No God???

Im so not religious, but Ill answer them cause I want to. keep in mind that Ill answer them as if I was religious (kind of)

1. god allows free will (out of his 'goodness') and so we humans are the ones that create all the suffering. Why he lets us have free-will if it causes so much trouble, I don't know.

2. Inefficiency? I would have to say that even scientifically, the world is neither efficient or inefficient. This is simply because that term is relative, subjective, and thus an opinion. Human muscles suck at converting ATP to motive energy, considering that tons of energy is turned into heat. But if our puposes NEED that amount of heat (and living creatures definately need heat) then its pretty efficient. Perhaps a good answer to this is that the world is perfectly efficient to serve god's unknown purpose, minus the inefficiency our human free-will creates

3. God cares, and so he would do what is good for us whether we like it or not. So suffering either must be part of gods purpose (my ass he's Good), or it is caused by the human free-will thing.

Hey, that was fun.
 
Belief = Acceptance without proof.

Reworded Question = "For anyone and everyone who doesn't accept the existence of God without proof; what are your BEST
refutations against His existence????"

Answer: No proof.
Click to expand...

Proof...

We exist, the universe exists, the universe has laws and is formed by many parameters, guidelines, and objectives, there exists order.

WHY?!

Where did we come from, why does the longest wavelength of light look red and not blue? How did something that didn't always exist come into existence? Why did it COME into existence rather than simply always existing?


Funny part is, I probably have the closest thing to a proof that
exists to date and I am betting that you have no idea what that
is.
Click to expand...

No proof for what, a God or no God??? Ambiguos statement....





1. Suffering. Why would God create suffering, and I don't want to hear you spin me any tales about the first two humans, we're out of bible school...I think we all know that that is make believe.
Click to expand...

No need to use the Bible. If there is no suffering there is no pleasure. For, pleasure has no definition without suffering. There can either be both or there can be neither, nothing in between.

2. God could not be inefficient. What reason would he have to be? But the world is inefficient.
Click to expand...

Seems pretty efficient to me......



3. This entity 'God' we all believe to be caring and all-powerful. But if he was caring there would be no suffering. So either he's not caring. Or he's not all-powerful...like he can't contol everything.
Click to expand...

We all???

Caring is a animal trait, and may not have ANYTHING whatsoever to do with God's actions.


And why is he not all powerful if suffering exists?

All who don't believe in God, don't do it becuase of what a book written by human's and human nature says. Do it because you have enough intelligence to think through it on your own. That's what I have done and all of this "the bible contradicts itself" "why is there evil in the world" blah blah blah, is quite arbitrary and does not refute God's existence, it simply discredits the Bible.

I couldn't careless about what a book says, because I know human's follow intrinic qualities. The Bible is simply a tool to teach/enforce morals and ways to live. There is no reason to believe that its contradictions disprove God, otherwise I would end my belief in science everytime something was disproven that was once considered a truth.
 
"If there is no suffering there is no pleasure."

That is quite incorrect. Pleasure is a completely different state of mind than suffering. Pleasure might hold less meaning due to less contrast, but it will be pleasure none the less. The chemicals in the brain are quite capable of giving you pleasure and no pain. Give yourself a bunch of dopamine and none of the pain or uncomfortableness neurotransmitters.

Although to a religious person that has no meaning, and in that case have 'faith' in what you want..

"Caring is a animal trait, and may not have ANYTHING whatsoever to do with God's actions. "

Just a guess, but I'm betting he was refering to the VERY popular belief that god is good and caring. God cares about us and so he doesn't take away our freewill, he cares so he does things we might not like for the 'greater good'... of course that is only logical.. (psh)
 
Proof...

We exist, the universe exists, the universe has laws and is formed by many parameters, guidelines, and objectives, there exists order.
Click to expand...

Well that about says it all. You just supplied evidence that
suggests the Universe may exist. Weeeeee. Unfortunately that
has nothing to do with proving that 'God' exists.



No proof for what, a God or no God??? Ambiguos statement....
Click to expand...

A 'God'.
 
