Why Does God Exist?
- Thread starter PsychoticEpisode
- Start date
Since these were the only replies in which you didn't quote other people, I will reply to them.
Belief/faith is subjective. If you want to say your faith is not rooted in the mind, then I'm afraid you're the one who has to prove that claim. Doesn't matter that it is popular - there are other superstitions (not just god) which are fundamentally rooted in all cultures in past and present and (you guessed it) superstition is all in the mind.
We are all deluded in some ways, thats just being human. But religion is a biggie. Depending on how fundamental you are in your faith, the more delusional you are, of course.
But one person's perception of the number 3 on a ruler is the same as another's. Don't they call that repeatability?
Fire
Lucky for you - they were actually scientists (most of whom are not composed of great theistic dispositions) who are accredited with making advancements inthe field of science
The reason that I quoted them was to suggest that your ideas about what constitutes science (it doesn't innvolve mystery, its unphased by metaphysics, its clear what the origins of the universe are) seem to be divorced from the real world of science by the view of practicing scientists
This is interesting - you admit you are deluded but feel confident that you call upon the notion of god as an example of delusion ... couldn't I just as easily turn around and say your insistence that there is no god is an example of delusion?
Lucky for you - they were actually scientists (most of whom are not composed of great theistic dispositions) who are accredited with making advancements inthe field of science
The reason that I quoted them was to suggest that your ideas about what constitutes science (it doesn't innvolve mystery, its unphased by metaphysics, its clear what the origins of the universe are) seem to be divorced from the real world of science by the view of practicing scientists
Other superstitions? Such as?
This is interesting - you admit you are deluded but feel confident that you call upon the notion of god as an example of delusion ... couldn't I just as easily turn around and say your insistence that there is no god is an example of delusion?
sometimes the squiggle of a 3 looks like an 8
See Spider this is not new. Some theist specially in modern times are trying to convince delusionals such as themselves, that such a thing as emperical objective evidence is not objective, but that all existence is subjective. I got a friend who identifies this phenomena, that the nutt jobs are trying to pull on everyone else. Don't fall for their delusion!
The Stolen Concept:
http://www.nathanielbranden.com/catalog/articles_essays/the_stolen_concept.html
See Spider this is not new. Some theist specially in modern times are trying to convince delusionals such as themselves, that such a thing as emperical objective evidence is not objective, but that all existence is subjective. I got a friend who identifies this phenomena, that the nutt jobs are trying to pull on everyone else. Don't fall for their delusion!
The Stolen Concept:
http://www.nathanielbranden.com/catalog/articles_essays/the_stolen_concept.html
So scientific observations are not subjective? There is no variability in scientific observations?
GOD is a belief, for those of us who want GOD to exist, he/it exists. GOD is considered the most powerfull entity of the universe, if one feels that he/she is uncapable to ever reach or come close to the power of entity of GOD than that person will believe in GOD. I am not such an entity, although I realize life would be much simplier if I just believed in him and made him my superior forever.
Did I say it didn't involve mystery? No. Science strives to understand things. Which means it is their job to erradicate mystery. For the theist, they probably wish they didn't bother.
Astrology, ghosts, aliens visiting Earth, wearing lucky underpants to be successful at something, etc.
Except I'm not saying there isn't a god. The problem is that it is remarkably easy to call someone delusional when they have a plethora of details on something that there is no evidence for. It's the equivelant of me stating there is a planet around Alpha Centauri with monkeys on it.
If we find evidence of god, great. But in the meantime it is delusional to believe in something without evidence.
Let me try to help.
There are obviously subjective variations and interpretations in science. The strength of the method is that through repeated experiments and continuous review these subjective influences are whittled down to a minimum to yield (almost always) a pretty darn good model of reality. The only real measure of just how good is the success of the predictions and results of applications based on the models.
So if I build one hundred computers using all the technology from known information, they will all function perfectly and identically?
And aren't observations limited by tools available? Isn't progress itself a sign that we don't know what we don't know?
So, in addition, theology as a modelling method for "reality" is lacking because it demands no repeatable evidence and no critical review of ideas against the anvil of experiment.
Anyone with an ounce of integrity must admit this. Not to say that personal religion isn't potentially helpful to the individual but it is not, and shoud not be presented as, a model of reality.
Anyone with an ounce of integrity must admit this. Not to say that personal religion isn't potentially helpful to the individual but it is not, and shoud not be presented as, a model of reality.
I don't know what the point of this question is, regarding general scientific methods.
And generally, if you build a thousand computers they will all function perfectly and identically. This is called modern manufacturing. Works pretty darn good. There's an acceptable statistical fallout, above which you review and adjust your process to fix it.
Pretty selfevident, huh? What's your point?
Do all "models of reality" depend on repeateable experiences?
Why do people get married or have children, for instance?
And why would science be used to define religion in the first place? Does science define history? Is all history, in that case, complete bunk?
Only the good ones. Clearly there are bad ones.
Wtf are you talking about sam? Did you pull an all-nighter with caffiene stimulants?
Again, wtf? Science has nothing to do with defining other discliplines. Science does not claim that religion or history are bunk, or anything else. Science is a method of figuring out stuff with the goal of approximating reality to the best of it's ability.
Religion and history are methods unto themselves and are only evaluated within the confines of their areas of focus.
If you tell me that religion is not about predicting outcomes of measurable phenomena but about personal explorations of the spirit, that's fine.
Science and personal religion are not comparable in what they (should) claim about the cosmos. One is clearly much better suited to explaining reality. This is a demonstrated fact. Why argue?
Well this depends on what is being measured.
- Many measurements can be made using a machine.
- The experimental parameters are set up before the experiment, not post-hoc so the system of measurement should be impartial in that it is not based on the results.
- If there is still a worry as to the measurements in question, and a machine can not be used to quantify the data, then a double bind method can be employed.
The experiment is repeated and can be done so in other labs.
The results are recorded as “statistically” significant. Which is not to say they represent reality, but they "probably" do (and that’s taking probable quite literally
Anyway, I still think that because God has made human an animal - an animal that can only live by killing other living things. This says something about the nature of God - considering God could have made humans so that humans didn't even have to eat and hence never have to kill but didn't. Seems like a rather creepy God to admire - to me anyway.
The easter bunny is a belief. If you believe in the easter bunny, the easter bunny exists. That is all.
Good stuff for the common people who don't care one way or the other.
Well your belief of God obviously exists - in ones head. That really doesn't say something about the God external to ones consciousness does it?