Author Topic: Evidence for philosophical naturalism, please present it  (Read 6284 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Godexists

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Darwins +0/-65
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Evidence for philosophical naturalism, please present it
« Reply #145 on: July 06, 2012, 05:27:46 PM »
Science has shown that the earth is old. This is not an opinion, it is a fact -

prove it.

Offline Zankuu

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2111
  • Darwins +132/-3
  • Gender: Male
    • I am a Forum Guide
Re: Evidence for philosophical naturalism, please present it
« Reply #146 on: July 06, 2012, 05:43:00 PM »
Godexists, please take the time to write up your own replies. Those you're having a discussion with are crafting responses using their own words. They aren't interested in debating paragraphs you've googled minutes prior to posting, they want to debate YOU.
Leave nothing to chance. Overlook nothing. Combine contradictory observations. Allow yourself enough time. -Hippocrates of Cos

Offline jaimehlers

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4933
  • Darwins +563/-17
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Evidence for philosophical naturalism, please present it
« Reply #147 on: July 06, 2012, 05:50:51 PM »
I already acknowledged that Christianity played a part in the development of science, but it is silly to claim that science came about because of Christianity.  Christianity is emphatically not based on "the notion that there exists a rational God who is the source of rational truth".  It is based on the notion that Jesus Christ died for the sins of everyone, then was resurrected to take his place at God's side.  This is hardly something I would expect from a rational god who is the source of rational truth.

Also, kindly stop making posts which consist of a link and a quote to someone else's argument.  If you want to convince people, you should do so using your words, rather than constantly quoting what other people say without adding any of your own thoughts.

Offline jaimehlers

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4933
  • Darwins +563/-17
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Evidence for philosophical naturalism, please present it
« Reply #148 on: July 06, 2012, 05:52:50 PM »
prove it.
Perhaps you should prove that the Earth is as young as you believe it is.  Use only scientific evidence, preferably from peer-reviewed publications.

Offline Astreja

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3012
  • Darwins +265/-3
  • Gender: Female
  • Agnostic goddess with Clue-by-Four™
    • The Springy Goddess
Re: Evidence for philosophical naturalism, please present it
« Reply #149 on: July 06, 2012, 06:22:42 PM »
Perhaps you should prove that the Earth is as young as you believe it is.  Use only scientific evidence, preferably from peer-reviewed publications.

GE, how old do you believe the Earth to be?  Please give us a figure, to the nearest 1000 years, so that we can quickly identify the data that falsifies your number.   ;)
Reality Checkroom — Not Responsible for Lost Articles

Offline jdawg70

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2076
  • Darwins +373/-8
  • Ex-rosary squad
Re: Evidence for philosophical naturalism, please present it
« Reply #150 on: July 06, 2012, 06:29:33 PM »
Science has shown that the earth is old. This is not an opinion, it is a fact -

prove it.

Well.  Try changing the question around somewhat: how about this question -

"How do I determine the age of the Earth?"

I am curious as to how you'd answer that....
"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: 2076
  • Darwins +373/-8
  • Ex-rosary squad
Re: Evidence for philosophical naturalism, please present it
« Reply #151 on: July 06, 2012, 06:34:23 PM »
prove it.
Perhaps you should prove that the Earth is as young as you believe it is.  Use only scientific evidence, preferably from peer-reviewed publications.

In Godexists' defense, I'm not sure that is fair.  Just because s/he can't prove the contradictory statement shouldn't prevent s/he from asking for proof of the opposing claim.  S/he, frankly, may not know the position if the opposing claim.
"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 jetson

  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 7276
  • Darwins +170/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Meet George Jetson!
    • Jet Blog
Re: Evidence for philosophical naturalism, please present it
« Reply #152 on: July 06, 2012, 06:35:59 PM »
Godexists,

This is a discussion forum.  You are expected to combine links and quotes with your own words in order to make your points or counter-points.  Please provide explanations in your own words as opposed to pasting links and quotes by themselves.

