Author Topic: Evidence of philosophical naturalism: a question from that thread  (Read 5903 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Boots

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1304
  • Darwins +96/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Living the Dream
The thread created by the user Godexists got me thinking, and I'd like to pose a question, particularly to believers (and especially to Godexists).

Let us say that I'm willing to concede the possibility--or even the *probability*, for agument's sake--that some intelligent being was the cause of the known universe.  That an entity, let's call him "god," initiated the Big Bang (because, from what I read in the "Evidence for philosophical naturalism" thread you started, I get the impression you believe the Big Bang occurred--please correct me if I misunderstood).

Here is my question:

So effing what???

Every single thing that has ever happend (clarification: that has been proven to have happened) can be explained by naturalistic causes/forces, and do not require supernatural intervention of any flavor whatsoever.  In other words, if this "god" entity did initiate the Big Bang, he has since left the building, to the best of our ability to discern.  Our human history is rife with pleasure and pain, strife and success, love and hate, backtracking and development, starvation and plenty, and all of it can be attributed to human behavior/attitudes.  Attributing such things to a diety calls into question the diety's motives and bent (good/evil/neutral/chaotic/lawful), and also doesn't actually get us anywhere.

Why should I give a hill of beans if the universe was created, as opposed to "simply came to be, just because?"  What difference in my everyday life does that make?
* 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 The Wannabe

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 272
  • Darwins +18/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Agnostic atheist...until further notice.
Re: Evidence of philosophical naturalism: a question from that thread
« Reply #1 on: July 05, 2012, 02:43:23 PM »


Why should I give a hill of beans if the universst as created, as opposed to "simply came to be, just because?"  What difference in my everyday life does that make?

It makes absolutely no difference.  Believers live strikingly similiar lives to atheist, whether they'll admit it or not.  If a big, sky-sugar-daddy actually existed, this would not be the case.
"I would believe only in a God that knows how to Dance."  -Friedrich Nietzsche

Offline One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 11041
  • Darwins +285/-37
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: Evidence of philosophical naturalism: a question from that thread
« Reply #2 on: July 05, 2012, 02:45:36 PM »
It makes a difference because gods are childish egocentric narcissists by nature. So they'll "gently stimulate you toward worship"[1], and believers will want to take away everyone's freedom to appease said gods.
 1. Translation: Threaten you into worship.
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 pianodwarf

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 4366
  • Darwins +208/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Je bois ton lait frappé
Re: Evidence of philosophical naturalism: a question from that thread
« Reply #3 on: July 05, 2012, 02:47:44 PM »
Why should I give a hill of beans if the universst as created, as opposed to "simply came to be, just because?"  What difference in my everyday life does that make?

It makes absolutely no difference.

It really doesn't.

One of my closest friends describes herself as a "Wiccan deist".  Unlike some other believers I've been friends with in the past, I've never felt any need or desire to engage her on the subject because, as a practical matter, there's essentially no difference between a god who never does anything and a god who doesn't exist at all.  I have no "beef" with deists, apart from the fact that I think it's a little odd to believe in a deity who basically just sits there in his Barcalounger.
[On how kangaroos could have gotten back to Australia after the flood]:  Don't kangaroos skip along the surface of the water? --Kenn

Offline Godexists

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Darwins +0/-65
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Evidence of philosophical naturalism: a question from that thread
« Reply #4 on: July 05, 2012, 04:17:28 PM »
Every single thing that has ever happend (clarification: that has been proven to have happened) can be explained by naturalistic causes/forces

like the fine tuning of the universe ?

or the arise of the first life ?

or lightening ?

or the fact that the atmosphere of the earth has the exact rate, namely 21%, to make life possible ?

i could go on and on.....

Quote
  What difference in my everyday life does that make?

It changes almost your whole life. It changes   your world view , and therefore your whole thinking, motivations, priorities,   behavior, goals, expectations of this and future  life, it opens completely new perspectives. Becoming namely a believer in God makes you start finding purpose and meaning in life

Offline jetson

  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 7277
  • Darwins +170/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Meet George Jetson!
    • Jet Blog
Re: Evidence of philosophical naturalism: a question from that thread
« Reply #5 on: July 05, 2012, 04:32:50 PM »
Every single thing that has ever happend (clarification: that has been proven to have happened) can be explained by naturalistic causes/forces

like the fine tuning of the universe ?

or the arise of the first life ?

or lightening ?

or the fact that the atmosphere of the earth has the exact rate, namely 21%, to make life possible ?

i could go on and on.....