Actually pleasure cannot exist without suffering. What would we have to compare it to? If there was no comparison, everything would feel the same, we would just be in this constant state, and that we would know nothing different.

Actually, something I was thinking about the other day was that why do people feel the need to make up 'god'? I mean...just because we don't know how things work doesn't mean that we need to attribute it to **MAGIC**. Haha. How could anyone rule out other religions, saying that they made up stories to make them feel less lost and vunerable in the world, and then seriously sit down and practice their chosen religion. And what is faith? If you put your faith in a person, someone might call you naive. Oh, but put your faith in this invisible, unproven random entity, and you think you're doing something amazing?

And what about heaven? If I, as an atheist, would not get into heaven because I don't blindly believe in something...is not 'god' then making and rewarding naive idiots? Seriously...lets reward the people who will accept anything their elders tell them, put their faith in an unseen force and devoutly praise an anchient idea that has its roots in debauchery and foundations in corruption and exploitation. Sorry to rant...
 
Last edited:
"What would we have to compare it to? If there was no comparison, everything would feel the same, we would just be in this constant state, and that we would know nothing different."

I understand your line of thinking, but I wholeheartedly disagree. Why exactly do we need something to compare to? Perhaps we would not APPRECIATE how lucky we would be to have the pleasure, but pleasure we would - none the less.

Tell me your actual reasoning why we need to know the opposite to be able to experience something. It creates an infinite loop in itself, because if you experience pleasure before pain, how would you know pleasure? And if you experienced pain first, how would you know pain without being able to compare it to pleasure? It doesn't make sense.

I truely think you are refering to appreciation here.
 
Actually pleasure cannot exist without suffering. What would we have to compare it to? If there was no comparison, everything would feel the same, we would just be in this constant state, and that we would know nothing different.
Click to expand...

Yes, exactly.


I understand your line of thinking, but I wholeheartedly disagree. Why exactly do we need something to compare to? Perhaps we would not APPRECIATE how lucky we would be to have the pleasure, but pleasure we would - none the less.

Tell me your actual reasoning why we need to know the opposite to be able to experience something. It creates an infinite loop in itself, because if you experience pleasure before pain, how would you know pleasure? And if you experienced pain first, how would you know pain without being able to compare it to pleasure? It doesn't make sense.
Click to expand...

It does start a loop....HOWEVER, so does defining a concept with synoyms of itself. For instance defining happy, with content, excited, jovial, pleased, glad, cheerful, etc etc simply hops around the exact same concept.

And follows the inane...

A=A because A is A and A is A because A=A.

Knowing that A=A and that A is A, the next question arises...what is A?

Now this then leads into the circular

A is (NOT-NOT A)/(Not B)

A is not equal to B because B=NOT A. And because A is NOT B, A is A.

BOTH of these paradoxes exist in logic, why I'm not sure. How to cirumvent it, I wish I knew, but either way you look logic is completely circular when dealing with more than The Absolute where all that is needed is to say A=A. With the absolute, there is no need or explanation, there is no need for defintion. And it is simply assumed to be truth for all practical purposes.




I mean...just because we don't know how things work doesn't mean that we need to attribute it to **MAGIC**.
Click to expand...

Just because there is no other logical explanantion for our existence("our" meaning things in general, not specifically Conscious Beings) doesn't mean you should assume that logic breaks down at its origin. Which would then imply that its use is completely erroneous. But...then again, thats some people arguments for no God isn't it?? God isn't logical....

Yet still you haven't answered my questions....

We exist, the universe exists, the universe has laws and is formed by many parameters, guidelines, and objectives, there exists order.

WHY?!

Where did we come from, why does the longest wavelength of light look red and not blue? How did something that didn't always exist come into existence? Why did it COME into existence rather than simply always existing?

And another one I intended to add originally....

Why is anything moving????



If it were always "moving" then movement has no definition. Equally if it were always moving what would it be moving relative to????

Moreover, an object at rest stays at rest unless acted on by an external force.

Meaning if it wasn't always moving there had to be an external force.

