunderstand something.
I'm not asking for a rebuttal to be found to anything. I am asking that a demonstration be found. If I doubt that the a malaria vaccine has been proven to work, where do I go to look for confirmation? To an internet forum? Won't it be in Nature, The Lancet or similar magazines?

You guys are really amazing in your reasoning.
David Mo 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 7th December 2018, 01:02 AM   #3587
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 3,481
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
The whole of science can be viewed as a refutation of god ideas. The sun is driven across the sky by a chariot god: nope. Ok, god set the earth as the center of the universe: nope. Fine, god miraculously heals people: nope. Well, prayer works: nope.

We can go on and on about all the concrete things god is supposed to be able to do in our lives, the world and the universe at large and show science that refutes “god did it.” Not one supposed god-effect has escaped this.

All that’s left is god stuff we can’t possibly measure, detect or otherwise interact with. That stuff can be dismissed on two grounds: 1)All the other god-stuff has been refuted and 2)if we can’t observe an effect than who cares about a supposed source of the effect?
This is an interesting philosophical argument against the concepts of Creation and Providence.

But note that it does not affect other ideas of god such as Kant's practical Reason argument or the concepts of God associated with faith and inner effects. You have a tendency to consider a primitive form of cosmological religion and pretend that by dismantling it you attack all kinds of religiosity. This is not true.

Last edited by David Mo; 7th December 2018 at 01:13 AM.
David Mo 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 7th December 2018, 01:36 AM   #3588
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 3,481
Allow me a general analysis of your comments: you are wrong about two things.

1. I am not saying that the positivism you defend is necessarily wrong. What I'm saying is that the positivism you defend is a philosophical theory. Not scientific.
2. I am not saying that if positivism is false, religion is justified. There are other better ways to combat the belief in God. You have a dogmatic stance because you believe that positivism is the only way to criticize religion and all that is not positivism is magic or superstition.

And I ask you to consider the following question: How do you demonstrate that science is the only possible knowledge? Through science? Or by analyzing science and its history?
David Mo 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 7th December 2018, 06:56 AM   #3589
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 14,759
Originally Posted by BadBoy View Post
So in other words, did God create the universe, then the earth, then created gravity, then created the laws of gravity which decided how strong the force is and how distance affects that force?
Let's not forget this is a God who somehow created the light on Earth and the Sun on different days, and had days before there was a Sun or an Earth rotating.
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en

"Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
JoeMorgue 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 7th December 2018, 07:03 AM   #3590
fuelair
Cythraul Enfys
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 57,831
Originally Posted by The Sparrow View Post
Splurgnop!
I suspect you actually meant to write Gmglk there!!!!! (Shorter and more succinct!)
__________________
There is no problem so great that it cannot be fixed by small explosives carefully placed.

Wash this space!

We fight for the Lady Babylon!!!
fuelair 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 7th December 2018, 07:10 AM   #3591
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 14,759
Originally Posted by David Mo View Post
Allow me a general analysis of your comments: you are wrong about two things.

1. I am not saying that the positivism you defend is necessarily wrong. What I'm saying is that the positivism you defend is a philosophical theory. Not scientific.
And what exactly does that mean? You really can't seem to get that calling thing "philosophy" does not have the power over us that it does over you.

Since everything is "philosophy" calling things "philosophy" makes no point, carries no weight, and means absolutely nothing but you obviously mean it as some sort of argument or point and it's not asking too much for you to just say what that point or argument is.

Outside of just the silly game of "You're doing a type of philosophy, ergo you don't get to criticize anything I do as long as I call it philosophy" there's no obvious point to your continue kneejerk need to defend philosophy as equally vigorously as you fail to define it or understand it.

Again for someone who's defending the virtue of Philosophy like it's your young daughter you caught in the hayloft with one of the local boys you have yet to show any real grasp of what it is beyond an on call "This philosopher said so and sod" and "I can never be wrong because I can always just invoke magic you can't prove doesn't exist because it's magic."