Quote
  What difference in my everyday life does that make?

It changes almost your whole life. It changes   your world view , and therefore your whole thinking, motivations, priorities,   behavior, goals, expectations of this and future  life, it opens completely new perspectives. Becoming namely a believer in God makes you start finding purpose and meaning in life

Indeed, you could go on and on, and I'm sure you will...but you're premise is flawed.  You seem to think that the "fine-tuning" is by design.  And you seem unable, or perhaps unwilling to imagine, for example, that life arose because of the conditions, not the other way around.  If that is a possibility, which it is, then what sort of argument are you left with?

Offline Godexists

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Darwins +0/-65
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Evidence of philosophical naturalism: a question from that thread
« Reply #6 on: July 05, 2012, 04:51:29 PM »

Indeed, you could go on and on, and I'm sure you will...but you're premise is flawed.  You seem to think that the "fine-tuning" is by design.

What better explanation do you suggest ? chance ? physical need ? any other on hand ?

Quote
And you seem unable, or perhaps unwilling to imagine, for example, that life arose because of the conditions, not the other way around.

Well, i believe that , too, actually. its quit certain that  the universe, and specially our galaxy/sun/planets/moon/earth  is fine tuned to host life on earth, and life is fine tuned to this environment.



Offline jetson

  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 7277
  • Darwins +170/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Meet George Jetson!
    • Jet Blog
Re: Evidence of philosophical naturalism: a question from that thread
« Reply #7 on: July 05, 2012, 05:14:33 PM »
Godexists,

think of it from the opposite viewpoint.  Here is an analogy for you:  A puddle on the ground, filled with water.  Your argument, in this analogy, is that the hole in the ground was designed specifically to hold that amount and exact shape of water.  My argument is that the water just filled in the hole.  Does that make sense?

So, could it be that the conditions we find ourselves in, the laws of the universe, the position of our particular planet, all of the fine-tuning that you like to call it, are just right for life to have started, and evolution to have taken its course?  If not, why not?

Offline The Wannabe

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 272
  • Darwins +18/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Agnostic atheist...until further notice.
Re: Evidence of philosophical naturalism: a question from that thread
« Reply #8 on: July 05, 2012, 05:32:19 PM »


Well, i believe that , too, actually. its quit certain that  the universe, and specially our galaxy/sun/planets/moon/earth  is fine tuned to host life on earth, and life is fine tuned to this environment.



The universe isn't fine tuned for life, just look around, bud.  We inhabit the only inhabitable planet that we know of.[1]  Space (which makes up the vast composition of this "fine tuned" universe) is utterly lethal to us earthlings.  If the cosmos was designed with biological life in mind, you would think that it wouldn't be so incredibly inhospitable to said life.
 1. And even here on earth our climate balances on a knives edge between searing heat and bitter cold. -
« Last Edit: July 05, 2012, 05:39:17 PM by The Wannabe »
"I would believe only in a God that knows how to Dance."  -Friedrich Nietzsche

Offline Astreja

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3014
  • Darwins +265/-3
  • Gender: Female
  • Agnostic goddess with Clue-by-Four™
    • The Springy Goddess
Re: Evidence of philosophical naturalism: a question from that thread
« Reply #9 on: July 05, 2012, 05:52:07 PM »
Well, i believe that , too, actually. its quit certain that  the universe, and specially our galaxy/sun/planets/moon/earth  is fine tuned to host life on earth, and life is fine tuned to this environment.

I take it you weren't in Winnipeg on February 1, 1996.  I was.  There was a low of -41°C that day, and according to Wikipedia the windchill hit a record of -57.1C.

'Fine tuning,' My Æsir patootie -- That's colder than Niflheim.
Reality Checkroom — Not Responsible for Lost Articles

Offline Boots

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1304
  • Darwins +96/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Living the Dream
Re: Evidence of philosophical naturalism: a question from that thread
« Reply #10 on: July 05, 2012, 08:43:09 PM »
Every single thing that has ever happend (clarification: that has been proven to have happened) can be explained by naturalistic causes/forces

like the fine tuning of the universe ?

You say the universe is finely tuned.  I say the universe is the way it is becaus it coudl not be anotehr way.  Who is right?