Conventional cause and effect which breaks down without some given absolute and external force ONCE AGAIN. Think about it every cause was once an effect, so why is anything happening????

Thus, you can either believe in a Given Absolute that is simply presumed to exist for all practical purposes, or you don't believe in cause and effect.

Now...which one is more logical.....
 
If I could give you an answer to those things, I'd be a pretty amazing person. But your contibuting it to something you've never seen/experienced is not an answer either. It's a guess. Science will one day tell us why things are the way they are, but you can't just say...these things are unexplainable...must be god.
 
Originally posted by CHRISCUNNINGHAM

WHY?!
Click to expand...

Good question, I don't think that I've heard that one before, but I'll give it a shot.
j/k
There is a division between atheists and theists that is important to establish in a discussion over "Why?!"

Atheists are able to look at that questions from both the atheist side and the theist side. I myself am an atheist, and I can understand how people can have no choice but to believe in God. A theist usually cannot look at the question from a atheistic view because they are too close-minded.
I can understand how some people can say "look at that tree. how did it come into existance? you don't know...well neither do I, I suppose nobody does...GOD did it!"

I can't buy into that, that is just inane, almost primitive thinking that is totally unbased in our modern scientific world.

You sort of mock all of our basic theoretical pyhsics in your post, like relativity. I'm not gonna bullshit you man, I am not a genius, I won't even begin to answer your questions (as dumb as they are) about how do we know what is truth. All that matters is that blaming existance on a supernatural being b/c there simply is no better explaination (in your mind) for it is in no way proof nor even a tangible reason to even begin to think about God.

Anyway, go read about the theory of Relativity, you piece of crap, before you begin to talk about it behind its back.

ZERO MASS
 
Originally posted by CHRISCUNNINGHAM

WHY?!

Heh, one theory I've had is the stupidest, simplest things you can think of. It's SO stupid and ridiculous that it almost sickens me to communicate it to you now, yet I feel compelled because I'm curious just how stupid you people will think it is. I think it's VERY stupid but blatantly obvious.

Thinks about this here: It there can be defined "the set of all things possible and impossible", the universe is apparently "that which is possible" and time allows it to take "space" from that which is impossible to that which is possible.

I'm not sure "possible" and "impossible" is the proper way to phrase that, but can you see my stupid point? I'm basically saying that "the universe exists because it can", which is stupid but it seems to me when I ponder on it that it seems that there's something interesting in there. Maybe there's only something stupid in there. *shrug*

Could it be that simple?

Why can it be? Well, because it's possible. There is stuff that can't be and stuff that can. Apparently the universe can BE, so it is.

How's that for simple?
 
You gonna spam advertise on every thread? I don't really care i was just asking so i'd know whether to ignore the automatic emails i receive everytime someone posts.
 
Hahaha. You funny little children......

Anyway, go read about the theory of Relativity, you piece of crap, before you begin to talk about it behind its back
Click to expand...

Read about relativity....

Have you read

Hyperspace Michio Kaku
A Brief History of Time Stephen Hawking
Realtivity (dont remeber the author)
Understanding Relativity (dont remember the author)

and I could go on for about a min or so, but I won't waste my time.

If you have read them, GREAT. I have also....

What's your point....

You know NOTHING about what I have read, and quite frankly, if you did know more, you may bite your tongue, depending on how much self pride you have....

Furthermore when did I "talk about Relativity behind its back" I am in no way being secretive about it. So that was just silly tripe.

Really what is your point my friend???

Realtivity and Quantum Mechanics doesn't answer my questions any better than you could.

Is this inadequate on the theories' part??

No. Because they aren't meant to answer them.

Is it inadequate on atheists, and science's part??

YES! Very much so if both claim to have all the answers.

Im not asking you or anyone else to buy into anything. If you read my earlier post and did not simply try and conduce to the thread without reading more than one post you would realize that I said....

All who don't believe in God, don't do it becuase of what a book written by human's and human nature says. Do it because you have enough intelligence to think through it on your own.

