iThink said:

It doesn't "prove" it, but it does provide a lot of evidence in favor of a naturalistic world view, as apposed to invoking anything beyond this impersonal material existence which has no evidence backing it.

---

random_wanderer said:

iThink said:

It doesn't "prove" it, but it does provide a lot of evidence in favor of a naturalistic world view, as apposed to invoking anything beyond this impersonal material existence which has no evidence backing it.

---

You say "but" as if evidence in favor of a naturalistic world view strengthens the unproven conclusion that life has no meaning making it a stronger position than the unproven conclusion that life does have meaning. 

How do you measure the quality of a poem?

When i shop on amazon, i find that it is as important to read what the customers have written about their purchase as it is to count how many stars a product has been awarded.

---

Quote:

I can't prove that something doesn't exist.

---

iThink said:

random_wanderer said:

iThink said:

It doesn't "prove" it, but it does provide a lot of evidence in favor of a naturalistic world view, as apposed to invoking anything beyond this impersonal material existence which has no evidence backing it.

---

You say "but" as if evidence in favor of a naturalistic world view strengthens the unproven conclusion that life has no meaning making it a stronger position than the unproven conclusion that life does have meaning. 

How do you measure the quality of a poem?

When i shop on amazon, i find that it is as important to read what the customers have written about their purchase as it is to count how many stars a product has been awarded.

---

The burden of proof is on you. I claim that there is a lack of something because there is no evidence for it. You claim it does exist. Show me the evidence. I can't prove that something doesn't exist.

---

 
The only claim i have made within this debate is that the argument that there is no meaning to life makes the same noise as the argument that there is a meaning to life and that there is an inconsistency in the belief that lack of evidence proves something to not exist.

Does the lack of evidence that there is a deep reality prove that it does not exist?

DieCommie said:

Quote:

I can't prove that something doesn't exist.

---

Sure you can.  At least, you can as much as you can prove something does exist.  I can claim I dont have a quarter in my hand.  You can look in my hand and have evidence to support that claim.

---

Quote:

iThink said:

Sure we are "supposed" to be here, but that is just because the impersonal laws make it that way.

---

Quote:

Proof?

---

mick said:

perhaps this argument is over-involved with semantics. I also feel there are levels of awareness, and this almost ties in with the definition of conscious existence.

a molecule that can bind to another molecule is aware at some level, same with protons, neutrons, electrons that exist. The strings that compose that matter up (if you believe in it) has to be aware at some level, as well. If these things were void of even the most basic awareness, it would be impossible for them to bind to form things like plants, human minds, gasses, iron, whatever.

---

So the ability to bind means that the object(s) have some level of awareness?

I personally guess there are levels of awareness too, but not in the same sense you do. 

How does this tie in of proof of the God you believe in?  It seem you are also a pantheist

Cognitive_Shift said:

I personally guess there are levels of awareness too, but not in the same sense you do. 

---

mick said:

Cognitive_Shift said:

I personally guess there are levels of awareness too, but not in the same sense you do. 

---

I am interested to hear your full philosophy on this man... here or through pm, though don't feel obligated.

---

Quote:

What are we humans so much more aware of than other animals?

---

random_wanderer said:

iThink said:

random_wanderer said:

iThink said:

It doesn't "prove" it, but it does provide a lot of evidence in favor of a naturalistic world view, as apposed to invoking anything beyond this impersonal material existence which has no evidence backing it.

---

You say "but" as if evidence in favor of a naturalistic world view strengthens the unproven conclusion that life has no meaning making it a stronger position than the unproven conclusion that life does have meaning. 

How do you measure the quality of a poem?

When i shop on amazon, i find that it is as important to read what the customers have written about their purchase as it is to count how many stars a product has been awarded.

---

The burden of proof is on you. I claim that there is a lack of something because there is no evidence for it. You claim it does exist. Show me the evidence. I can't prove that something doesn't exist.

---

 
The only claim i have made within this debate is that the argument that there is no meaning to life makes the same noise as the argument that there is a meaning to life and that there is an inconsistency in the belief that lack of evidence proves something to not exist.

Does the lack of evidence that there is a deep reality prove that it does not exist?

---

Quote:

I can speculate on a flying spaghetti monster all I want to and you would never "prove" me wrong.

---