Quote
or the arise of the first life ?
I readily concede science does not yet have the answer for this.  Emphasis on YET.  But strides are being made, adn I have every confidence that science will provide the answer.

Quote
or lightening ?

you're joking now, right?

Quote
or the fact that the atmosphere of the earth has the exact rate, namely 21%, to make life possible ?

Or that life evolved to use the 21% rate (rate of what, by the way?) of the atmosphere?  Stop going in reverse, bud, you're going to get whiplash!

Quote
i could go on and on.....

Have you actually read any of the replies to you yet?

Quote
It changes almost your whole life. It changes   your world view , and therefore your whole thinking, motivations, priorities,   behavior, goals, expectations of this and future  life, it opens completely new perspectives. Becoming namely a believer in God makes you start finding purpose and meaning in life

this offends me.  News flash: the purpose of life is to LIVE.  Period.  End of story.  You seem to need some "higher purpose" in order to have "meaning" in your life.  Psheh.  Give your own life meaning.  make the world a better place for future generations through your actions--isn't that enough??

Having some blessed afterlife that lasts an eternity . . . all that does is make you want to skip out on THIS (comaprative) craphole of a life quicker.  Why bother suffering through this if you can get to THAT faster??  It's assenine that theists think their outlook gives their life meaning, while atheists' don't have meaning.  You got it backwards AGAIN, GE.  This life is all you get, so it's up to you, and only you, to make the most of it.

Before you rail about how I don't know anything, I was raised a Roman Catholic and considered the priesthood as a late teenager.  Going to college and opening my mind to history and free-thinking allowed me to (eventually) throw off the shackles of indoctrination that you're reveling in so much.  It took years for me to reconsider my beliefs, longer to stop calling myself a Christian, and longer still to call myself an atheist.  I've spent lots of time thinking about--and LIVING--this stuff.  And I'm glad I did.  Hopefully my kids won't suffer through the guilt and self-deprication religion brings; hopefully they'll learn to squeeze every drop out of this precious, beautiful life they have while they're here and not worry about some pie-in-the-sky fantasy after they die.

Sorry, got off on a tangent there. But like I said, that offended me.  ;D
* 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

Online Azdgari

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12299
  • Darwins +275/-31
  • Gender: Male
Re: Evidence of philosophical naturalism: a question from that thread
« Reply #11 on: July 05, 2012, 09:36:14 PM »
It changes almost your whole life. It changes   your world view , and therefore your whole thinking, motivations, priorities,   behavior, goals, expectations of this and future  life, it opens completely new perspectives. Becoming namely a believer in God makes you start finding purpose and meaning in life

If you were unable to grant your life purpose before adopting theism, then that is a personal flaw.  Do not aflict others with that same flaw.
The highest moral human authority is copied by our Gandhi neurons through observation.

Offline Godexists

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Darwins +0/-65
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Evidence of philosophical naturalism: a question from that thread
« Reply #12 on: July 05, 2012, 10:25:42 PM »
Godexists,

think of it from the opposite viewpoint.  Here is an analogy for you:  A puddle on the ground, filled with water.  Your argument, in this analogy, is that the hole in the ground was designed specifically to hold that amount and exact shape of water.  My argument is that the water just filled in the hole.  Does that make sense?


Thats a old, boring, tired, stupid  argument.

No, it doesnt make sense, since the facts do speak a other language.

http://thetruthwillmakeyoumad.wordpress.com/tag/puddle-analogy/


Offline Godexists

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Darwins +0/-65
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Evidence of philosophical naturalism: a question from that thread
« Reply #13 on: July 05, 2012, 10:27:01 PM »
It changes almost your whole life. It changes   your world view , and therefore your whole thinking, motivations, priorities,   behavior, goals, expectations of this and future  life, it opens completely new perspectives. Becoming namely a believer in God makes you start finding purpose and meaning in life

If you were unable to <a class="inlineAdmedialink" href="#">grant[/url] your life purpose before adopting theism, then that is a personal flaw.  Do not aflict others with that same flaw.

here a good reading for you :

http://www.bethinking.org/resources/the-absurdity-of-life-without-god.htm

Online Azdgari

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12299
  • Darwins +275/-31
  • Gender: Male
Re: Evidence of philosophical naturalism: a question from that thread
« Reply #14 on: July 05, 2012, 10:40:37 PM »
Is there a specific point in that book that you think is relevant?  The existence of a god or demon who holds a purpose for me doesn't impact my own ability to provide subjective purpose.  It is merely another source of subjective purpose.
The highest moral human authority is copied by our Gandhi neurons through observation.

