Author Topic: Probabilities of God's existence debate  (Read 49885 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Lukvance

  • Emergency Room
  • ******
  • Posts: 1982
  • Darwins +13/-258
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1073 on: May 16, 2014, 08:38:50 AM »
I love yes or no questions! More! :)

Unfortunately, I'm getting tired of asking them, because you never actually answer the question I'm posing.

Let's look a your original statement:
Wherever you go, our love will be with you. So if you go to the moon you will find love.

So yes or no: If I was unaware that you loved me, would I feel love on the moon at the thought of you - given that I have no feelings of love towards you?


And in response, I get a load of waffle about me thinking of someone else, and feeling love.  What has that got to do with your original statement?

In what way would YOUR love "be with me"?

That's the thing with IF. You said what if...and I said "for example..." you chose another case from my example and wanted me to adapt my example to your new set. I tried my best but it gets confusing I agree.
My love would be with you since you could think of the acts of love I made for you and feel loved.
You're worth more than my time

Offline Anfauglir

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 6198
  • Darwins +408/-5
  • Gender: Male
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1074 on: May 16, 2014, 08:42:18 AM »
Its clear to me that there is no further point in my engaging with you: I no longer believe that you are honestly trying to find common ground or to provide any evidence for your claims, but rather to dodge questions and cherrypick responses so that you can have your "ha ha!" moment. 

Sorry, I don't have time for that, so I'm bowing out of our exchanges as I do not think there is anything else you can offer me.
Just because you've always done it that way doesn't mean it's not incredibly stupid.
Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?

Offline Lukvance

  • Emergency Room
  • ******
  • Posts: 1982
  • Darwins +13/-258
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1075 on: May 16, 2014, 08:43:59 AM »
I know that you are asking questions, but your question is weird.  You're essentially asking that, if love started with a first entity, doesn't that mean that love existed before that first entity.  Which is a bizarre conclusion to ask about.
It's complicated. My initial question (in my head) was the following : What if Love is like Mathematics or the gravity law. Something that we (humans) would discover, not create it.
You're worth more than my time

Offline Lukvance

  • Emergency Room
  • ******
  • Posts: 1982
  • Darwins +13/-258
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1076 on: May 16, 2014, 08:45:57 AM »
Its clear to me that there is no further point in my engaging with you: I no longer believe that you are honestly trying to find common ground or to provide any evidence for your claims, but rather to dodge questions and cherrypick responses so that you can have your "ha ha!" moment. 

Sorry, I don't have time for that, so I'm bowing out of our exchanges as I do not think there is anything else you can offer me.
Yeah I got that when you said the following lie : "because you never actually answer the question I'm posing."
You're worth more than my time

Offline jdawg70

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2091
  • Darwins +374/-8
  • Ex-rosary squad
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1077 on: May 16, 2014, 08:58:49 AM »
I know that you are asking questions, but your question is weird.  You're essentially asking that, if love started with a first entity, doesn't that mean that love existed before that first entity.  Which is a bizarre conclusion to ask about.
It's complicated. My initial question (in my head) was the following : What if Love is like Mathematics or the gravity law. Something that we (humans) would discover, not create it.
I think it's complicated because you're making it complicated.  You're trying to simultaneously hold on to two mutually-exclusive ideas - that love is a phenomenon of the mind and that love has an existence independent of the mind.  Or, in more generic terms, that <insert abstract concept x> is a phenomenon of the mind and that <abstract concept x> has an existence independent of the mind.
"When we landed on the moon, that was the point where god should have come up and said 'hello'. Because if you invent some creatures, put them on the blue one and they make it to the grey one, you f**king turn up and say 'well done'."

- Eddie Izzard

http://deepaksducttape.wordpress.com/

Offline Lukvance

  • Emergency Room
  • ******
  • Posts: 1982
  • Darwins +13/-258
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1078 on: May 16, 2014, 09:11:33 AM »
what do you think? should I take one position? I like the Idea that love is like Math or gravity. Something we discover. Something that has an existence independent of the mind.
You're worth more than my time

Offline G-Roll

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 385
  • Darwins +43/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1079 on: May 16, 2014, 09:15:16 AM »
I like the idea that beer won't make me fat. Yet what happens if I drink a lot of it every day? And not that lite beer or low calorie stuff. But a mans beer with full flavor and a beard.

