|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Logical and rational arguments against a higher power. [Re: SirTripAlot]
#14581405 - 06/08/11 07:15 PM (12 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
So since I prayed to God, he answered my prayer.
Of course you have to ignore the billions of prayers to god that go unanswered.
If you logically factor that in then your survival was a lucky break against the odds. People that never pray also get these lucky breaks.
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
4896744
Small Town Girl


Registered: 03/06/10
Posts: 5,128
Loc: United States
Last seen: 11 years, 8 months
|
Re: Logical and rational arguments against a higher power. [Re: SirTripAlot]
#14581422 - 06/08/11 07:18 PM (12 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
SirTripAlot said: Thank you for responding...
Im being honest here, no bullshit. I do see what you are saying...you are actually refuting allot with that response. I might not necessarily agree with it
No matter what I list then, the conversation or debate is over since I do not believe the physical parameters that we as human adhere to (math,science, etc) pertain to God, thus there would be know way to prove or disprove.
thanks for the enlightenment bro
So what you are saying is that you choose to believe in it for no logical reason.
-------------------- Live your Life!
|
SirTripAlot
Semper Fidelis



Registered: 01/11/05
Posts: 7,466
Loc: Harmless (Mostly)
Last seen: 18 minutes, 23 seconds
|
Re: Logical and rational arguments against a higher power. [Re: 4896744] 1
#14581438 - 06/08/11 07:20 PM (12 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
And I guess the overwhelming sensation I had was just the blood running out of my body....I do see where you guys are coming from, hence, the reason for the thread.
Call me stupid, but I did learn something by posing this here
-------------------- “I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Logical and rational arguments against a higher power. [Re: SirTripAlot] 2
#14581443 - 06/08/11 07:21 PM (12 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
No one is stupid when they're learning.
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
AlphaFalfa
imagine


Registered: 06/16/08
Posts: 3,857
Loc: 3 Seconds Ago.
Last seen: 9 years, 10 months
|
Re: Logical and rational arguments against a higher power. [Re: 4896744]
#14581458 - 06/08/11 07:23 PM (12 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
iThink said:
Quote:
SirTripAlot said: Thank you for responding...
Im being honest here, no bullshit. I do see what you are saying...you are actually refuting allot with that response. I might not necessarily agree with it
No matter what I list then, the conversation or debate is over since I do not believe the physical parameters that we as human adhere to (math,science, etc) pertain to God, thus there would be know way to prove or disprove.
thanks for the enlightenment bro
So what you are saying is that you choose to believe in it for no logical reason.
His perception is proof for his belief.
The problem lies in his perception of perception, particularly that perception is reason for belief. If he knew that perception is preceded by beliefs, then he wouldn't prove the existence of god through a this experience, but through sensory phenomena that we can all experience, regardless of our perception. Ie. Gravity is going to always exist, regardless of perception and it is easily recognizable with the five senses.
To bad.
-------------------- if you ever feel lost, just remember, life is not a journey, it is entertainment, all 4 fun...
|
DieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
|
Re: Logical and rational arguments against a higher power. [Re: SirTripAlot]
#14581468 - 06/08/11 07:25 PM (12 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
SirTripAlot said: Thank you for responding...
Im being honest here, no bullshit. I do see what you are saying...you are actually refuting allot with that response. I might not necessarily agree with it
No matter what I list then, the conversation or debate is over since I do not believe the physical parameters that we as human adhere to (math,science, etc) pertain to God, thus there would be know way to prove or disprove.
thanks for the enlightenment bro
Let me just add... I don't agree with iThink's claim that the burden is solely on you. I believe that the burden of evidence is one the one making the claim. I will make the claim that the christian god is likely not real. The evidence I would use to defend this claim is largely scientific evidence. I believe this set of evidence also implies that most culture's god(s) are not real.
Of course, as new evidence comes out the definition of god gets more ambiguous afterwards. With all the evidence we have today, I would claim that the traits of a possible god are very limited. I believe evidence shows that a potential god cannot read our thoughts, cannot be all powerful, and cannot be a personal god. However, with no evidence on how the universe was created, I have no evidence either way if the universe was created as a deliberate act by an intelligence or otherwise. So I must remain strictly agnostic with respect to a god that may have created the universe, but I have sufficient evidence to be atheist when it comes to a god that created earth and life or one that is all powerful, can read my mind and cares about me personally.
|
SirTripAlot
Semper Fidelis



Registered: 01/11/05
Posts: 7,466
Loc: Harmless (Mostly)
Last seen: 18 minutes, 23 seconds
|
Re: Logical and rational arguments against a higher power. [Re: 4896744]
#14581470 - 06/08/11 07:26 PM (12 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Yes and No
Starting to question it more.
I kinda follw(ed?) the ontological argument from Descates when it comes to God.
-------------------- “I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”
|
AlphaFalfa
imagine