Offline Godexists

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Darwins +0/-65
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Evidence of philosophical naturalism: a question from that thread
« Reply #15 on: July 05, 2012, 10:40:53 PM »
You say the universe is finely tuned.  I say the universe is the way it is becaus it coudl not be anotehr way.  Who is right?

Why could it not be different ?


Quote
or the arise of the first life ?
I readily concede science does not yet have the answer for this.  Emphasis on YET.  But strides are being made, adn I have every confidence that science will provide the answer.

you are confident based on what ? Life is built upon codified, complex information. The information needed to make the simplest cell is unimaginable. The engeneering is extraordinary.
What makes you believe, chance is a possible mechanism to explain the origin of life ? You cannot put evolution into the game, since evolution can only happen with living organisms.

Quote

you're joking now, right?

no, i am absolutely serious. Please provide me a source, that explains how lightning came to be in the first place. Without it, life is not possible  on earth.



Quote
Or that life evolved to use the 21% rate (rate of what, by the way?) of the atmosphere?  Stop going in reverse, bud, you're going to get whiplash!

 http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=origin-of-oxygen-in-atmosphere

On earth, oxygen comprises 21 percent of the atmosphere. That precise figure is an Anthropic Constant that makes life on earth possible. If oxygen were 25% fires would erupt spontaneously, if it were 15%, human beings would suffocate.



Quote
this offends me.  News flash: the purpose of life is to LIVE.

Why do you think this is the purpose of life ?


 
Quote
Period.  End of story.  You seem to need some "higher purpose" in order to have "meaning" in your life.  Psheh.  Give your own life meaning.  make the world a better place for future generations through your actions--isn't that enough??

So what difference will it make, if God does not exist, and in one hundred years, you will be dead, we will be dead, and in the future, this universe will not exist anymore ? we will be all doomed physical death. What difference will it make, if you lived your life as a jerk, or as mother thereza ?


Online Azdgari

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12299
  • Darwins +275/-31
  • Gender: Male
Re: Evidence of philosophical naturalism: a question from that thread
« Reply #16 on: July 05, 2012, 10:42:18 PM »
GE, let's say a god exists (creator or not) and has a purpose in mind for us.  How does one go about evaluating whether that purpose is "right"?
The highest moral human authority is copied by our Gandhi neurons through observation.

Offline JeffPT

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2071
  • Darwins +223/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm a lead farmer mutha fucka
Re: Evidence of philosophical naturalism: a question from that thread
« Reply #17 on: July 05, 2012, 10:43:47 PM »
like the fine tuning of the universe ?

What is the universe finely tuned for?  I assume you mean life, right?  That's horribly far fetched don't you think?  You make it seem as if the only thing the universe has in it is life.   How about planets? Stars? Black holes? Comets? Asteroids?  Without all of the 'fine tuning' of the constants being as they are, you would not have any of those things in their current forms either.  While life does exists in at least one location in this universe, to say that life is what this universe is 'fine tuned' for is ridiculous considering how little of it we have found.  Why could one not argue that the universe is fine tuned for stars?  Seeing as you can fit a million earths inside our sun, and that there are trillions and trillions of stars out there, the fine tuning of the universe for stars may just happen to be the same fine tuning required for life, making us a happenstance by-product of the process. 

It is often said that there are more stars in the universe than their are grains of sand on all the beaches of the world, Godexists.  If this is true, just go out to a nearby beach, lift up a giant hand-full of sand and let it sift through your fingers until 1 grain of sand is left.  Now, look at that grain of sand, and imagine a physical object so small that you could fit a million of them inside the single grain.  Then consider that physical object and how small it must be, and imagine how mind-bogglingly STUPID it would be to assume that all the grains of sand on all the beaches of the world, were created so there could be something special happening on that miniscule physical object that's a million times smaller than the single grain of sand you're looking at.   

or the arise of the first life ?

We don't yet know how life arose.  Neither do you.  You just say you do because that's what you've been told to believe. 

or lightening ?

What?  We have a pretty good grasp on how lightning works.  Are you saying here that lightning is supernatural? 

or the fact that the atmosphere of the earth has the exact rate, namely 21%, to make life possible ?