Offline jdawg70

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2091
  • Darwins +374/-8
  • Ex-rosary squad
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1080 on: May 16, 2014, 09:22:47 AM »
what do you think? should I take one position? I like the Idea that love is like Math or gravity. Something we discover. Something that has an existence independent of the mind.

I'm not sure it's fair to say that math has an existence independent of minds.  But I'll agree that gravity does.

So based on the premise that love has an existence independent of the mind...what is the nature of the independent existence of love?  Can you describe some way in which love has an observable effect independently of a mind?
"When we landed on the moon, that was the point where god should have come up and said 'hello'. Because if you invent some creatures, put them on the blue one and they make it to the grey one, you f**king turn up and say 'well done'."

- Eddie Izzard

http://deepaksducttape.wordpress.com/

Offline jdawg70

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2091
  • Darwins +374/-8
  • Ex-rosary squad
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1081 on: May 16, 2014, 09:24:43 AM »
I like the idea that beer won't make me fat. Yet what happens if I drink a lot of it every day? And not that lite beer or low calorie stuff. But a mans beer with full flavor and a beard.
I never understood low cal beer.  Once I make the decision to imbibe, concepts like 'my health' are sorta out the window.  But I drink hard.
"When we landed on the moon, that was the point where god should have come up and said 'hello'. Because if you invent some creatures, put them on the blue one and they make it to the grey one, you f**king turn up and say 'well done'."

- Eddie Izzard

http://deepaksducttape.wordpress.com/

Offline Lukvance

  • Emergency Room
  • ******
  • Posts: 1982
  • Darwins +13/-258
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1082 on: May 16, 2014, 10:14:21 AM »
So based on the premise that love has an existence independent of the mind...what is the nature of the independent existence of love?  Can you describe some way in which love has an observable effect independently of a mind?
Not yet. Working on it.
You're worth more than my time

Offline Astreja

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3013
  • Darwins +265/-3
  • Gender: Female
  • Agnostic goddess with Clue-by-Four™
    • The Springy Goddess
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1083 on: May 16, 2014, 10:26:26 AM »
It's clear to me that there is no further point in my engaging with you: I no longer believe that you are honestly trying to find common ground or to provide any evidence for your claims, but rather to dodge questions and cherrypick responses so that you can have your "ha ha!" moment. 

Sorry, I don't have time for that, so I'm bowing out of our exchanges as I do not think there is anything else you can offer me.

I'm out too, with one final observation:  No matter how many "ha ha!" points are supposedly scored in a debate like this, there still has to be evidence that is up to our standards.  If anything, Luk's alleged god seems even more unreal than before we started  -- reduced to a petty thought experiment that just keeps trying to swallow its own tail.
Reality Checkroom — Not Responsible for Lost Articles

Offline Lukvance

  • Emergency Room
  • ******
  • Posts: 1982
  • Darwins +13/-258
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1084 on: May 16, 2014, 10:31:20 AM »
It's clear to me that there is no further point in my engaging with you: I no longer believe that you are honestly trying to find common ground or to provide any evidence for your claims, but rather to dodge questions and cherrypick responses so that you can have your "ha ha!" moment. 

Sorry, I don't have time for that, so I'm bowing out of our exchanges as I do not think there is anything else you can offer me.

I'm out too, with one final observation:  No matter how many "ha ha!" points are supposedly scored in a debate like this, there still has to be evidence that is up to our standards.  If anything, Luk's alleged god seems even more unreal than before we started  -- reduced to a petty thought experiment that just keeps trying to swallow its own tail.
Post #870 miss.
I don't understand what where you looking for. All discussion after that post where meant to be out of subject.
You're worth more than my time

Offline median

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1848
  • Darwins +201/-16
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahweh: Obviously not obvious.
    • Talk Origins
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1085 on: May 16, 2014, 10:35:24 AM »
what do you think? should I take one position? I like the Idea that love is like Math or gravity. Something we discover. Something that has an existence independent of the mind.

