This is what I mean when I say...

Discussion in 'Religion & Philosophy' started by Frank, Feb 9, 2017.

  1. Frank

    Frank Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2016
    Messages:
    7,391
    Likes Received:
    1,348
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Okay, the purpose of this thread is to allow anyone debating the issues handled in this forum...to define how he/she is using a particular word. Then, when a question arises about the use of particular word or phrase...you can link back to what you have said here.

    I hope many people make use of it.


    AGNOSTIC!

    When I say I am an agnostic, this is what I mean:


    I do not know if gods exist or not;
    I see no reason to suspect gods CANNOT EXIST...that the existence of gods is impossible;
    I see no reason to suspect that gods MUST EXIST...that gods are needed to explain existence;
    I do not see enough unambiguous evidence upon which to base a meaningful guess in either direction...

    ...so I don't.
     
  2. Dirty Rotten Imbecile

    Dirty Rotten Imbecile Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2016
    Messages:
    2,159
    Likes Received:
    870
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So you don't what ?
     
  3. Frank

    Frank Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2016
    Messages:
    7,391
    Likes Received:
    1,348
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I do not see enough unambiguous evidence upon which to base a meaningful guess in either direction...

    ...so I don't.


    So I do not make a guess in either direction.
     
  4. Questerr

    Questerr Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    63,174
    Likes Received:
    4,995
    Trophy Points:
    113
    But do you believe in any gods?
     
  5. Frank

    Frank Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2016
    Messages:
    7,391
    Likes Received:
    1,348
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    "Believe in"...huh?

    If you are asking if I blindly guess that there are gods...or if I blindly guess that there are no gods...

    ...NO, I DON'T.

    There are people who "believe" or blindly guess that there is at least one god. I am not one of them. I do not "believe" there are gods.

    There also are people who "believe" or blindly guess that there are no gods. I am not one of them either. I do not "believe" there are no gods.
     
  6. Questerr

    Questerr Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    63,174
    Likes Received:
    4,995
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Great. You don't claim knowledge of the existence of any gods. This makes you Agnostic.

    But your lack of belief ALSO makes you an Atheist.
     
  7. Johnny Brady

    Johnny Brady New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2016
    Messages:
    3,377
    Likes Received:
    45
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Guys, the word "God" is oldfashioned, but if we start regarding him as an "alien", things begin falling into place..:)
    So the question could therefore be "Do we believe in aliens?"
    According to the famous Drake Equation, there are literally thousands of alien races out there, there ya go..:)

    [​IMG]
    "According to Drake, the average of people's best estimates suggests that there are about 10,000 technically advanced civilisations spread across our galaxy"
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/space/universe/questions_and_ideas/drake_equation
     
  8. Electron

    Electron Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 27, 2011
    Messages:
    1,932
    Likes Received:
    1,108
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I find the absence of evidence for supernatural gods to be consistent with there being no gods. It's not watertight proof, but close enough for me.
     
  9. Frank

    Frank Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2016
    Messages:
    7,391
    Likes Received:
    1,348
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    Yup.



    No it doesn't.
     
  10. Frank

    Frank Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2016
    Messages:
    7,391
    Likes Received:
    1,348
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Do you find the "absence of evidence" of life on any of the planets circling the nearest 15 stars to Sol...to be more consistent with "there is no life there"...or "we do not know if life is there?"
     
  11. Electron

    Electron Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 27, 2011
    Messages:
    1,932
    Likes Received:
    1,108
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We know there is life here, so it's possible there is life there. The same can't be said of gods.
     
  12. Frank

    Frank Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2016
    Messages:
    7,391
    Likes Received:
    1,348
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    There is absolutely NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER that there is any life on any planet circling the nearest 15 stars to Sol.

    Do you consider that to be more consistent with "therefore there is no life there"...or "we do not know if life is there?"

    It's okay...you can say it.

    The more consistent take would be "We do not know if there is life on any of those planets."

    And...we do not know if there are gods or not. We simply do not know.
     
  13. Dirty Rotten Imbecile

    Dirty Rotten Imbecile Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2016
    Messages:
    2,159
    Likes Received:
    870
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I would say we do not know life is there.

    I would go a step further and evaluate the likelihood that life is there. I believe it is somewhat likely that life may exist on these other planets at least in its simplest form. I make that evaluation based on my knowledge that a) there are other examples of life (like right here on our planet) and b) organic compounds have been found on interstellar material like comets.