Exact rate to make life possible?  You do know that there have been periods of time with significantly less oxygen (zero at times) and periods with significantly more oxygen?  You do know that some microbes are anaerobic (meaning they do not require oxygen)?  You do know that microbes can survive the harsh environment of outer space for a time, right?

It's like you can't stop yourself from thinking THIS point in time is all that has ever been, and that all the life you've learned about is all there is.  That's just not true.     

i could go on and on.....

You'd just be further embarrassing yourself if you did.

It changes almost your whole life. It changes   your world view , and therefore your whole thinking, motivations, priorities,   behavior, goals, expectations of this and future  life, it opens completely new perspectives. Becoming namely a believer in God makes you start finding purpose and meaning in life

No matter what you think it does for your life, becoming a believer in God still has no bearing at all on whether or not that God exists.  If you are right about your God, then billions of people are out there right now, believing in THEIR God, yet claiming the very same type of 'life changes' you are.  What do you make of those people?  Why are they so moved by their god that you and I both know doesn't exist?  Why has their life changed so much if their god is just fiction?  You see, that's the issue.  ALL of you claim this crap.  Well I'm here to tell you that being an atheist is far better than being a Christian.  It opens your eyes to the natural world around you.  It gives you less reason to hate others on the basis of race, sexual orientation, political affiliation, and religious beliefs.  It makes you want to take care of the planet you live on.  Do with that information what you wish.  It's my opinion.  Religion is a cancer on the world.  That is also my opinion. 

BTW, is anyone else getting the feeling that Godexists is not one person, but maybe 2 different people posting?  Some of his posts appear to be sharp, well written and grammatically sound with no spelling errors; then we get one like this and it's like a whole different person.  Maybe he's cutting / pasting other peoples arguments, and posts like this is who he / she really is, or maybe it's 2 people.  I don't know.     

Thats a old, boring, tired, stupid  argument.

When you have no logical comeback to an argument, the classic tool people use is to insult it instead.  It's a sure-fire sign that you've got no good counter for it.  jetson's analogy is excellent.  It's a perfect distillation of the argument. 

BTW, that's what Christians have been doing against atheists for several thousand years now.  The theist knows they can't win the logical fight, so they naturally turn to demonizing the other side instead.  It works because people fall for it.   
Whenever events that are purported to occur in our best interest are as numerous as the events that will just as soon kill us, then intent is hard, if not impossible to assert. NDT

Offline jetson

  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 7277
  • Darwins +170/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Meet George Jetson!
    • Jet Blog
Re: Evidence of philosophical naturalism: a question from that thread
« Reply #18 on: July 05, 2012, 10:45:20 PM »


Thats a old, boring, tired, stupid  argument.

No, it doesnt make sense, since the facts do speak a other language.


Then you will have no problem at all showing me exactly why yours is better.  That includes explaining exactly why I need to simply accept that the entire universe was fine tuned for us.  Take your time.

Online 12 Monkeys

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4624
  • Darwins +105/-11
  • Gender: Male
  • Dii hau dang ijii
Re: Evidence of philosophical naturalism: a question from that thread
« Reply #19 on: July 05, 2012, 10:50:25 PM »
Asteroids in our solar system have hit our planet and the other planets that are in our small little corner of the milky way. These asteroids caused a catastophic event here on earth,killing almost all life. It could and probably will happen again. how is this finley tuned for life?
There's no right there's no wrong,there's just popular opinion (Brad Pitt as Jeffery Goines in 12 monkeys)

Offline Godexists

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Darwins +0/-65
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Evidence of philosophical naturalism: a question from that thread
« Reply #20 on: July 05, 2012, 11:50:22 PM »
Asteroids in our solar system have hit our planet and the other planets that are in our small little corner of the milky way. These asteroids caused a catastophic event here on earth,killing almost all life. It could and probably will happen again. how is this finley tuned for life?

http://doesgodexist.com/Charts/EvidenceForDesignInTheUniverse.html

asteroidal and cometary collision rate
if greater: too many species would become extinct.
if less: crust would be too depleted of materials essential for life.

Offline Godexists

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Darwins +0/-65
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Evidence of philosophical naturalism: a question from that thread
« Reply #21 on: July 05, 2012, 11:57:50 PM »


Thats a old, boring, tired, stupid  argument.

No, it doesnt make sense, since the facts do speak a other language.