The "independent of mind" part is the assumption you made which has neither been justified nor demonstrated. It is just an assumption, like all of the other supernatural assumptions you started with. That is the problem.
« Last Edit: May 16, 2014, 10:39:01 AM by median »
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Carl Sagan

Offline Lukvance

  • Emergency Room
  • ******
  • Posts: 1982
  • Darwins +13/-258
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1086 on: May 16, 2014, 10:42:17 AM »
The "independent of mind" part is the assumption you made which has neither been justified nor demonstrated. It is just an assumption, like all of the other supernatural assumptions you started with. That is the problem.
Welcome to the conversation. I was talking with jdawg70 before you jump in. Which assumption are you talking about?
You're worth more than my time

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12338
  • Darwins +677/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1087 on: May 16, 2014, 11:00:22 AM »
Yeah I got that when you said the following lie :

Lukvance,

we try to not accuse people of lying here.  It is inflamatory and really does not add to the conversation.  Please refrain from that unless you can prove it is a lie.  Thanks
Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline Lukvance

  • Emergency Room
  • ******
  • Posts: 1982
  • Darwins +13/-258
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1088 on: May 16, 2014, 11:17:42 AM »
Yeah I got that when you said the following lie :

Lukvance,

we try to not accuse people of lying here.  It is inflamatory and really does not add to the conversation.  Please refrain from that unless you can prove it is a lie.  Thanks


Message removed: It is not the custom to comment on a moderator's advice.

GB
Mod
« Last Edit: May 16, 2014, 11:46:00 AM by Graybeard »
You're worth more than my time

Offline Lukvance

  • Emergency Room
  • ******
  • Posts: 1982
  • Darwins +13/-258
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1089 on: May 16, 2014, 12:59:27 PM »
Alright, let's prove the lie!...tomorrow I will take time to underline every question that he asked me and the answer I gave him.
« Last Edit: May 16, 2014, 01:03:34 PM by Lukvance »
You're worth more than my time

Online One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 11041
  • Darwins +285/-37
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1090 on: May 16, 2014, 01:02:50 PM »
That's so unfair :(

It's part of the rules. Rules, if I might add, that you agreed to when you signed up. Rules you should have read.
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
We choose our own gods.

A.K.A.: Blaziken_rjcf/Lucifer/All In One.

Offline jdawg70

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2091
  • Darwins +374/-8
  • Ex-rosary squad
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1091 on: May 16, 2014, 02:44:11 PM »
The "independent of mind" part is the assumption you made which has neither been justified nor demonstrated. It is just an assumption, like all of the other supernatural assumptions you started with. That is the problem.
Welcome to the conversation. I was talking with jdawg70 before you jump in. Which assumption are you talking about?
Honestly Lukvance this is making me question your reading comprehension skills.  The first 8 words that median said is the answer to your question.

Come'on Lukvance.  I've been giving the benefit of the doubt for a while.  It's starting to fade a bit.

Are you feeling overwhelmed?  You've got a lot of different threads with a lot of different members conversing with you.  Perhaps it's time for you to slow down a bit?
"When we landed on the moon, that was the point where god should have come up and said 'hello'. Because if you invent some creatures, put them on the blue one and they make it to the grey one, you f**king turn up and say 'well done'."

- Eddie Izzard

http://deepaksducttape.wordpress.com/

Offline Lukvance

  • Emergency Room
  • ******
  • Posts: 1982
  • Darwins +13/-258
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1092 on: May 16, 2014, 03:03:30 PM »
Honestly Lukvance this is making me question your reading comprehension skills.  The first 8 words that median said is the answer to your question.
Come'on Lukvance.  I've been giving the benefit of the doubt for a while.  It's starting to fade a bit.
Are you feeling overwhelmed?  You've got a lot of different threads with a lot of different members conversing with you.  Perhaps it's time for you to slow down a bit?
I still don't get it. YOU talked about the independence of the mind, not me.
I think it's complicated because you're making it complicated.  You're trying to simultaneously hold on to two mutually-exclusive ideas - that love is a phenomenon of the mind and that love has an existence independent of the mind.  Or, in more generic terms, that <insert abstract concept x> is a phenomenon of the mind and that <abstract concept x> has an existence independent of the mind.
What is he asking me? He wants me to prove that a mind can be independent?
I talked about 3 concepts the math, gravity and love. Which one does he want me to justify or demonstrate?
You're worth more than my time

Offline jdawg70

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2091
  • Darwins +374/-8
  • Ex-rosary squad
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1093 on: May 16, 2014, 03:17:06 PM »
Honestly Lukvance this is making me question your reading comprehension skills.  The first 8 words that median said is the answer to your question.
Come'on Lukvance.  I've been giving the benefit of the doubt for a while.  It's starting to fade a bit.
Are you feeling overwhelmed?  You've got a lot of different threads with a lot of different members conversing with you.  Perhaps it's time for you to slow down a bit?
I still don't get it. YOU talked about the independence of the mind, not me.