Equally, I am not talking about the Caring Bible God, I am talking about the Given Absolute in our basic logic of why anything exists. It is the absolute of which is assumed to be true for all practical purposes, i.e. providing answers to...

Why is anything moving????

Every Cause was once an Effect, so why is anything happening????

How did something that didn't always exist come into existence?

Why did it COME into existence rather than simply always existing?

I have thought about these question many nights. And I was an semi-atheist for some time. Trying to reason through these question I have come to realize that there is a lack in one thing and one thing alone. A given absolute. Without it, these questions have no answer, and are simply the greatest conundrums known to man.

I'm not gonna bullshit you man, I am not a genius, I won't even begin to answer your questions (as dumb as they are) about how do we know what is truth.
Click to expand...

If my questions are so dumb, why does it take genius to answer them, and why is it above YOUR ability as you seemingly imply with the statement "I am not a genius".....


If I could give you an answer to those things, I'd be a pretty amazing person. But your contibuting it to something you've never seen/experienced is not an answer either. It's a guess. Science will one day tell us why things are the way they are, but you can't just say...these things are unexplainable...must be god.
Click to expand...

So what.... you are saying there is a SCIENTIFIC reason why Cause and Effect break down at the beginning of our universe?????

Yes I am sure it has everything to do with the spin cycles of the Up Quark. And the attraction between the Gluons. Positively.....

This is MUCH MUCH more than unexplainable. Unexlainable is an understatment. These questions are blatantly paradoxical, their validity notwithstanding.

As you all seem to be misinterpreting what it is I'm saying by stating my proposal somehow entails the supernatural, ok.

But I have said this form the very beginning, that it is a Given Absolute that is required, not a Caring Bible God that grants wishes. The latter is up for you to decide. But the former is not something that can be overlooked. If science ever catches up to philosophy and logic, (which it will eventually have to do if its ever going to answer such questions) then it will come to the same conclusion. There must be a Given absolute that is simply presumed to exist in all practicality and logic, for all else DEFIES logic!!


As for what you said Wesmorris, I agree with you, and had come to the same conclusion quite recently. It is a very reasonable proposal, and if anything it is a corroboration for the existence of Multiuniverses, and Determinism, however there is one abiguity, everything is possible relative to whom or what??

Existence......
 
Last edited:
Originally posted by CHRISCUNNINGHAM
everything is possible relative to whom or what??

Existence......
Click to expand...

Actually I would say relative to absolute nothingness.
 
CHRISCUNNINGHAM:

Ok since you think that without pain we could not have pleasure, can you explain why you think one needs to compare a feeling with another? Obviously if you can compare something than you have a recorded memory of "that was a 10 on the pleasure scale" and then compare it to a "0 on the pleasure scale" as being pain. So you would feel pleasure without feeling the pain.

The phenomenon that you unknowingly cite in your arguements is when someone exeriences something too often or all the time and it becomes the norm. This is called habituation, and it is a process designed to free up your mind from overexertion. With habituation, the human mind MIGHT stop feeling pleasure after a while if it is all they feel, much like a drug adict.
But unlike a drug addict, they would not experience pleasure and be content or ignorant of the whole pleasure pain thing - for, as you say, lack of comparison.

That is all theoretical even so. Habituation might not even cover something like pleasure, completely.

Do you understand how the brain works, or am I talking to a neurobiological log? Do you realize that there are chemicals that give you pleasure, and those can be perpetually stimulated. This might not bode quite so well with your social life, or your life in general, but you could do it, and I'm sure people try all the time. The only obstical is that the brain removes dopamine receptor cites that are used to stimulate pleasure. If one could figure out how to make those receptor cites stay open, then you really could be perpetually happy.
 
""Why is anything moving????

If it were always "moving" then movement has no definition. Equally if it were always moving what would it be moving relative to????

Moreover, an object at rest stays at rest unless acted on by an external force. ""

Gravity is an external force. Lets say you place a whole big mass of gas out in space. Oh ya, you stop time too. So nothing is moving, the gas is all just sitting there, no velocity vectors or anything. When you let time go, gravity will pull everything together, electromagnectic force will bounce things off of eachother and pull things in tight orbits, the strong and weak nuclear force will rapize some particles as well.

