|
zzripz
Stranger


Registered: 12/23/08
Posts: 8,292
Loc: Manchester, UK
Last seen: 4 years, 7 months
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: clam_dude]
#18372281 - 06/05/13 11:53 AM (10 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
clam_dude said:
Quote:
zzripz said: alright 'god'---going back a hundred miles above when I presented a definition which I will summarize~~~
Quote:
To be 'possessed by a god' was in ancient Greece given the definition: Late Latin enthūsiasmus, from Greek enthousiasmos, from enthousiazein, to be inspired by a god, from entheos, possessed : en-, in; see en-2 + theos, god.
So this means like--nature was seen as alive, and plants that opened the eyes were considered gods, angels, spirits, daemons. The eating of them becomes you a god/ And this very ancient understanding gets used by Christian mythology and made to be an ACTUAL 'Son of God'---get it? IE it is made to be historical---for political power!
In these times the oppressive myth is scientific materialism, and/or Physicalism, and the demand is that 'everything is matter' and 'only that which can be measured is real'. And that is why you are reading the 'atheists' here push the 'rationalist' agenda, because so-called rationality as it is defined by a-theism is 'measure' as scientific materialism/scientism demands reality to be so it can then tell you what is real and what is delusion according to their 'reason'.
The notion that science is an ideology is pathetic - the "ideology" to follow evidence wherever it leads. That's not an ideology. An Ideology, (as implied in the word "scientism") is a belief that cannot be altered. If there is any evidence whatsoever that there is something more to the human mind (or the universe for that matter) other than material entities, then scientists would be the first to accept this. But there is absolutely no evidence. To the contrary, the more we learn about the brain, the more evidence there is that it is merely atoms interacting in certain ways. You may not like it but that's the way it is. And stop using the word "scientism," you make a fool out of yourself.
    
OK.....lol You are the fool but will never see it, like those who hold that ideology always don't...until, one day, if they are fortunate, they suddenly have some experience or some knowledge which shows their foolishness. You are most definitely part of that very ideology you deny.
Have you heard of scientists who use the term scientism? yes or no?
Please don't call other people names or suggest they are fools. Please confine your arguments to the topic of discussion. Thanks! -johnm214
Edited by johnm214 (06/05/13 09:04 PM)
|
clam_dude
stranger in astrange land

Registered: 09/10/03
Posts: 1,717
Loc: twilight zone
Last seen: 6 years, 3 months
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: zzripz]
#18372465 - 06/05/13 12:28 PM (10 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zzripz said: OK.....lol You are the fool but will never see it, like those who hold that ideology always don't...until, one day, if they are fortunate, they suddenly have some experience or some knowledge which shows their foolishness. You are most definitely part of that very ideology you deny.
Have you heard of scientists who use the term scientism? yes or no?
I happen to be a materialist in the sense that I don't see what there could be other than material things. That's one thing I believe. I also believe that the earth orbits the sun. And I believe that onions have a less potent taste when you cook them for a little while.
Now why is it that you have to arbitrarily take one of my beliefs and state that it's an ideology?
-------------------- "I would like to thank god for making me an atheist" - Ricky Gervais
|
GilbertC06
Omnipotent to a fault.


Registered: 01/29/13
Posts: 597
Last seen: 3 years, 3 months
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: zzripz]
#18372618 - 06/05/13 01:09 PM (10 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zzripz said: alright 'god'---going back a hundred miles above when I presented a definition which I will summarize~~~
Quote:
To be 'possessed by a god' was in ancient Greece given the definition: Late Latin enthūsiasmus, from Greek enthousiasmos, from enthousiazein, to be inspired by a god, from entheos, possessed : en-, in; see en-2 + theos, god.
So this means like--nature was seen as alive, and plants that opened the eyes were considered gods, angels, spirits, daemons. The eating of them becomes you a god/ And this very ancient understanding gets used by Christian mythology and made to be an ACTUAL 'Son of God'---get it? IE it is made to be historical---for political power!
In these times the oppressive myth is scientific materialism, and/or Physicalism, and the demand is that 'everything is matter' and 'only that which can be measured is real'. And that is why you are reading the 'atheists' here push the 'rationalist' agenda, because so-called rationality as it is defined by a-theism is 'measure' as scientific materialism/scientism demands reality to be so it can then tell you what is real and what is delusion according to their 'reason'.
You have now gone into a deep rabbit hole of attacking science and reality. If you are averse to to measuring and taking in evidence of something to determine the truth then you effectively live in your own fantasy world. Once you have that mentality you then come to conclusions like:
"That bump in the night must have been a ghost."
"That light in the sky must be aliens."
"That coincidence must have been an act of God."
By rejecting science and rational thinking you then enter the world of gullibility and leaping conclusions.
You go all the way around to attack science just so you can hold on to the idea of spirits and god. All I can say to that is prove that spirits exist. Prove that a god exists. Science can prove that galaxies light years away exist. Why can't people prove one spirit exists?
|
zzripz
Stranger