Registered: 06/16/08
Posts: 3,857
Loc: 3 Seconds Ago.
Last seen: 9 years, 10 months
|
Re: Logical and rational arguments against a higher power. [Re: SirTripAlot]
#14581484 - 06/08/11 07:28 PM (12 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
SirTripAlot said: And I guess the overwhelming sensation I had was just the blood running out of my body....I do see where you guys are coming from, hence, the reason for the thread.
Call me stupid, but I did learn something by posing this here
To believe that you could prove god because you prayed to him, is to ignore that thousands of starving people in the world whose prayers go unanswered by this god.
You ultimately have to believe and probably do, that you are special in gods eyes because you do see that he does not answere all prayers.
Humans are amazing creatures and I believe many miracles such as yours can be explained by hidden abilities that you tap into unconsciously.
-------------------- if you ever feel lost, just remember, life is not a journey, it is entertainment, all 4 fun...
|
Diploid
Cuban



Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
|
Re: Logical and rational arguments against a higher power. [Re: SirTripAlot]
#14581495 - 06/08/11 07:31 PM (12 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
I prayed to God, he answered my prayer.
If your hand had been completely amputated and ground into homogeneous mush instead of just injured, do you believe god would have grown it back for you?
If so, can you explain why he would have grown yours back but has never done that for any other amputee? Not even faithful ones who fervently pray to be cured of their amputation?
-------------------- Republican Values: 1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you. 2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child. 3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer. 4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.
|
4896744
Small Town Girl


Registered: 03/06/10
Posts: 5,128
Loc: United States
Last seen: 11 years, 8 months
|
Re: Logical and rational arguments against a higher power. [Re: DieCommie]
#14581508 - 06/08/11 07:35 PM (12 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Let me just add... I don't agree with iThink's claim that the burden is solely on you. I believe that the burden of evidence is one the one making the claim. I will make the claim that the christian god is likely not real. The evidence I would use to defend this claim is largely scientific evidence. I believe this set of evidence also implies that most culture's god(s) are not real.
You are correct. It's easy for me to fall into a way of speaking that is just more practical for day to day life.
-------------------- Live your Life!
|
SirTripAlot
Semper Fidelis



Registered: 01/11/05
Posts: 7,466
Loc: Harmless (Mostly)
Last seen: 18 minutes, 23 seconds
|
Re: Logical and rational arguments against a higher power. [Re: Diploid]
#14581540 - 06/08/11 07:44 PM (12 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
I can never explain Gods judgments or actions...never claimed too....saying that he would or would not regenerate my hand would contradict this.
-------------------- “I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”
|
mushiepussy

Registered: 02/06/11
Posts: 1,198
Loc:
|
Re: Logical and rational arguments against a higher power. [Re: 4896744]
#14581553 - 06/08/11 07:47 PM (12 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
A being exsitng outside the law of physics Like the singularity in a black hole?
All powerful...no higher power source Power scource? Like a star?
The abilty for damnation, salvation, etc How are we not completely capable of this?
Created the Earth and man Chemistry? Electromagnetism? Gravity? Again we are completely capable of controlling these phenomena.
Can you proove the Flying Spahgetti Monster doesn't exist?
|
zoomfan
doubt 'er