Maybe on average, the universe isn't moving at all.
 
Frencheneesz

Yes, I was completely aware of that. But I was speaking more along the lines of the concept, not the feeling. Yes it is the result of neuro impulses, etc etc, however why does the brain relases dopamine?.

...To "propagate" what is needed for a species to survive i.e. eating, sex, survival in accomplisment, and the list goes on.

What is the "reasoning" behind the difference??

How can I have a "10 on the pleasure scale" if I am not aware of what pleasure is?

That is my point. The fact that the happiness is an effect of the brains release of dopamine is irrelavent, What is this "happiness/pleasure" that this drug induces?

And don't think stictly in the realm of emotion, think concepts in general.

For instance, what is 1 without 0?

What is 0 without 1?

This without That?

Nothing without something?

All of these things are only defined by there opposite. Hence, in order for one to be defined, both have to already exist. Meaning there is no plesure without suffering as there cannot be This without That.

And...

Gravity is an external force. Lets say you place a whole big mass of gas out in space. Oh ya, you stop time too. So nothing is moving, the gas is all just sitting there, no velocity vectors or anything. When you let time go, gravity will pull everything together, electromagnectic force will bounce things off of eachother and pull things in tight orbits, the strong and weak nuclear force will rapize some particles as well.

Maybe on average, the universe isn't moving at all.
Click to expand...


Well, I am a bit confused on what you mean by the universe is not moving at all, because the galaxies are moving, molecules are moving, electrons are movings, therefore the universe is moving. It doesn't matter how great or how miniscule, if one thing is moving then an external force had to place a force on it. And if there was assumed to be only one thing(an infinitely dense ball with a mass the size of an atomic nucleus containing all the matter in the universe, that doesn't exist yet a.k.a the universe) that "existed" how was it put into motion.

....wow everytime I read or think about the Big Bang it just becomes more and more moronic. If such an inane idea were in the Bible, Atheists would have a fricken field day......
 
Last edited:
"How can I have a "10 on the pleasure scale" if I am not aware of what pleasure is? "

To compare ideas, you have to have an understanding of BOTH of those ideas beforehand.

"For instance, what is 1 without 0?"

1 is not the opposite of zero, but anyway... Egyptians, I think, had no concept of zero. They never imagined the possibility of 0 of something. It never occured to them. Yet they figured out how to use 1 and many other numbers quite well.

"All of these things are only defined by there opposite."

This is creating a ton of circular logic. Circular logic is a problem you know -- because it doesn't prove anything.

"Meaning there is no plesure without suffering as there cannot be This without That."

Well, in any case, we are arguing over something of which we know nothing. We don't know enough about the brain to know all the ins and outs of pain and pleasure. So, at least in my case, I'm saying that the possibility is still out there for a body only to experience pleasure. And in any case, this stemmed from gods supposed goodness right? So god could give everyone knowlege of pain, and then let them have pleasure forever on. Sound good?

"Well, I am a bit confused on what you mean by the universe is not moving at all"

I meant that on average every particle would cancel out anothers movment. Maybe its a dumb idea, but I meant that maybe the universe has onie particle with a certain motion x on one side and a particle with motion -x on the other, canceling out. Thus the universe would be still, on average. Just like the Integration (area under) a cosine curve is 0 on average, -1 one side 1 on the other, cancels to 0. ya..
 
"How can I have a "10 on the pleasure scale" if I am not aware of what pleasure is? "
Click to expand...

Look at it like this:

I tried some rum and raisin ice cream. It was extremely nice. That's defined by my taste buds. They don't need to know what tastes horrible to know whether something tastes good. In this instance i don't see worth in comparison. It's like saying a person must have once been sad to find any fun in having sex.... Feelings are natural- when your foot is chopped off it hurts and causes several emotions such as pain, anger, anxiety and so on. You will suffer the causes of these emotions whether you'd ever experienced happiness or not, and so on...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top