Registered: 12/23/08
Posts: 8,292
Loc: Manchester, UK
Last seen: 4 years, 7 months
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: GilbertC06]
#18372977 - 06/05/13 02:35 PM (10 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
You have now gone into a deep rabbit hole of attacking science and reality. If you are averse to to measuring and taking in evidence of something to determine the truth then you effectively live in your own fantasy world. Once you have that mentality you then come to conclusions like:
"That bump in the night must have been a ghost."
"That light in the sky must be aliens."
"That coincidence must have been an act of God."
By rejecting science and rational thinking you then enter the world of gullibility and leaping conclusions.
You go all the way around to attack science just so you can hold on to the idea of spirits and god. All I can say to that is prove that spirits exist. Prove that a god exists. Science can prove that galaxies light years away exist. Why can't people prove one spirit exists?
First question I feel I must ask you GilbertC06 is~~have you ever had an experience you cannot explain rationally?
|
GilbertC06
Omnipotent to a fault.


Registered: 01/29/13
Posts: 597
Last seen: 3 years, 3 months
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: zzripz]
#18373019 - 06/05/13 02:45 PM (10 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zzripz said:
Quote:
You have now gone into a deep rabbit hole of attacking science and reality. If you are averse to to measuring and taking in evidence of something to determine the truth then you effectively live in your own fantasy world. Once you have that mentality you then come to conclusions like:
"That bump in the night must have been a ghost."
"That light in the sky must be aliens."
"That coincidence must have been an act of God."
By rejecting science and rational thinking you then enter the world of gullibility and leaping conclusions.
You go all the way around to attack science just so you can hold on to the idea of spirits and god. All I can say to that is prove that spirits exist. Prove that a god exists. Science can prove that galaxies light years away exist. Why can't people prove one spirit exists?
First question I feel I must ask you GilbertC06 is~~have you ever had an experience you cannot explain rationally?
No. And even if I did, I'm not the smartest most knowledgeable person on the planet. So even if I couldn't explain it, doesn't mean somebody else couldn't.
|
zzripz
Stranger


Registered: 12/23/08
Posts: 8,292
Loc: Manchester, UK
Last seen: 4 years, 7 months
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: GilbertC06]
#18373241 - 06/05/13 03:35 PM (10 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
GilbertC06 said:
No. And even if I did, I'm not the smartest most knowledgeable person on the planet. So even if I couldn't explain it, doesn't mean somebody else couldn't.
....I find that real sad. This is what I truly find sad about the mindset you represent...you do not trust your being
|
GilbertC06
Omnipotent to a fault.


Registered: 01/29/13
Posts: 597
Last seen: 3 years, 3 months
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: zzripz]
#18373427 - 06/05/13 04:17 PM (10 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zzripz said:
Quote:
GilbertC06 said:
No. And even if I did, I'm not the smartest most knowledgeable person on the planet. So even if I couldn't explain it, doesn't mean somebody else couldn't.
....I find that real sad. This is what I truly find sad about the mindset you represent...you do not trust your being
Besides the "you do not trust your being" part which makes absolutely no sense...
What is sad? That I don't choose to believe in a spirit world for which has no real evidence? That I choose to not believe in a god or gods I have never even seen give a fuck about humanity? For which there is no evidence?
Is it also sad that I don't believe that he Marvel universe is real? That I don't believe bugs talk like in Bugs Life? That I don't believe that Narnia exists? That I know that Harry Potter is just a fictional book series?
It's totally mind boggling to me that for some people they need to believe in the supernatural just to be happy. I've even heard religious people say they would commit suicide and or go chaotic and kill everyone if their god didn't exist. That is fucking hilarious and equally disturbing at the same time. What is so wrong in that we are humans on planet Earth that is situated in a super vast Universe that might as well be infinite to us? Isn't that enough? You still need a god? You still need to believe in magic so you don't slit your wrists? You can't metaphorically and literally just stop and look at a flower and appreciate it? It has to have some supernatural meaning or else you aren't content?
If anything is sad it's those people. Those people who aren't content with their own lives so they have to make some bs up just to stay sane.
|
johnm214


Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: GilbertC06]
#18374949 - 06/05/13 09:03 PM (10 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Clamdude and zzripz: Please don't call other people names or suggest they are fools. Please confine your arguments to the topic of discussion. Thanks!
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: zzripz]
#18376119 - 06/06/13 01:41 AM (10 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zzripz said:
Quote:
clam_dude said:
Quote:
zzripz said: alright 'god'---going back a hundred miles above when I presented a definition which I will summarize~~~
Quote:
To be 'possessed by a god' was in ancient Greece given the definition: Late Latin enthūsiasmus, from Greek enthousiasmos, from enthousiazein, to be inspired by a god, from entheos, possessed : en-, in; see en-2 + theos, god.
So this means like--nature was seen as alive, and plants that opened the eyes were considered gods, angels, spirits, daemons. The eating of them becomes you a god/ And this very ancient understanding gets used by Christian mythology and made to be an ACTUAL 'Son of God'---get it? IE it is made to be historical---for political power!
In these times the oppressive myth is scientific materialism, and/or Physicalism, and the demand is that 'everything is matter' and 'only that which can be measured is real'. And that is why you are reading the 'atheists' here push the 'rationalist' agenda, because so-called rationality as it is defined by a-theism is 'measure' as scientific materialism/scientism demands reality to be so it can then tell you what is real and what is delusion according to their 'reason'.
The notion that science is an ideology is pathetic - the "ideology" to follow evidence wherever it leads. That's not an ideology. An Ideology, (as implied in the word "scientism") is a belief that cannot be altered. If there is any evidence whatsoever that there is something more to the human mind (or the universe for that matter) other than material entities, then scientists would be the first to accept this. But there is absolutely no evidence. To the contrary, the more we learn about the brain, the more evidence there is that it is merely atoms interacting in certain ways. You may not like it but that's the way it is. And stop using the word "scientism," you make a fool out of yourself.
    
OK.....lol You are the fool but will never see it, like those who hold that ideology always don't...until, one day, if they are fortunate, they suddenly have some experience or some knowledge which shows their foolishness. You are most definitely part of that very ideology you deny.
Have you heard of scientists who use the term scientism? yes or no?
Please don't call other people names or suggest they are fools. Please confine your arguments to the topic of discussion. Thanks! -johnm214
How can you call someone a fool and then post this quote from john214 all in the same post?
-------------------- "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
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: johnm214]
#18376124 - 06/06/13 01:43 AM (10 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
johnm214 said: Clamdude and zzripz: Please don't call other people names or suggest they are fools. Please confine your arguments to the topic of discussion. Thanks!
You beat me to it. It's amazing how blind folk can be to their own bs while pointing it out in others. I love this place.
-------------------- "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
|
GilbertC06
Omnipotent to a fault.


Registered: 01/29/13
Posts: 597
Last seen: 3 years, 3 months
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: Icelander]
#18376164 - 06/06/13 01:56 AM (10 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
How can you call someone a fool and then post this quote from john214 all in the same post?
Maybe because he didn't. Johnm214 put that statement in zzripz post in bold and red ink to point that zzripz called clamdude a "fool".
Edited by GilbertC06 (06/06/13 01:56 AM)
|
Vaipen
Psychonaut

Registered: 01/15/12
Posts: 782
Loc: Europe
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: zzripz]
#18376905 - 06/06/13 09:09 AM (10 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zzripz said:
Quote:
Vaipen said: Very well put zzrip. If I understand you, at least what I recognize in your post, is that it is a sort of circular reasoning or self-fulfilling system.
If it is measurable it is real and if it is real, it is measurable. Since it is measurable, measurability must be rational and logical and therefore a demand on reality that must be met. Did I understand that right?
Yes. They become limited by their sense that only measurement shows what is real. But what If we said 'how do you measure the immeasurable?'
What popped up in my head was 'By using your intuition'.
|
Vaipen
Psychonaut