Jetson

Offline Graybeard

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 6698
  • Darwins +533/-19
  • Gender: Male
  • Is this going somewhere?
Re: Evidence for philosophical naturalism, please present it
« Reply #153 on: July 06, 2012, 06:37:42 PM »
Quote
Kennedy and Newcombe also argue that science has it roots in Christianity.
They are wrong.

Kennedy and Newcombe have mistaken cause and effect. Modern day Christianity had its roots in Science because science kept proving the Bible to be filled with ignorance, as it still does. Christian apologists then came out of the woodwork to "re-translate the Bible's message" to fit the facts that science produced.

They didn't like doing that and many people were killed by the Christian powers for "dabbling with the black arts." or committing heresy.

Quote
Evidence for this view is that nearly all the founders of modern science were Christians. These include men such as Keppler, Boyle, Pascal, Pasteur, Newton, etc.
This is equivalent to saying, "All doctors in Iran are Moslem."

There is no great surprise. In the times of Keppler, Boyle, Pascal, Pasteur, Newton, etc. everyone in Europe was Christian. Either that or you were an outcast in society and didn't get published. Look up Isaac Newton and see the strange form of Christianity he held to.

And now into Mod Mode:

As you seem only to be able to quote chunks of copy/paste and seem not to be able to think or speak for yourself, the debate is becoming somewhat limited.

On that subject, I have to ask myself, are we debating with you or with the internet? Do you believe absolutely everything that is in each article you copy and paste?
Nobody says “There are many things that we thought were natural processes, but now know that a god did them.”

Offline Graybeard

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 6698
  • Darwins +533/-19
  • Gender: Male
  • Is this going somewhere?
Re: Evidence for philosophical naturalism, please present it
« Reply #154 on: July 06, 2012, 06:39:11 PM »
Science has shown that the earth is old. This is not an opinion, it is a fact -

prove it.
Age of the EarthWiki

If I pointed you to anything more complex and thorough, you would not understand it.
Nobody says “There are many things that we thought were natural processes, but now know that a god did them.”

Offline Godexists

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Darwins +0/-65
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Evidence for philosophical naturalism, please present it
« Reply #155 on: July 06, 2012, 08:07:03 PM »
If I pointed you to anything more complex and thorough, you would not understand it.

Should you as a moderator not understand, that not my understanding of complex issues  is on quest here, but the issue of the topic ?  If you are unable to leave personal attacks aside, i must deduce that you have a poor case to defend.

Offline jaimehlers

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4933
  • Darwins +563/-17
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Evidence for philosophical naturalism, please present it
« Reply #156 on: July 06, 2012, 09:01:35 PM »
Should you as a moderator not understand, that not my understanding of complex issues  is on quest here, but the issue of the topic ?  If you are unable to leave personal attacks aside, i must deduce that you have a poor case to defend.
Your understanding of those issues is absolutely on topic.  How can you expect to evaluate what other people are telling you if you don't understand it?  And from what I've seen, you don't, really.  You constantly rely on blogs and religious sites for your rebuttals, and much of the time you add very little to what those blogs say, if anything.

You need to face up to this and either show us that you really do understand, or you need to take the time to gain that understanding.  And you can't gain that understanding from the sites you keep linking to, because they aren't interested in actually evaluating things dispassionately, but in affirming what they already believe to do no matter what it takes.

Offline Godexists

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Darwins +0/-65
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Evidence for philosophical naturalism, please present it
« Reply #157 on: July 06, 2012, 09:26:43 PM »
You need to face up to this and either show us that you really do understand, or you need to take the time to gain that understanding.  And you can't gain that understanding from the sites you keep linking to, because they aren't interested in actually evaluating things dispassionately, but in affirming what they already believe to do no matter what it takes.

Well, these sites have educated me a lot. If their information is irrelevant to you, that is your problem, not mine. Btw. where are you getting your understanding from ? the world view you have presented so far, has shown to be very poor....

Offline Boots

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1299
  • Darwins +96/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Living the Dream
Re: Evidence for philosophical naturalism, please present it
« Reply #158 on: July 06, 2012, 09:52:05 PM »
You need to face up to this and either show us that you really do understand, or you need to take the time to gain that understanding.  And you can't gain that understanding from the sites you keep linking to, because they aren't interested in actually evaluating things dispassionately, but in affirming what they already believe to do no matter what it takes.