    My general understanding of how life has progressed from chemicals to organic compounds to single-celled and then multiple celled organisms gives me confidence to say that it is somewhat likely that there are other planets with life on them. The things necessary for such life exists.

    To contrast, I have never met a God or other supernatural being, have no evidence to provide me with an understanding of how such a being could have existed or developed existence.
     
  14. Johnny Brady

    Johnny Brady New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2016
    Messages:
    3,377
    Likes Received:
    45
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Scientists have a tendency to embellish the facts. For example I saw them literally whooping and hollering on TV with gigantic grins when their Rosetta/Philae probe "landed" on a comet, but it gradually emerged that it hadn't landed at all, the bloody thing had simply crashlanded, bounced, and ended up stuck down a ravine..;)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosetta_(spacecraft)

    [video=youtube;A3_cp3Mtj0E]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3_cp3Mtj0E[/video]
     
  15. William Rea

    William Rea Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2016
    Messages:
    1,432
    Likes Received:
    604
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    As you say, we know that life is possible.

    We don't even have a definition of what 'gods' are let alone know that any kind of god is even possible.

    What probabilities can we put on life? Well it has happened once so the probability of life occurring in our Universe is exactly 1.
     
  16. cerberus

    cerberus Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2015
    Messages:
    25,530
    Likes Received:
    5,363
    Trophy Points:
    113
    . . . and high 5'ing and hugging and a-kissing? It all looked so - what's the word? - so false to the extent that it seemed rehearsed. But I always thought it bounced, and when it came back down again the comet (that started out as an asteroid in earlier reports [​IMG] ), which would have been travelling at 380000mph, wouldn't have still been around for the second descent, it would have been a squillion miles further on. What a massive confidence trick it all is!
     
  17. Frank

    Frank Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2016
    Messages:
    7,391
    Likes Received:
    1,348
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You would say, correctly...THAT WE DO NOT KNOW IF LIFE EXISTS ON ANY OF THOSE PLANETS...which, of course, was my point.

    If you wanted to "go further" and make the blind guess that there is (and pretend it is a reasonable evaluation) that would be fine. There is ABSOLUTELY nothing whatever wrong with making a guess...even a blind one.

    But...as we human go out into space, if we last long enough to do so...we may discover that life only occurs on planets circling one in ten thousand stars. And your blind guess might be totally wrong.

    As for "never having met or have an understanding" of things that CANNOT be detected by human senses...well, once again, we may discover that the vast majority of the universe and everything in it is NOT detectable to human senses.

    A creator god or gods, DRI, MAY EXIST...no matter how much atheistic belief wants to guess otherwise.
     
  18. Johnny Brady

    Johnny Brady New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2016
    Messages:
    3,377
    Likes Received:
    45
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yes, my reading of scientists is that most or them are atheists, so they worship the universe itself as their God, and they do their whoop/holler act to try to convince the government to give them more cash to continue..:)
    For example, whenever Sagan used to say with wide eyes and a soppy grin on his face "Billions upon billions of stars..the splendid majesty and wonder of the universe, blah blah" I felt like slapping him round the chops..:)
    The bottom line is that the universe is filled with useless atoms-and-molecules cosmic debris left over from the big bang, totally worthless!
    And in recent years we've been saddled with another grinning jackanapes on our TV screens in the form of "Professor" Brian Cox who's just as gushy and wappy about the universe as Sagan was and deserves a good slapping too-

    [video=youtube;eOvWioz4PoQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eOvWioz4PoQ[/video]


    PS- Cox reminds me of George Formby with the same teeth and gormless manner..:)-

    [video=youtube;sfmAeijj5cM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfmAeijj5cM[/video]
     
  19. Dirty Rotten Imbecile

    Dirty Rotten Imbecile Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2016
    Messages:
    2,159
    Likes Received:
    870
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So it would seem that the point at which you and I reach an impasse is on the matter of warranted belief. To me, it is acceptable to look at what we already know and apply it in other situations whereas you prefer to keep things as absolutes. I differentiate between what is possible and what is probable as two different things. It is possible that there is life on other planets. It is possible that there is a supernatural being that created everything. It is probable that life exists on other planets because the known ingredients for that life to exist.