Registered: 01/15/12
Posts: 782
Loc: Europe
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: clam_dude]
#18376933 - 06/06/13 09:14 AM (10 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
clam_dude said:
Quote:
zzripz said: alright 'god'---going back a hundred miles above when I presented a definition which I will summarize~~~
Quote:
To be 'possessed by a god' was in ancient Greece given the definition: Late Latin enthūsiasmus, from Greek enthousiasmos, from enthousiazein, to be inspired by a god, from entheos, possessed : en-, in; see en-2 + theos, god.
So this means like--nature was seen as alive, and plants that opened the eyes were considered gods, angels, spirits, daemons. The eating of them becomes you a god/ And this very ancient understanding gets used by Christian mythology and made to be an ACTUAL 'Son of God'---get it? IE it is made to be historical---for political power!
In these times the oppressive myth is scientific materialism, and/or Physicalism, and the demand is that 'everything is matter' and 'only that which can be measured is real'. And that is why you are reading the 'atheists' here push the 'rationalist' agenda, because so-called rationality as it is defined by a-theism is 'measure' as scientific materialism/scientism demands reality to be so it can then tell you what is real and what is delusion according to their 'reason'.
The notion that science is an ideology is pathetic - the "ideology" to follow evidence wherever it leads. That's not an ideology. An Ideology, (as implied in the word "scientism") is a belief that cannot be altered. If there is any evidence whatsoever that there is something more to the human mind (or the universe for that matter) other than material entities, then scientists would be the first to accept this. But there is absolutely no evidence. To the contrary, the more we learn about the brain, the more evidence there is that it is merely atoms interacting in certain ways. You may not like it but that's the way it is. And stop using the word "scientism," you make a fool out of yourself.
Please don't call other people names or suggest they are fools. Please confine your arguments to the topic of discussion. Thanks! -johnm214
Hm. You say ideologies don't change. I don't see how that is true.
Is it an ideology of mankind to increase its knowledge and understanding of nature? If so, then we can see how science has changed over the last 2000 years. There have been several epochs in history and McKenna spoke at length about them. Science and its methods have changed.
The term scientism is a legit term and anyone may use it and it does not make them fools.
|
Vaipen
Psychonaut

Registered: 01/15/12
Posts: 782
Loc: Europe
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: GilbertC06]
#18376977 - 06/06/13 09:27 AM (10 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
GilbertC06 said:
Quote:
zzripz said: alright 'god'---going back a hundred miles above when I presented a definition which I will summarize~~~
Quote:
To be 'possessed by a god' was in ancient Greece given the definition: Late Latin enthūsiasmus, from Greek enthousiasmos, from enthousiazein, to be inspired by a god, from entheos, possessed : en-, in; see en-2 + theos, god.
So this means like--nature was seen as alive, and plants that opened the eyes were considered gods, angels, spirits, daemons. The eating of them becomes you a god/ And this very ancient understanding gets used by Christian mythology and made to be an ACTUAL 'Son of God'---get it? IE it is made to be historical---for political power!
In these times the oppressive myth is scientific materialism, and/or Physicalism, and the demand is that 'everything is matter' and 'only that which can be measured is real'. And that is why you are reading the 'atheists' here push the 'rationalist' agenda, because so-called rationality as it is defined by a-theism is 'measure' as scientific materialism/scientism demands reality to be so it can then tell you what is real and what is delusion according to their 'reason'.
You have now gone into a deep rabbit hole of attacking science and reality. If you are averse to to measuring and taking in evidence of something to determine the truth then you effectively live in your own fantasy world. Once you have that mentality you then come to conclusions like:
"That bump in the night must have been a ghost."
"That light in the sky must be aliens."
"That coincidence must have been an act of God."
By rejecting science and rational thinking you then enter the world of gullibility and leaping conclusions.
You go all the way around to attack science just so you can hold on to the idea of spirits and god. All I can say to that is prove that spirits exist. Prove that a god exists. Science can prove that galaxies light years away exist. Why can't people prove one spirit exists?
I don't think zzrip denies the value of science. Neither do I. But what many people here refuse to see is that their view is merely one in a string of views throughout history. We've gone from ancient Greece, India and China to science of the Middle Ages, to the Enlightenment and to Romanticism to modern science. But this modern science is just another chapter that has become, like the rest of these epochs, a paradigm.
You are well embedded in that paradigm. You may think that because you are alive today, that somehow you are witnessing the end of the line of science. That science from now on will never change again, that its methodologies and ways of reasoning will remain as they are. Guess what, people in those other epochs probably thought the same thing.
There is always a deep bias that the contemporary mind. I am sure psychologists and philosophers can name many reasons for that.
So let's examine your examples. To me they all seem useful. If I encounter a bump in the road I do not think in terms of material science not in terms of paranormal phenomenon. As soon as you want to think about what it was, you enter into a realm of speculation. You can look back and see a hole in the road, measure it scientifically and get a satisfactory answer/conclusion. But what if a person would say, that hole was caused by a ghost, or a ghost made me drive my wheels over the hole? This to me sounds like an an alternative explanation that is as valid as the scientific one. Both can satisfy the mind but it just depends on preferences.
All people are looking for an answer and you need to find the ones that satisfy you the most. That doesn't mean one type of answer is superior to others. The idea that science will always provide the best answer is just a contemporary bias and the paradigm we live in structurally emphasizes in society, in school, on tv, everywhere, that science is the best way to answer questions.
I disagree.
|
Vaipen
Psychonaut