Well, these sites have educated me a lot. If their information is irrelevant to you, that is your problem, not mine. Btw. where are you getting your understanding from ? the world view you have presented so far, has shown to be very poor....

different from yours =\= poor

GE, folks have given you example after example of why you're talking out your butt, yet you ignore them.  Why is that?  You keep saying "prove it" and "show me your proof."  When it's been done, time and again, on this thread, you don't answer it.  What gives, man???
* Religion: institutionalized superstition, period.

"Many of my ultra-conservative Republican friends...have trouble accepting the idea God is not a Republican. " ~OldChurchGuy

"We humans may never figure out the truth, but I prefer trying to find it over pretending we know it."  ~ParkingPlaces

Offline Godexists

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Darwins +0/-65
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Evidence for philosophical naturalism, please present it
« Reply #159 on: July 06, 2012, 10:19:55 PM »
GE, folks have given you example after example of why you're talking out your butt, yet you ignore them.  Why is that?

isnt it rather the oposit the case ? No relevant reason for philosophical naturalism has been presented. Rather, the answers have exposed the irrationality and baselessness  of this world view, and how unsupported it is based on scientific evidence. But the participants ignore it. Why is that ?


Quote
  You keep saying "prove it" and "show me your proof."  When it's been done, time and again, on this thread, you don't answer it.  What gives, man???

" We don't know " as answer means to you, it has been done ? gimme a break....

Offline jaimehlers

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4933
  • Darwins +563/-17
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Evidence for philosophical naturalism, please present it
« Reply #160 on: July 06, 2012, 10:45:52 PM »
Well, these sites have educated me a lot. If their information is irrelevant to you, that is your problem, not mine. Btw. where are you getting your understanding from ? the world view you have presented so far, has shown to be very poor....
Educated, or indoctrinated?  One thing you really need to understand is that those sites aren't presenting information, they're presenting interpretations to justify what they believe.  The problem is, those interpretations aren't convincing unless someone already accepts them, as you do.  That is probably why you think they're relevant.  Incidentally, the fact that you believe those sites are relevant is your problem, because that belief leads you to make wrong, even invalid conclusions about how the world actually works.

By the way, you don't mean my worldview, because you don't know what my worldview is for the most part.  What you mean are "worldviews that incorporate philosophical naturalism".  And the only reason you're saying this is because you seem to think that because philosophical naturalism can't answer any question you put to it with absolute certainty, it's "very poor" compared to the certainty that your beliefs give you.  The problem is that your beliefs are a false certainty, because you can't actually prove them to the same standard you're demanding.  You can only posit your beliefs and anecdotal evidence which is at best questionable.

The "relevant reason" for philosophical naturalism is that it works, plain and simple, whereas religious belief does not.  That's because religious belief is not rational.  It is emotional, it caters to what a person wants to be true rather than what actually is true based on real evidence.

As for "irrational and baseless", what exactly is irrational and baseless about philosophical naturalism?  The fact that the people here are honest in saying that they can't answer every question in the universe using science (yet)?  That's the way it works.  What's irrational is to believe that you somehow know that things outside the universe - which you can't observe - are exactly as you need them to be in order for your god to exist, or to believe that your god can do things in the universe without having a measurable effect on it that we can detect.  Those are both things you believe, yet they are also both things you cannot possibly know, thus are also baseless.

You know the saying about leading a horse to water?  Well, we can explain things, and explain them, and explain them, but as long as you're only hearing what you want to hear and disregarding the rest, then you'll continue to get nothing out of it.

Offline stuffin

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 734
  • Darwins +26/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Evidence for philosophical naturalism, please present it
« Reply #161 on: July 06, 2012, 10:52:43 PM »

GE, folks have given you example after example of why you're talking out your butt, yet you ignore them.  Why is that?[/quote
isnt it rather the oposit the case ? No relevant reason for philosophical naturalism has been presented. Rather, the answers have exposed the irrationality and baselessness  of this world view, and how unsupported it is based on scientific evidence. But the participants ignore it. Why is that ?