Quote:
I am not saying that if positivism is false, religion is justified. There are other better ways to combat the belief in God. You have a dogmatic stance because you believe that positivism is the only way to criticize religion and all that is not positivism is magic or superstition.
The idea that answer have more and less correct answer is not dogma. A person who absolutely believes that 2+2=4, a person who absolutely believes 2+2 = Pi, and a person who absolutely believes that 2+2=A Potato are not all equally dogmatic and don't all need to open their minds to each other more. One person is correct, one person is wrong, and one person is not even wrong.
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en

"Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal

Last edited by JoeMorgue; 7th December 2018 at 07:13 AM.
JoeMorgue 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 7th December 2018, 07:11 AM   #3592
fuelair
Cythraul Enfys
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 57,831
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn.

I am pretty sure the phrase in it's entirety is " What part of 'Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn' do you not understand?"
__________________
There is no problem so great that it cannot be fixed by small explosives carefully placed.

Wash this space!

We fight for the Lady Babylon!!!
fuelair 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 7th December 2018, 07:39 AM   #3593
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,376
Originally Posted by David Mo View Post
I'm not asking for a rebuttal to be found to anything. I am asking that a demonstration be found.
Irrelevant. You're still demanding a specific thing that I suspect you already know won't be found in that exact form, and suggesting that that's the only argument you will accept. It's the same straw man, just dressed up in a slightly different hat.

Quote:
You guys are really amazing in your reasoning.
Thank you.
JayUtah 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 7th December 2018, 07:50 AM   #3594
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 14,759
This is, again, the strawman version of science where no statement can be made outside of some double blind, 6 month long placebo controlled experiment published in a major journal.

People are trying, desperately, to create a false face to put on science that has to be so rigorous that it can never actually achieve its own standards, all for end goal of yet more "You're precious science isn't allowed to have an opinion on so and so" tedium and excuse making.

Science is not obligated to disprove every piece of nonsense to the nonsense's strawman version of science's standards.

You will not find the phrase "A super-intelligent can of key lime pie filling does not live on the far side of the moon." in any scientific text or journal. No experiment has ever been conducted for the specific purpose of testing this hypothesis. This does not mean "There's no super-intelligent can of key lime pie filling on the far side of the moon" is not scientific.
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en

"Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
JoeMorgue 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 7th December 2018, 07:56 AM   #3595
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 3,481
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
Irrelevant. You're still demanding a specific thing that I suspect you already know won't be found in that exact form, and suggesting that that's the only argument you will accept. It's the same straw man, just dressed up in a slightly different hat.
So if you say something manifestly false and I ask you to prove it in some way I am riding a straw man. Amazing reasoning.

Maybe it's not the only way to know whther a subject is scientific or not. For now you have not explain why my method fails. If you know another one, it would be good if we could discuss it calmly and honestly.

Please, note that I am not discussing if something is true or false. Just if this a scientific issue.
David Mo 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 7th December 2018, 07:57 AM   #3596
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 76,413
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
This is, again, the strawman version of science where no statement can be made outside of some double blind, 6 month long placebo controlled experiment published in a major journal.
It's really interesting that the people most likely to rail against science and extol the superlative virtues of philosophy are those least likely to understand either science or philosophy.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... 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 7th December 2018, 07:59 AM   #3597
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 14,759
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
It's really interesting that the people most likely to rail against science and extol the superlative virtues of philosophy are those least likely to understand either science or philosophy.
It's further interesting that science is held to the standard of ULTIMATE LEVEL OF ALL THE RIGOROUS AT ALL TIMES! while philosophy is held to the "I made something up" or "Some philosopher said once" standards.
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en

"Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
JoeMorgue 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 7th December 2018, 08:00 AM   #3598
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 76,413
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
It's further interesting that science is held to the standard of ULTIMATE LEVEL OF ALL THE RIGOROUS AT ALL TIMES! while philosophy is held to the "I made something up" or "Some philosopher said once" standards.
Yes, it seems all very convenient.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... 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 7th December 2018, 08:03 AM   #3599
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 3,481
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Again for someone who's defending the virtue of Philosophy like it's your young daughter you caught in the hayloft with one of the local boys you...
This isn't just mental limitation. This comment is repugnant... See a psychiatrist or someone who teaches you to behave like a normal person.
David Mo 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 7th December 2018, 08:04 AM   #3600
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 14,759
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Yes, it seems all very convenient.
Yep. "Science" (which is at this point almost a slur used against anyone who suggest any intellectual standards) has to prove water is wet via a 6 month, lab controlled study before it can take a bath while "Philosophy" gets to make stuff up and declare it the ultimate truth.
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en

"Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
JoeMorgue 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 03:38 AM.
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.