    Warranted belief allows us to function. Consider: I have a house that I would like to purchase so I can rent it out. I compile a list of the home's features and compare it to other homes on the rental market. I determine that is probable that I can rent this home for $2000. I create a proposal to my investors and they look at what I have compiled and decide if my math is reasonable. If I go in claiming I'm going to rent the house for a million dollars the bank is going to reject me. Their belief would not be warranted.

    I'm sure that you use warranted belief in your life on a regular basis and that if you used the same standard of "anything's possible " you would have terrible results.

    PS. the vast majority of the universe and everything in it is definitely not detectable to human senses. That is why we have devices like telescopes, probes, rovers etc to give us data we would not be able to collect otherwise.
     
  20. Dirty Rotten Imbecile

    Dirty Rotten Imbecile Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2016
    Messages:
    2,159
    Likes Received:
    870
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Maybe I'm just reading too much into this but it appears like you are responding to what I said with some statements designed to attack the character of the scientific community.

    If that is the case it's disappointing. I think that we should focus on the philosophy of atheism compared to theism. When we try to evaluate the validity of a claim based on the character of the people who made the claim it will end up in a lot of accusations back and forth (and really we have no way of knowing what the people in that video believe about atheism or theism). Humans often let us down whether they are theists or atheists. I can certainly think of a lot of disappointments in both camps.

    You are, of course free to post what you will, but I think you have digressed into a subtopic that will devolve the respectful nature of this conversation so far.
     
  21. Frank

    Frank Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2016
    Messages:
    7,391
    Likes Received:
    1,348
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Warranted or justified beliefs in areas such as we are discussing...are blind guesses being disguised by "belief" with modifiers.



    Show me the math.

    You folk toss "probability" around carelessly.

    Show me the math that determines "gods" or "no gods" is more likely.



    And what makes you think that there are no areas of the "universe" that are not detectable no matter what instruments we use?

    There may be a world going on right alongside of each of us in another dimension that neither of us will ever be able to see.

    When talking about the true nature of the REALITY of existence...ya got a dung load of stuff that's possible.
     
  22. Dirty Rotten Imbecile

    Dirty Rotten Imbecile Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2016
    Messages:
    2,159
    Likes Received:
    870
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes, this is the impasse. I'm saying that we can use what we already know to help us think about the likelihood of something, you dont agree and consider warranted belief to be a blind guess. I respect your refusal of my opinion. Since it's an impasse I won't try to convince you further.

    I'm sorry I'm not a mathematician. Are you?

    There are most certainly areas of the universe that are not detectable at present. We are not certain what is at the center of black holes. We are not sure of what comprises dark matter. We are also trapped at the bottom of a gravity well where we are limited by our position in time and space. We can only see what was at the edge of the universe 13.8 billion years ago, not what is there today. We can only see the sun as it was 13 minutes ago.

    Up until recently we couldn't see what the actual composition of Europa was but as the information about its water content, temperature and other factors become more obvious to us. Scientists have explored it with probes to increases our ability to consider the probability that life may now or in the past have existed there. As we see more of the universe we become less "blind." The predictions we make become more accurate.



    Yes that is very possible. Physicists with greater abilities than I, have calculated the theory of branes and theorize that there quite possibly is another reality just a centimetre away that we can't detect. There is theoretical math for it but no physical evidence. I still find it exciting because quite often we theorize something mathematically and find physical evidence of it later. Neptune was discovered in this fashion. Despite not being able to sense it with our eyes or anything the gravitational affect that Neptune had on the other planets was detectable. It gave scientists enough information that they were able to focus their search. Where they were once blind, using their understanding of what they already knew to make predictions gave scientists the ability to find Neptune. It is no longer controversial.

    We find the same thing with exoplanets. Not so long ago they were science fiction. Based on what we knew about our own star and other stars we have observed we knew there was a likely probability of their existence. Then scientists learned how to measure transits across the face of stars. Each additional piece of information helped to piece together more and more info about exoplanets. Now they can classify exoplanets using the same classification system that we have used in our own solar system. They have learned how to uncover planets that have similar conditions to our own. It's a great example of how blindness can be cured using the scientific method.

    So true. You and I agree on a lot of things. Just not this issue of warranted belief. I appreciate you taking the time to discuss it with me though.
     