Try this one again. You never responded to it.

The evidence for philosophical naturalism is: every single thing we have ever discovered and validated about how Universe works, including the history of how it has worked in the past.

What's your evidence in favor of your god of choice?
When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.

Offline SwayzesGhost

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 92
  • Darwins +3/-9
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Evidence for philosophical naturalism, please present it
« Reply #162 on: July 07, 2012, 12:55:18 AM »
The earth and universe are  pretty damn old.  The cosmic background radiation confirms this.

Offline Godexists

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Darwins +0/-65
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Evidence for philosophical naturalism, please present it
« Reply #163 on: July 07, 2012, 01:00:18 AM »
The earth and universe are  pretty damn old.  The cosmic background radiation confirms this.

amazing. how does it confirm it ?

Offline Astreja

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3012
  • Darwins +265/-3
  • Gender: Female
  • Agnostic goddess with Clue-by-Four™
    • The Springy Goddess
Re: Evidence for philosophical naturalism, please present it
« Reply #164 on: July 07, 2012, 02:26:58 AM »
Should you as a moderator not understand, that not my understanding of complex issues  is on quest here, but the issue of the topic ?  If you are unable to leave personal attacks aside, i must deduce that you have a poor case to defend.

You hypocrite!

You're the one who was caught red-handed copying and pasting material from other websites and misrepresenting it as your own.

You're the one who set up this thread and declared unreasonable one-sided debate conditions, shifting the burden of proof to the pro-naturalism side in your very first post.

You're the one for whom no counter-argument will ever be good enough, no matter how many scores of peer-reviewed articles we produce for your examination.  All you do is say "Not good enough" and ask for more and more evidence so you can brush it aside, write "ha ha" or some other thinly-veiled insult, and post another link to another Argument from Incredulity.

Personally, I don't think you started this thread to learn something new about Life, the Universe and Everything.  I think you did it specifically to slander atheists.  In My opinion, you have forfeited the right to our respect.

May your real life come to reflect in the finest detail your execrably shameful behaviour in this thread.
Reality Checkroom — Not Responsible for Lost Articles

Offline DumpsterFire

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 383
  • Darwins +61/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • The Flaming Duck of Death!
Re: Evidence for philosophical naturalism, please present it
« Reply #165 on: July 07, 2012, 02:32:00 AM »
I sure am getting sick of theists coming on here to regurgitate the old "How do atheists explain the origins of life and/or the universe?" thread that inevitably gets tons of responses without ever making much progress.

GE, you have admitted that in order for your "worldview" to work god must exist outside of all known laws of the universe, and you must be able to decide for yourself which parts of your holy tome are to be taken literally and which parts figuratively. This is the philosophical equivalent of strapping your goalpost to a Ferrari and then stomping on the gas pedal. Yeah, yeah, I know you don't see it that way.

Mankind has sought to explain the unknown via the supernatural for as long as there has been mankind. Science has proven a great many of these supernatural explanations to be incorrect. Never in the history of mankind has a supernatural explanation been substantiated. Therefore, it is logical to conclude that all supernatural explanations are fallacious.

Nevertheless, we do not (nor may we ever) know how the universe came to be. Despite how much you truly wish it so, you don't know either, GE. There is still an enormous amount of this existence that we do not understand, and if it makes you feel better to believe there is a god behind it all, so be it.

Because it does not matter! All that matters (and the reason atheists obsess over theism) is, "How does your belief in a god adversely affect my life today?" Even if there is a creator of the universe, what makes you so certain that whatever dogma you adhere to is exactly correct? The fact is that religious belief has profound effects on public and legal policy, in deciding the viability of political candidates, and in shaping the general direction of a populous. It also drives believers to condemn nonbelievers and gays, and occasionally to crash planes into buildings. All of this is of far greater immediate concern to me than is the origin of the universe.

