Thread: God

  1. #541
    The Earth is not flat. Clyde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    1,403
    "Ok I don't think you quite understand this concept....It is possible that the test was too hard. Blaming it on yourself just beats you down"

    Ok, well surely a logical appraisal of the situation is best, to determine whether its your fault or not.

    "Say you're late for an appointment. You park in the handicapp cause you feel rushed. You go to your appointment and while there your car is towed. Angerily you call your wife/mother to come pick you up. On the way to get you she's hit by a drunk driver, or any driver, and dies.

    It is not an uncommon thing for people to blame themselves in this situation. If you had taken your time, whatever. However it wasn't your fault, it was the durnk driver's."

    Ok but then i think most people would blame themselves, atleast for a while in that scenario, in fact i can't think anyone i know who wouldn't blame themselves.

    "Trust me the studies are out there on this one. There are particuarlly a bunch that show that woman are much more likely to internalize, while men externalize"

    Ok, i believe you. People with faith are more likely to externalise, but surely there can be many instances when externalising is bad. What if I really DO need to study harder for that test, then presumeably internalising is good?

    "Well first of all yes it can be derrived by data, that's what psycologists do, using science, scientific method, and such they derrived those conclusions. What more do you want?
    Umm why don't you read my quote again:"

    Sorry, you are quite right, i misread your quote.

    "Therefore the point is, if they live satisfying lives, and don't cause others to live unsatisfactory ones, who cares? They are happy. And under atheism when you die that's it, so nothing wrong there. If you try and force your view that they shouldn't have a faith based view on them, then you're just as bad as the people who tried to force their views on others in teh past, and often caused wars."

    Hold on a minute, your data seems to support my views rather than contradict them. If atheists can live satisfied lives just as well as theists then what benefit is there to believeing? No doubt to the people who are believers right now, yes its important, but if they hadn't been brought up as belivers it wouldn't be!

    The question is this: Which would be a better world, one with institutionalised irrational beliefs or one without?

    I think for many reasons i have already given it is one without.

  2. #542
    Blank
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    1,034
    "Surly lying in some cases is win-win."
    Thats what we call "little white lies".
    I thought you believed in truth at all cost.
    This is immoral right?

    Rationality is used to determine whether or not a new scenario is ethical based on comparisons with previous scenarios where the ethics are "known".
    If this is rational, why is irrational to hold on to old beliefs?

  3. #543
    The Earth is not flat. Clyde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    1,403
    "Well, I doubt most humanists (and I consider myself one) think of humanism in purely logical terms"

    True, but then ethics is not purely logical. In fact that is one the criticisms i have of humanism is that it occasionally presents its case as entirely rational. Perhaps i'm quibling, a humanist approach IS a rational way of dealing with ethics, its merely that ethics themselves are not due to logical reasoning.

    "Some of this feeling no doubt arises out of social conditioning, even when religious trappings are discarded."

    Undoubtedly.

    "But that also begs the question that some religious beliefs are also an attempt to codify, albeit often unsuccessfully, social structures that pre-existed the religion"

    hmm you don't need religion for laws. Society is more than capable of imposing laws without religion there.

    I don't think religion turned up as a way of teaching morality, because the early religions have much less emphasis on moral behaviour.

    "Evolution has resulted in a social situation where humanism is one of, if not the, best strategies to preserve our genes"

    Perhaps i'm stilll not completely convinced it makes a huge difference on an individual basis.... but i may be wrong.

    "Unfortunately, a few things counter it. Individuals (and their genes) can be rewarded for antisocial behavior"

    Well this applies to all social animals, we are social for personal benefit, and sometimes antisocial behaviour benfits us too.

    In one of Matt Ridleys newer books he explains why there is good reason to believe that mans Xenophobia has genetic basis, and is present to avoid outsiders coming into a group and taking advantage of the benefits without adding anything.

    "There's also a conflict between genetic behavior designed to improve the survival of the individual genes and more generic species genes (at least, this is something being debated). "

    Species genes? Hmm sounds strange, got a reference?

    "Religion, among other things, was an attempt to reconcile these conflicting genetic directives"

    Woah there, that is an interesting theory, but i'm not quite buying it (perhaps you can convince me)

    The reason being two fold - 1) I don't see any evidence supporting it.

    and 2) Religion would seem to be inevitable given humanities weakness for indocrination, and our lame pattern recognition. (Human beings like many animals are biased in favour of positive correlation, that is why people wear the same shirt to football games thinking it will make their team win, and gamblers have weird rituals that they think increases the likelyhood that they will win)

    "I think most, not all, humanists are at least agnostic about the existance of God, "

    I'm not so sure my parents are humanists, and they get the monthly (or is might be biweekly) news letter, i have read it several times and it seems to be pretty atheistic to me.

    On the back of one was a cartoon that showed a man thinking something along the lines of "Logicly God does not exist, if God does exist he gave me logic, therefore he doesn't want meto believe in him", or something along those lines. And i've read several articles by Dawkins in them.

    Maybe British humanists are partuicularly secular.
    Last edited by Clyde; 12-06-2002 at 05:41 PM.

  4. #544
    The Earth is not flat. Clyde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    1,403
    "I thought you believed in truth at all cost. "

    You err thought wrong.

    "This is immoral right?"

    I (personally) do place a high value on truth for truths sake, BUT there are clearly limitations:

    Family in a car crash brought to hospital, kid is dying mother is dead, kid has only minutes to live and asks if his mom is ok?

    Do you lie or do you tell the truth? Blatantly you lie.

    "If this is rational, why is irrational to hold on to old beliefs?"