  23. Frank

    Frank Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2016
    Messages:
    7,391
    Likes Received:
    1,348
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    My bet is you will.

    What do "you know" that deals with the likelihood of gods existing or not existing.





    If you are going to talk about something being more likely than another...you have to know the probability of each. That is a math problem. If you do not have the math...and on this issue you do not...you are simply blindly guessing.

    Which is what I said.


    On average...8 minutes not 13.


    And that has what to do with whether or not gods exist?




    Correct. But what does that have to do with whether or not gods exist?

    We can blindly guess if they do or not. Other than that...not much.


    Science is a great thing.

    But I doubt it will ever get us an answer to whether or not any gods exist.

    I know for a fact it WILL NEVER get us to the point where we know that no gods exist.



    Thank you, Dirty Rotten Imbecile...that was nicely and courteously put.

    My position, however, is: On the question of whether or not gods exist...the word "belief" is just a disguise for "blind guess"...and warranted belief or justified belief are merely longer variations of the disguise.

    People who say, "I believe there is at least one god"...are expressing a blind guess.

    People who say, "I believe there are no gods"...are expressing a blind guess.

    This "justified" or "warranted" stuff is lipstick in an attempt to make it look prettier.
     
  24. Dirty Rotten Imbecile

    Dirty Rotten Imbecile Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2016
    Messages:
    2,159
    Likes Received:
    870
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This sounds like a rhetorical question, I'm already sharing my thoughts on the matter.


    Not really. I can say I think it's more likely that it will rain today than it will not rain today without ever once creating a mathematical problem. I can predict that my car will stop on the stop line if I use the brake with just the right pressure. I can predict that my wife will make my dinner if I show her a recipe I know she will find appealing etc.

    There are very smart people out there who could form mathematical equations for it but Im happy enough to just say" I don't reckon it'll rain today." I'm not C-3PO nor am I required to be to make a prediction.(edit: and none of what I a. Saying us my own prediction anyway, it's just stuff I have learned about from others that makes sense to me. I haven't had an original thought in my life that I know of).


    Close enough. I'm sure my point wasn't lost on you.


    Well we were discussing the similarities and differences between predicting that life would exist on another planet and predicting that a supernatural being exists that caused reality to occur (or something there about).

    My argument is that there is existing information that helps us to make predictions about life on other planets; historically science has demonstrated that having knowledge leads to predictions which adds to knowledge enabling further predictions.

    God as a scientific principle (a cause for a natural process) relies on a lack of information. At first god dwelled on a mountaintop, then in the clouds and now outside of our dimension. Whatever we don't know that's where God dwells.

    I should clarify that I'm only talking about using a God as a scientific principle to understand the natural universe. God apparently has value to people for other things, I'm not refuting that here. I'm just saying that the concept of God as a scientific principle has little or no value in understanding the natural universe.

    We can apply reason and make observations.

    One thing I will concede is that God may have created the entire universe, including evidence that leads me to believe that she didn't. All of reality may have begun at the moment I became aware of it complete with dinosaur bones and geological formations to make me believe that the world is billions of years old.

    However most of the time I choose to believe the evidence in front of me because it makes sense to. Doing so help me to navigate my reality better. It has practical application, the alternative does not. Even if the evidence does just define a created reality that is intended to deceive me there is enough consistency and the simulation elaborate enough that I can still continue on as I am because this deceptive God still created a universe in which he as a scientific principle has no value.
    No, probably not because god as a scientific principle exists where science still has a mystery. If science one day pulled back the veil and said "here is the robot that created reality" then that robot is god. If the universe is eternal as many suppose it is then there will always be another mystery.

    Based on what I see it's more of an intellectual trap to fall in than a likely explanation for understanding the nature of the universe.

    I'll consider it further, thanks.
     
  25. Johnny Brady

    Johnny Brady New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2016
    Messages:
    3,377
    Likes Received:
    45
    Trophy Points:
    0
    1- I'm a scientist myself, I got College of Preceptors exam passes in General Science and Advanced Science in the 1960's, and went on to do lab work..:)
    2- True Christians will never let anybody down, not ever..:)
    For example Brit TV star Julian Clary said- "When I was a mixed up teenager I asked a monk to pray for me. I met him 30 years later and asked if he remembered me and he replied "Of course, I've been praying for you every day since"
     

Share This Page