Then you will have no problem at all showing me exactly why yours is better.  That includes explaining exactly why I need to simply accept that the entire universe was fine tuned for us.  Take your time.

http://biologos.org/questions/fine-tuning

Online Azdgari

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12299
  • Darwins +275/-31
  • Gender: Male
Re: Evidence of philosophical naturalism: a question from that thread
« Reply #22 on: July 06, 2012, 12:01:39 AM »
If you are incapable of responding yourself, then why are you here?
The highest moral human authority is copied by our Gandhi neurons through observation.

Offline Astreja

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3014
  • Darwins +265/-3
  • Gender: Female
  • Agnostic goddess with Clue-by-Four™
    • The Springy Goddess
Re: Evidence of philosophical naturalism: a question from that thread
« Reply #23 on: July 06, 2012, 12:12:49 AM »
So what difference will it make, if God does not exist, and in one hundred years, you will be dead, we will be dead, and in the future, this universe will not exist anymore ? we will be all doomed physical death. What difference will it make, if you lived your life as a jerk, or as mother thereza ?

Because now is when we are alive and now is where we find meaning.

Do you honestly think that eternal life adds some Special Ultimate Purpose to life?  I do not.  I think the presence of never-ending tomorrows makes it quite impossible for anything to have a purpose to its existence.

I experienced this Myself at age 11, in 1968.  For a few mind-bending and terrifying minutes I wandered up and down the universal timeline in its 3 most common variations:  Fixed start and stop, open-ended positive and minus infinity, and cyclical.  There was no meaning to be found anywhere, even for gods.

This plunged Me briefly into nihilism and what might have been an episode of clinical depression, but as you can see, I didn't give up on the world.  I later discovered mindfulness, and the incredible richness of every moment of time.

Here and now is where you will find your meaning, and gods are not required.
Reality Checkroom — Not Responsible for Lost Articles

Offline Godexists

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Darwins +0/-65
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Evidence of philosophical naturalism: a question from that thread
« Reply #24 on: July 06, 2012, 12:18:24 AM »
like the fine tuning of the universe ?

What is the universe finely tuned for?  I assume you mean life, right?  That's horribly far fetched don't you think?  You make it seem as if the only thing the universe has in it is life.   How about planets? Stars? Black holes? Comets? Asteroids?  Without all of the 'fine tuning' of the constants being as they are, you would not have any of those things in their current forms either.  While life does exists in at least one location in this universe, to say that life is what this universe is 'fine tuned' for is ridiculous considering how little of it we have found.  Why could one not argue that the universe is fine tuned for stars?  Seeing as you can fit a million earths inside our sun, and that there are trillions and trillions of stars out there, the fine tuning of the universe for stars may just happen to be the same fine tuning required for life, making us a happenstance by-product of the process. 

It is often said that there are more stars in the universe than their are grains of sand on all the beaches of the world, Godexists.  If this is true, just go out to a nearby beach, lift up a giant hand-full of sand and let it sift through your fingers until 1 grain of sand is left.  Now, look at that grain of sand, and imagine a physical object so small that you could fit a million of them inside the single grain.  Then consider that physical object and how small it must be, and imagine how mind-bogglingly STUPID it would be to assume that all the grains of sand on all the beaches of the world, were created so there could be something special happening on that miniscule physical object that's a million times smaller than the single grain of sand you're looking at.   

http://www.firstscience.com/home/articles/big-theories/recipe-for-the-universe-just-six-numbers-page-2-1_1230.html

The tremendous timespans involved in biological evolution offer a new perspective on the question 'why is our Universe so big?' The emergence of human life here on Earth has taken 4.5 billion years. Even before our Sun and its planets could form, earlier stars must have transmuted pristine hydrogen into carbon, oxygen and the other atoms of the periodic table. This has taken about ten billion years. The size of the observable Universe is, roughly, the distance travelled by light since the Big Bang, and so the present visible Universe must be around ten billion light-years across.
The galaxy pair NGC 6872 and IC 4970 indicate the vastness of the Universe. Light from the bright foreground star has taken a few centuries to reach us; the light from the galaxies has been travelling for 300 million years. The Universe must be this big - as measured by the cosmic number N - to give intelligent life time to evolve. In addition, the cosmic numbers omega and Q must have just the right values for galaxies to form at all.
This is a startling conclusion. The very hugeness of our Universe, which seems at first to signify how unimportant we are in the cosmic scheme, is actually entailed by our existence! This is not to say that there couldn't have been a smaller universe, only that we could not have existed in it. The expanse of cosmic space is not an extravagant superiority; it's a consequence of the prolonged chain of events, extending back before our Solar System formed, that preceded our arrival on the scene.
This may seem a regression to an ancient 'anthropocentric' perspective - something that was shattered by Copernicus's revelation that the Earth moves around the Sun rather than vice versa. But we shouldn't take Copernican modesty (some-times called the 'principle of mediocrity') too far. Creatures like us require special conditions to have evolved, so our perspective is bound to be in some sense atypical. The vastness of our universe shouldn't surprise us, even though we may still seek a deeper explanation for its distinctive features.