    You lost me, what?
    Last edited by Clyde; 12-06-2002 at 05:35 PM.

  5. #545
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    272
    I thought you believed in truth at all cost.
    This is immoral right?
    I think you have a problem with magnitude, Mulder.

    If this is rational, why is irrational to hold on to old beliefs?
    Because your 'old beliefs' have a hidden agenda. Murder is bad != jesus is the saviour.
    Joe

  6. #546
    Blank
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    1,034
    I think you have a problem with magnitude, Mulder.
    I thought the world was meaningless and therefore
    magnitude wouldn't matter.

    Because your 'old beliefs' have a hidden agenda. Murder is bad != jesus is the saviour.
    You are the one who said there is no right or wrong.

    "If this is rational, why is irrational to hold on to old beliefs?"
    In the previous sentance you considered patern matching
    of events to be rational. This is no doubt problemic. It's
    not rational, it's more instinct.

    Murder is bad != jesus is the saviour.
    murder is bad (ingrained by your genes and society) <>
    jesus is the savior (ingrained by the preposisition of your
    genes to believe in a higher power and society)
    Do you see the problem here?

  7. #547
    Blank
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    1,034
    Sorry to bring back old post but

    An infinite number.
    So what is the probability that one chosen randomly will be true?
    1/infinity.
    Your event space has only 2 events either there is a
    god or there is not. The probability of each with repect to
    current knowledge is unknown and is probably meaningless
    anyways.

  8. #548
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    272
    I thought the world was meaningless and therefore
    magnitude wouldn't matter.
    Hmmm. You are quite the detective. But no where have I pronounced the world as meaningless. Your life may have no meaning; but we may be in it for the long haul.


    You are the one who said there is no right or wrong.
    Your point is?

    In the previous sentance you considered patern matching
    of events to be rational. This is no doubt problemic. It's
    not rational, it's more instinct.
    No, I was making fun.

    Do you see the problem here?
    What problem?
    Joe

  9. #549
    Blank
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    1,034
    What problem?
    The same factors that make you believe murder is wrong
    cause others to believe in Jesus.

  10. #550
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    272
    The same factors that make you believe murder is wrong
    cause others to believe in Jesus.
    What makes me believe murder is wrong?

    People believe murder is wrong for tangible reasons. Jesus isn't. Your statement is wrong (quel surprise).

    Do you have anything to add?

    "Jesus was the first tortoise"

    No? Thought not.
    Joe

  11. #551
    Blank
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    1,034
    People believe murder is wrong for tangible reasons.
    Tangible reasons like not being in prison verse
    religious persecution. There is no difference, it shouldn't
    matter if a reason is tangible or intangible the mind sees
    both as truth.

  12. #552
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    552
    >If this is rational, why is irrational to hold on to old beliefs?
    for one to be rational, he has to constantly re-evaluate old beliefs based on knew knowledge. An idea that made sense logically ~1000 years ago might not necessarily make sense today. Obviously, the idea that murder is "wrong" makes sense today whereas the idea of an all-powerful god existing makes little sense today.
    C Code. C Code Run. Run Code Run... Please!

    "Love is like a blackhole, you fall into it... then you get ripped apart"

  13. #553
    The Earth is not flat. Clyde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    1,403
    "Your event space has only 2 events either there is a
    god or there is not. The probability of each with repect to
    current knowledge is unknown and is probably meaningless
    anyways."

    There are an infinite number of possibilities, not two.

    If you think there are only two you dont grasp much about probability.

    And the probability of each possibility given "current knowledge" is exactly the same as any other possibility because THERE IS NO CURRENT KNOWLEDGE, thats the whole point!

    "The same factors that make you believe murder is wrong
    cause others to believe in Jesus."

    You doing it again, making completely irrelevant comparisons:

    Ethics, is part of our social interaction, which not entirely rational (there is reasoning involved) and which cannot be dealt with in a PURELY logical way.

    Jesus on the other hand is a physical property of the universe, either he did exist or he did not, the ONLY way to determine what's real and what's not is through logic.

    See the difference? One not based on logic but where logic has a use (and no doubt with a genetic component) , the other completely based logic.

    Logic is used to determine the "truth", morality is not truth it is a set of social rules.

  14. #554
    Blank
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    1,034
    There are an infinite number of possibilities, not two.

    If you think there are only two you dont grasp much about probability.
    Using your logic I would consider
    there not being a god and there being a god *both* attributes
    of the universe. They would then both be
    1/infinity.

    And the probability of each possibility given "current knowledge" is exactly the same as any other possibility because THERE IS NO CURRENT KNOWLEDGE, thats the whole point!
    I thought you knew that there was more evidence not
    supporting a god. Impossible to come up with a probabilty
    but I suppose you could guess.

    Jesus on the other hand is a physical property of the universe, either he did exist or he did not, the ONLY way to determine what's real and what's not is through logic.
    Phsical propertys of the universe does not matter. In fact
    if you do believe in god he would some how exist above the
    universe he created.

  15. #555
    Blank
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    1,034
    Jesus on the other hand is a physical property of the universe, either he did exist or he did not, the ONLY way to determine what's real and what's not is through logic.
    Social interaction is after all based on physical events. I thought
    love and happyness were also based on the physical. Don't
    aithest accepted that everything is a physical property.

Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

Similar Threads

  1. what race is god?
    By Leeman_s in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 02-22-2004, 05:38 PM
  2. God II
    By Leeman_s in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 01-09-2003, 01:42 AM
  3. GOD and religion
    By Unregistered in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 10-14-2001, 05:13 PM
  4. Foundations
    By mithrandir in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 10-05-2001, 02:18 PM