What the hell, Lukvance.  WHAT.  THE.  HELL.
what do you think? should I take one position? I like the Idea that love is like Math or gravity. Something we discover. Something that has an existence independent of the mind.

Quote
I think it's complicated because you're making it complicated.  You're trying to simultaneously hold on to two mutually-exclusive ideas - that love is a phenomenon of the mind and that love has an existence independent of the mind.  Or, in more generic terms, that <insert abstract concept x> is a phenomenon of the mind and that <abstract concept x> has an existence independent of the mind.
What is he asking me? He wants me to prove that a mind can be independent?
I talked about 3 concepts the math, gravity and love. Which one does he want me to justify or demonstrate?
I want you to justify or demonstrate that love has an existence independent of the mind.  If you don't believe that is the case - that is, you do not believe that love has an existence independent of the mind - then kindly explicitly say so.  That way we can move the f**k on already.
"When we landed on the moon, that was the point where god should have come up and said 'hello'. Because if you invent some creatures, put them on the blue one and they make it to the grey one, you f**king turn up and say 'well done'."

- Eddie Izzard

http://deepaksducttape.wordpress.com/

Offline Lukvance

  • Emergency Room
  • ******
  • Posts: 1982
  • Darwins +13/-258
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1094 on: May 16, 2014, 03:44:50 PM »
I want you to justify or demonstrate that love has an existence independent of the mind.
Euh? I don't know! I asked you what do you think I should pick. love has an existence independent of the mind or not?
I asked it here :
what do you think? should I take one position? I like the Idea that love is like Math or gravity. Something we discover. Something that has an existence independent of the mind.
I did not understand that you wanted me to justify or demonstrate anything since that question. I thought I made it clear here :
So based on the premise that love has an existence independent of the mind...what is the nature of the independent existence of love?  Can you describe some way in which love has an observable effect independently of a mind?
Not yet. Working on it.
Are you sure it is me who has too much conversation at the same time?
You're worth more than my time

Offline jdawg70

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2091
  • Darwins +374/-8
  • Ex-rosary squad
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1095 on: May 16, 2014, 04:03:42 PM »
Lukvance -

I'm sure I'm not the only one who is just plain confused by this thread as of late.  I think this all started from, essentially, this post of yours:

I'm trying to prove to you (all) that nothing is real or everything is real.
That if you think that Love is real then God is real.

It's...I dunno.  It's really hard talking to you.  You're really all over the place.

For example, this post really, really, really seems to imply that you accept the claim that love has an independent existence:
Essentially, love started when people started (or any other entity capable of an emotion called love).
You are, and have been claiming, that 'love' has an independent existence outside of minds.  It's time to pony up the evidence and reasoning behind that claim.
If love started with the first entity capable of an emotion wouldn't that mean that love was there before the said entity? it was there independent of his mind then he "discovered it" and called it love?
No.
Do you believe that love has no power whatsoever outside your mind? What about the expression "love is blind" or "love is crazy" or "love will vanquish all", are they false?
I believe them to be true, in that case love has an independent existence. More than Gandalf. For me, they don't have the same degree of reality.
So I will agree to NOT in future be referring to God as an entity less or more real than Love.
The existence of both not being the question anymore :)

And yes, I'm am pretty damn sure it's you who is having too many conversations.  You're being sloppy and unclear, and are spread out among far more threads and debates than I am, or most other forum members frankly.
"When we landed on the moon, that was the point where god should have come up and said 'hello'. Because if you invent some creatures, put them on the blue one and they make it to the grey one, you f**king turn up and say 'well done'."