  You just say you do because that's what you've been told to believe.


No, i believe that God created life, because all scientific evidence leads us straight to this conclusion.

Quote
What?  We have a pretty good grasp on how lightning works.  Are you saying here that lightning is supernatural? 

we know how it works. but no scientist knows how it arose on earth.

http://aaaworldwitness.wordpress.com/2009/04/05/lightning-proof-of-god/

How did lightning and thunder, along with the vital life supporting lightning-nitrogen cycle, evolve?
No one Evolutionist strikes the same answer twice.
Lightning is like the 100 or so non-living elements on earth. How they came to exist in the first place is a complete mystery to evolutionists.


Quote
Exact rate to make life possible?  You do know that there have been periods of time with significantly less oxygen (zero at times) and periods with significantly more oxygen?  You do know that some microbes are anaerobic (meaning they do not require oxygen)?  You do know that microbes can survive the harsh environment of outer space for a time, right?

How about you search and present a good a answer how oxygen arose in first place on earth ? and why it has the right rate to make complex life on earth possible ?

 
You'd just be further embarrassing yourself if you did.

embarassing because of what, exactly ? i feel very comfortable with my answers, my world view, which seems well backed up to me through science.
Embarassing seems to me , when someone believes, that complex , codified information can arise merely through chance, for example. Or, when someone believes, that dead matter can produce self conscient beings as your for example.


Quote
No matter what you think it does for your life, becoming a believer in God still has no bearing at all on whether or not that God exists.  If you are right about your God, then billions of people are out there right now, believing in THEIR God, yet claiming the very same type of 'life changes' you are.  What do you make of those people?  Why are they so moved by their god that you and I both know doesn't exist?  Why has their life changed so much if their god is just fiction?  You see, that's the issue.  ALL of you claim this crap.  Well I'm here to tell you that being an atheist is far better than being a Christian.  It opens your eyes to the natural world around you.  It gives you less reason to hate others on the basis of race, sexual orientation, political affiliation, and religious beliefs.

My lord, Jesus Christ, tells me to love my next. Atheism however has nothing to offer, since its the religion of nothingness.


 
Quote
Religion is a cancer on the world.  That is also my opinion. 

I am not a religious person. So your opinion on this is irrelevant to me.

Quote
BTW, is anyone else getting the feeling that Godexists is not one person, but maybe 2 different people posting?  Some of his posts appear to be sharp, well written and grammatically sound with no spelling errors; then we get one like this and it's like a whole different person.  Maybe he's cutting / pasting other peoples arguments, and posts like this is who he / she really is, or maybe it's 2 people.  I don't know.   
 

I am just one person. When i cite others, i post the link.



Quote
When you have no logical comeback to an argument, the classic tool people use is to insult it instead.

I have given however the reason for why i see this argument the way i see it.

Quote
  It's a sure-fire sign that you've got no good counter for it.  jetson's analogy is excellent.  It's a perfect distillation of the argument.


read the link i gave......


Offline Godexists

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Darwins +0/-65
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Evidence of philosophical naturalism: a question from that thread
« Reply #25 on: July 06, 2012, 12:32:50 AM »


Do you honestly think that eternal life adds some Special Ultimate Purpose to life?

yes. Only if God exists, and we have eternal life, our life becomes meaningful and purposeful. Otherwise, its empty and meaningless.

http://www.atheism-analyzed.net/
Quote
, the Atheist fulfillment is solely through materialism and pursuits of the self.  A randomly assembled life-form in a randomly assembled universe has no purpose beyond self-gratification and   perpetuation.  As a philosophy, this is without much substance.