Registered: 07/16/09
Posts: 505
Loc: eastern Canada
Last seen: 2 years, 10 months
|
Re: Logical and rational arguments against a higher power. [Re: SirTripAlot]
#14581583 - 06/08/11 07:55 PM (12 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
i would be happy to tell you why i dont think there is a higher power.
first of all even if there was a higher power there would be no other conclusion to make than that it is guilty of molestation, murder, torture, every dirty horrible thing we condemn people to life in prison for. in a court of law anyone who is a part of or allows any of these things to happen without trying to stop it by any means possible is guilty of the same offense. and an ultimate power could stop any of these things. forget "god gave man choice" if he is all powerful he could take it back so innocent children didnt get raped and tortured.
now my reasons for why i dont think there is a higher power are as follows:
the idea that there is a being somewhere who created everything and out of anything at all he decided to make a universe and people and make those people die for him and burn them in hell if they didnt get a chance to read a certain book or just wanted to be a good person on their own, is totally illogical. it is no different than any other culture's creation myth they are all illogical and fabricated out of thin air out of lack of explanation for the origins of things. its a mystery so leave it that way until you know. dont claim you know when you know you could be totally wrong.
i'm going to assume your an intelligent person because you at least offer yourself up for debate so tell me, if your current faith was set out before you and you had never heard of it before would you say yes thats it thats how it must have happened? there's a rtick at play here it's an emotional trick it masqeurades as god's presence but its just a coping mechanism to avoid emotional issues. your mind tells you i know this is illogical but then there's that feeling which you attribute to god because it is associated with god. it is a guilt drilled into you for years guilt for questioning god. its the fear of if you let yourself stop believing and he really is real i might burn in hell for eternity. it is no different than a cult every way you turn there is a trap waiting for you if you try to leave.
it is the culminated trickery of two thousand years you dont stand a chance unless you drop it all and see for yourself what is true and real without a doubt. that which is doesnt need to be talked about or debated or thought about it just is.. plain as day completely obvious. everything else is speculation and has no more value than as a theory. to base your life on a theory is dangerous especially one which has built in mechanisms to keep it from evolving with new information.
lastly i dont believe there is a god because i've been to "hell" and can't imagine any intelligent being subjecting a person to it let alone a just benevolent loving god. i wouldnt wish what i went through on the worst person in the world and im "only human". so you tell me now that i've told you, why do you believe there is a god? because "you have this feeling" or "you just know" or " you can feel god's presence". please just consider that that feeling whatever you wanna call it or attribute to it, is no different than when you "just knew" there was a santa claus when you were a kid. i call god santa claus for big kids because its really just as mythical and childish and YOU KNOW IT deep down. make the leap be a man and put behind your childhood fantasies. it's a difficult transition but its for the best and deep down you know it.
-------------------- Thinking is dreaming wake up and enjoy the dream.
|
zoomfan
doubt 'er


Registered: 07/16/09
Posts: 505
Loc: eastern Canada
Last seen: 2 years, 10 months
|
Re: Logical and rational arguments against a higher power. [Re: zoomfan]
#14581623 - 06/08/11 08:05 PM (12 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
when you lose a lot of blood you have a weird feeling come over you.... its lack of blood. same thing happened to me once i didnt pray.. i got better. and what about all those other guys who prayed and were just as "good" as you and bled out and died. almost everyone prays not to die before they die. very few survive.
-------------------- Thinking is dreaming wake up and enjoy the dream.
|
AlphaFalfa
imagine


Registered: 06/16/08
Posts: 3,857
Loc: 3 Seconds Ago.
Last seen: 9 years, 10 months
|
Re: Logical and rational arguments against a higher power. [Re: SirTripAlot]
#14581649 - 06/08/11 08:10 PM (12 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
SirTripAlot said: I can never explain Gods judgments or actions...never claimed too....saying that he would or would not regenerate my hand would contradict this.
Saying that you believe in god because he helped you, but then saying that you can't explain why he does what he does, contradicts itself.
How can you say that god helped you, when you say that you can't explain gods actions?
How? Its not possible; by saying that he did it because you prayed, shows that you believe you can explain gods actions.
-------------------- if you ever feel lost, just remember, life is not a journey, it is entertainment, all 4 fun...
Edited by AlphaFalfa (06/08/11 08:14 PM)
|
zoomfan
doubt 'er


Registered: 07/16/09
Posts: 505
Loc: eastern Canada
Last seen: 2 years, 10 months
|
Re: Logical and rational arguments against a higher power. [Re: zoomfan]
#14581652 - 06/08/11 08:11 PM (12 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
one last thing if you argue there is a god logically, than you must stick to logic not faith because faith and logic are different things. i cant count the number of people who have argued that there is a god using logic and then in the end say well you just have to have faith. having faith is dicarding logic so pick one and stick with it.
-------------------- Thinking is dreaming wake up and enjoy the dream.
|
SirTripAlot
Semper Fidelis