The reason you started this thread, GE, is because somewhere in your little mind you think that if you can get an atheist to agree that a god created the universe it will somehow validate the rest of your shallow beliefs. Admit it.
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 jaimehlers

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4933
  • Darwins +563/-17
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Evidence for philosophical naturalism, please present it
« Reply #166 on: July 07, 2012, 04:18:20 AM »
In fact, if there were some "creator of the universe" who never interacted with it, Godexists couldn't possibly know anything about said creator.  The only way he could is if this creator interacted with the universe in some fashion.  And if that's the case, that interaction can be detected and measured by a disinterested observer.  Thus it would not be supernatural, because it would exist in the universe, and there would be a way to explain it (for example, that there's something outside the universe that can interact with it).  It would also mean that what we think of as "the universe" was incomplete, and the actual universe included this "outside" and whatever was in it.  Thus that would be a natural part of the universe.

So by definition, there cannot be anything supernatural, only natural things that we do not (yet) understand.

Offline bertatberts

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1427
  • Darwins +51/-8
  • Gender: Male
  • Humanists. Not perfect. Not forgiven. Responsible.
Re: Evidence for philosophical naturalism, please present it
« Reply #167 on: July 07, 2012, 06:11:23 AM »
Guys, guys! Six pages and you're all still giving this moron credence.(feeding the troll) Stop for f**k Sake. He really isn't worthy.

"Moderator" please oh please, close this thread, the information that has been given is not getting through to him. Leave him to his ignorance, please.
We theists have no evidence for our beliefs. So no amount of rational evidence will dissuade us from those beliefs. - JCisall

It would be pretty piss poor brainwashing, if the victims knew they were brainwashed, wouldn't it? - Screwtape. 04/12/12

Offline Godexists

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Darwins +0/-65
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Evidence for philosophical naturalism, please present it
« Reply #168 on: July 07, 2012, 07:45:00 AM »
You hypocrite!

You have a lost case, so attack me personally. I understand......

Offline Godexists

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Darwins +0/-65
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Evidence for philosophical naturalism, please present it
« Reply #169 on: July 07, 2012, 07:46:10 AM »
I sure am getting sick.......

I have good advice in such a case : don't participate at this topic, and you'll get well again.

Offline Godexists

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Darwins +0/-65
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Evidence for philosophical naturalism, please present it
« Reply #170 on: July 07, 2012, 07:47:26 AM »
In fact, if there were some "creator of the universe" who never interacted with it, Godexists couldn't possibly know anything about said creator.  The only way he could is if this creator interacted with the universe in some fashion.  And if that's the case, that interaction can be detected and measured by a disinterested observer. 

We have the bible. Jesus. the testimonies all around the globe. How about we go back to your evidence for naturalism ? Where is it ?!

Offline Godexists

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Darwins +0/-65
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Evidence for philosophical naturalism, please present it
« Reply #171 on: July 07, 2012, 07:48:40 AM »
Guys, guys! Six pages and you're all still giving this moron credence.(feeding the troll) Stop for f**k Sake. He really isn't worthy.

"Moderator" please oh please, close this thread, the information that has been given is not getting through to him. Leave him to his ignorance, please.

Oh, another personal attack.....The desperation is  getting worse and worse..... So no good evidence for naturalism ? it starts getting boring.

Offline Dante

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2201
  • Darwins +72/-9
  • Gender: Male
  • Hedonist Extraordinaire
Re: Evidence for philosophical naturalism, please present it
« Reply #172 on: July 07, 2012, 07:50:32 AM »
How about we go back to your evidence for naturalism ? Where is it ?!

You've been presented with a plethora of facts and evidence, yet you dismiss them out of hand. Curious. What would you consider to be evidence?
Actually it doesn't. One could conceivably be all-powerful but not exceptionally intelligent.

Offline Gnu Ordure

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3832
  • Darwins +109/-9
  • Gender: Male
Re: Evidence for philosophical naturalism, please present it
« Reply #173 on: July 07, 2012, 08:26:36 AM »
Science has shown that the earth is old. This is not an opinion, it is a fact -

prove it.
GE, Graybeard provided proof in the form of the Wiki article. You've ignored that and continued to complain that people aren't answering your questions.

Why don't you respond to him?