 

Offline Astreja

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3014
  • Darwins +265/-3
  • Gender: Female
  • Agnostic goddess with Clue-by-Four™
    • The Springy Goddess
Re: Evidence of philosophical naturalism: a question from that thread
« Reply #26 on: July 06, 2012, 12:40:54 AM »
Only if God exists, and we have eternal life, our life becomes meaningful and purposeful. Otherwise, its empty and meaningless.

As I mentioned above, I view eternal life as irredeemably meaningless.  I cannot un-see what I saw in 1968, nor do I wish to forget it.  I have chosen to embrace the vision to the end of My days on Earth.

Quote
the Atheist fulfillment is solely through materialism and pursuits of the self.

So you can read minds now, GE?  I really don't think so.
Reality Checkroom — Not Responsible for Lost Articles

Offline Aaron123

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2749
  • Darwins +77/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: Evidence of philosophical naturalism: a question from that thread
« Reply #27 on: July 06, 2012, 12:48:56 AM »
The tremendous timespans involved in biological evolution offer a new perspective on the question 'why is our Universe so big?' The emergence of human life here on Earth has taken 4.5 billion years. Even before our Sun and its planets could form, earlier stars must have transmuted pristine hydrogen into carbon, oxygen and the other atoms of the periodic table. This has taken about ten billion years. The size of the observable Universe is, roughly, the distance travelled by light since the Big Bang, and so the present visible Universe must be around ten billion light-years across.

Your argument isn't even supported by the bible.  That book claims everything was made in six days, not billions of years.


Quote
No, i believe that God created life, because all scientific evidence leads us straight to this conclusion.


Your "scientific evidence" is nothing more than incredulity/ignorance.


Quote
we know how it works. but no scientist knows how it arose on earth.

http://aaaworldwitness.wordpress.com/2009/04/05/lightning-proof-of-god/

How did lightning and thunder, along with the vital life supporting lightning-nitrogen cycle, evolve?
No one Evolutionist strikes the same answer twice.
Lightning is like the 100 or so non-living elements on earth. How they came to exist in the first place is a complete mystery to evolutionists.

1) Lighting has nothing to do with evolution.

2) Again, you're just arguing from ignorance.


Quote
How about you search and present a good a answer how oxygen arose in first place on earth ? and why it has the right rate to make complex life on earth possible ?


Again, arguing from ignorance.

 

Quote
embarassing because of what, exactly ? i feel very comfortable with my answers, my world view, which seems well backed up to me through science.
Embarassing seems to me , when someone believes, that complex , codified information can arise merely through chance, for example. Or, when someone believes, that dead matter can produce self conscient beings as your for example.


Again, all you've done is argue ignorance/incredulity about things.  Saying "Magic Man Done It" is not science.



Quote
My lord, Jesus Christ, tells me to love my next. Atheism however has nothing to offer, since its the religion of nothingness.

Atheism is not a religion.
« Last Edit: July 06, 2012, 12:50:38 AM by Aaron123 »
Being a Christian, I've made my decision. That decision offers no compromise; therefore, I'm closed to anything else.

Offline Graybeard

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 6714
  • Darwins +534/-19
  • Gender: Male
  • Is this going somewhere?
Re: Evidence of philosophical naturalism: a question from that thread
« Reply #28 on: July 06, 2012, 04:27:57 AM »
No, i believe that God created life, because all scientific evidence leads us straight to this conclusion.
No. Magic is not real. Science is the opposite of God. God is ignorance, God is the being who does things when people stop thinking - "Why did it rain heavily?" "God did it."

God used to bring disease, we know better now; God used to make you blind and lame, we know better now; God used to make it rain, we know better now; god used to send plagues, floods; God used to strike people dead. Each and every time there is a scientific advance, God retreats because we know what really causes it.

Quote
Quote
What?  We have a pretty good grasp on how lightning works.  Are you saying here that lightning is supernatural? 

we know how it works. but no scientist knows how it arose on earth.
You are wrong. scientists do know how lightning arose, even I know how it arose.

Quote
Lightning is like the 100 or so non-living elements on earth. How they came to exist in the first place is a complete mystery to evolutionists.
That is just stupid. But then a lot of religious people believe stupid things.
Quote
How about you search and present a good a answer how oxygen arose in first place on earth ?
I know how it arose on earth. Why should I research something I know? It is you who should be researching this.

I'll give you a clue: look at the classical model of the atomic structure of oxygen.
Nobody says “There are many things that we thought were natural processes, but now know that a god did them.”