Registered: 01/11/05
Posts: 7,466
Loc: Harmless (Mostly)
Last seen: 18 minutes, 23 seconds
|
Re: Logical and rational arguments against a higher power. [Re: mushiepussy]
#14581653 - 06/08/11 08:11 PM (12 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Now that I have found out, that my question was flawed...if I could kinda switch gears a tad...and propose anytype of conversation on Descrates ontological argument:
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/descartes-ontological/
Descartes' Ontological Argument
First published Mon Jun 18, 2001; substantive revision Tue Apr 12, 2011
Descartes' ontological (or a priori) argument is both one of the most fascinating and poorly understood aspects of his philosophy. Fascination with the argument stems from the effort to prove God's existence from simple but powerful premises. Existence is derived immediately from the clear and distinct idea of a supremely perfect being. Ironically, the simplicity of the argument has also produced several misreadings, exacerbated in part by Descartes' failure to formulate a single version.
The main statement of the argument appears in the Fifth Meditation. This comes on the heels of an earlier causal argument for God's existence in the Third Meditation, raising questions about the order and relation between these two distinct proofs. Descartes repeats the ontological argument in a few other central texts including the Principles of Philosophy. He also defends it in the First, Second, and Fifth Replies against scathing objections by some of the leading intellectuals of his day.
Descartes was not the first philosopher to formulate an ontological argument. An earlier version of the argument had been vigorously defended by St. Anselm in the eleventh century, and then criticized by a monk named Gaunilo (Anselm's contemporary) and later by St. Thomas Aquinas (though his remarks were directed against yet another version of the argument). Aquinas' critique was regarded as so devastating that the ontological argument died out for several centuries. It thus came as a surprise to Descartes' contemporaries that he should attempt to resurrect it. Although he claims not to be familiar with Anselm's version of the proof, Descartes appears to craft his own argument so as to block traditional objections.
Despite similarities, Descartes' version of the argument differs from Anselm's in important ways. The latter's version is thought to proceed from the meaning of the word “God,” by definition, God is a being a greater than which cannot be conceived. Descartes' argument, in contrast, is grounded in two central tenets of his philosophy — the theory of innate ideas and the doctrine of clear and distinct perception. He purports not to rely on an arbitrary definition of God but rather on an innate idea whose content is “given.” Descartes' version is also extremely simple. God's existence is inferred directly from the fact that necessary existence is contained in the clear and distinct idea of a supremely perfect being. Indeed, on some occasions he suggests that the so-called ontological “argument” is not a formal proof at all but a self-evident axiom grasped intuitively by a mind free of philosophical prejudice.
Descartes often compares the ontological argument to a geometric demonstration, arguing that necessary existence cannot be excluded from idea of God anymore than the fact that its angles equal two right angles, for example, can be excluded from the idea of a triangle. The analogy underscores once again the argument's supreme simplicity. God's existence is purported to be as obvious and self-evident as the most basic mathematical truth. It also attempts to show how the “logic” of the demonstration is rooted in our ordinary reasoning practices.
In the same context, Descartes also characterizes the ontological argument as a proof from the “essence” or “nature” of God, arguing that necessary existence cannot be separated from the essence of a supremely perfect being without contradiction. In casting the argument in these terms, he is implicitly relying on a traditional medieval distinction between a thing's essence and its existence. According to this tradition, one can determine what something is (i.e. its essence), independently of knowing whether it exists. This distinction appears useful to Descartes' aims, some have thought, because it allows him to specify God's essence without begging the question of his existence.
-------------------- “I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”
|
SirTripAlot
Semper Fidelis



Registered: 01/11/05
Posts: 7,466
Loc: Harmless (Mostly)
Last seen: 18 minutes, 23 seconds
|
Re: Logical and rational arguments against a higher power. [Re: AlphaFalfa]
#14581700 - 06/08/11 08:21 PM (12 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
If I am unclear let me restate:
I dont believe in God because all he does is "help" me.
I cannot preempt God. I asked for his protection. He gave it to me. Thats not me explaining the whys of God....merely his manifestation to me. I also cannot explain why he helped me...only assume that he answered my prayer out of mercy.
-------------------- “I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”
|
zoomfan
doubt 'er


Registered: 07/16/09
Posts: 505
Loc: eastern Canada
Last seen: 2 years, 10 months
|
Re: Logical and rational arguments against a higher power. [Re: SirTripAlot]
#14581724 - 06/08/11 08:28 PM (12 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
why would you assume he helped you at all though? why assume there is a god in the first place? if you didnt assume there was a god you wouldnt assume he answered your prayer. what is your assumption based on?
-------------------- Thinking is dreaming wake up and enjoy the dream.
|
AlphaFalfa
imagine


Registered: 06/16/08
Posts: 3,857
Loc: 3 Seconds Ago.
Last seen: 9 years, 10 months
|
Re: Logical and rational arguments against a higher power. [Re: SirTripAlot]
#14581745 - 06/08/11 08:32 PM (12 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Decartes argument is nonsensical.
You can't prove the existence of something through thoughts.
In order to prove something to someone else, there has to be a basic level of observation(ie. taste, touch, sound, sight, feel) that can be equally related to. Like, you cant prove that blue is a better color than red to a blind guy. In order to prove that one color is superior over another, both people have to be able to see colors in the first place.
Same goes for god, in order to prove god, there has to be something that everyone can observe/experience.
Thats why ones thoughts cannot really be used to prove the existence of anything, because everyone can't observe anothers thoughts equally. Like what if on the one hand decarstes tried to prove the existence of gods nature to a guy who can't think of gods nature, with this ontological argument?
What I can do however, is prove the existence of gravity by showing you that letting go of something i am holding up, will always move downwards. This applies to all things and finally more importantly, you and I can see equally.
-------------------- if you ever feel lost, just remember, life is not a journey, it is entertainment, all 4 fun...
|
|