- Eddie Izzard

http://deepaksducttape.wordpress.com/

Offline nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6685
  • Darwins +890/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1096 on: May 16, 2014, 05:33:35 PM »
I'm still trying to figure out how love can exist where there are no living beings. We don't have to try to imagine what love is, or to compare love to gravity or to numbers. We know that love is a feeling that is generated by chemical reactions in the brain in response to stimuli. And with no brain, there can be no brain chemicals and therefore no love.

Lukvance, if you have any evidence that love is something different, time is way past for you to present it.

You are going to be talking to yourself here in a hot minute if you don't come up with something better than what you have been giving. Or maybe you will be talking to god. Who knows?
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.

Offline Lukvance

  • Emergency Room
  • ******
  • Posts: 1982
  • Darwins +13/-258
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1097 on: May 16, 2014, 05:36:41 PM »
Imply, imply. You can make anything imply whatever you want. The fact is that, in the last posts, you were the one all over the place telling me things like "What the hell" or "The first 8 words that median said is the answer to your question." when it clearly wasn't then telling me "I want you to justify or demonstrate that love has an existence independent of the mind" when you already know that I can't...for now and saying that I was "overwhelmed" when my answers and question made perfect sense when took in context.
You're worth more than my time

Offline Lukvance

  • Emergency Room
  • ******
  • Posts: 1982
  • Darwins +13/-258
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1098 on: May 16, 2014, 05:38:10 PM »
I'm still trying to figure out how love can exist where there are no living beings. We don't have to try to imagine what love is, or to compare love to gravity or to numbers. We know that love is a feeling that is generated by chemical reactions in the brain in response to stimuli. And with no brain, there can be no brain chemicals and therefore no love.

Lukvance, if you have any evidence that love is something different, time is way past for you to present it.

You are going to be talking to yourself here in a hot minute if you don't come up with something better than what you have been giving. Or maybe you will be talking to god. Who knows?
"how love can exist where there are no living beings " and "love has an existence independent of the mind" have 2 different meanings for you?
You're worth more than my time

Offline Lukvance

  • Emergency Room
  • ******
  • Posts: 1982
  • Darwins +13/-258
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1099 on: May 16, 2014, 05:42:44 PM »
I was looking forward to explore the possibilities of "the existence of a love independent of the mind" with jdawg when median came crashing in the conversation, perturbing him.
You're worth more than my time

Offline DumpsterFire

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 383
  • Darwins +61/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • The Flaming Duck of Death!
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1100 on: May 16, 2014, 11:10:51 PM »
Lukvance, read this Webster's Dictionary definition:

1. Love   noun \?l?v\
: a feeling of strong or constant affection for a person

: attraction that includes sexual desire : the strong affection felt by people who have a romantic relationship

(italics added)

Simply put, "Love" is the English word used to describe certain feelings of affection experienced within the minds of human beings. It is an emotion, just as anger, fear, and hate are. It (and the others) cannot, by definition, exist absent the mind. If you are convinced that love exists independently of the mind, kindly explain in specific terms how that is possible.

If love exists independently, however, it follows that the other emotions do, too. You can't have it both ways.
Providing rednecks with sunblock since 1996.

I once met a man who claimed to be a genius, then boasted that he was a member of "Mesa".

Think for yourself.

Offline Lukvance

  • Emergency Room
  • ******
  • Posts: 1982
  • Darwins +13/-258
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1101 on: May 16, 2014, 11:18:17 PM »
Lukvance, read this Webster's Dictionary definition:

1. Love   noun \?l?v\
: a feeling of strong or constant affection for a person

: attraction that includes sexual desire : the strong affection felt by people who have a romantic relationship

(italics added)

Simply put, "Love" is the English word used to describe certain feelings of affection experienced within the minds of human beings. It is an emotion, just as anger, fear, and hate are. It (and the others) cannot, by definition, exist absent the mind. If you are convinced that love exists independently of the mind, kindly explain in specific terms how that is possible.

If love exists independently, however, it follows that the other emotions do, too. You can't have it both ways.

You too don't read the posts? I just said in post #1094 that in post #1082 I said I was working on the concept of love existing independently of the mind or not and that I did not have the answer... yet. You can go read them again if you want it will prevent you to say things like "If you are convinced that love exists independently of the mind".
You're worth more than my time