Registered: 01/15/12
Posts: 782
Loc: Europe
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: GilbertC06]
#18377041 - 06/06/13 09:47 AM (10 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
GilbertC06 said:
Quote:
zzripz said:
Quote:
GilbertC06 said:
No. And even if I did, I'm not the smartest most knowledgeable person on the planet. So even if I couldn't explain it, doesn't mean somebody else couldn't.
....I find that real sad. This is what I truly find sad about the mindset you represent...you do not trust your being
Besides the "you do not trust your being" part which makes absolutely no sense...
What is sad? That I don't choose to believe in a spirit world for which has no real evidence?
The word 'choose' here is vital, isn't it. The fact that science cannot find this spirit world does not mean it doesn't exist. Why is evidence so important? Why must everything be provable? What sort of mind would demand such of reality? It is quite arrogant, is it not, to believe that only science can render the truth about the nature of reality and that other means of exploring reality must therefore be folly of some kind.
It is a choice we make. But you have never made the choice consciously. You see to have been indoctrinated very well and it sticks to you because it follows your personality, which is prominently rational - and you pride yourself on that I bet. zzrip, me, others here have a personality much less in that groove. To you this seems very strange, you don't get us. Personally I am 50-50, right in between rationality and intuition. I pride myself on that.
I like science, when it 'behaves' as it was intended for. And I like spirituality when it is similarly pure, so no scientism and no religion for me.
Quote:
Is it also sad that I don't believe that he Marvel universe is real? That I don't believe bugs talk like in Bugs Life? That I don't believe that Narnia exists? That I know that Harry Potter is just a fictional book series?
And yet, they ARE real in some sense, because we read these books, films have been made, they are alive in our human collective subconscience, somehow, in some strange way that makes them real, but not scientifically real. But these stories resonate in us, like mythology. There is a reason for that, these stories make us think, enlighten us, give cultural clues to right and wrong and give a fundament to our cultural psyche. How is that unreal? It is real, but in another way. But that doesn't make it less real or worse epiphenomenon.
Quote:
It's totally mind boggling to me that for some people they need to believe in the supernatural just to be happy.
That sums it up, agreed? You make a mistake here believing that these other people 'need' something supernatural to be happy while you seem blind to the fact that looking at you, these people don't get why your rationality provides you with such happiness. Your baseline assumption is not neutral. It is science and rationality. But whoever said that science and rationality should necessarily be the baseline assumption? To me, both science and the supernatural have equal standing and both serve us in different ways.
The mistake is that people like you insist that science must be the ultimate arbiter of reality BECAUSE it does away with supernatural claims. I say that science can never hope to prove supernatural or paranormal phenomenon because these things by their nature defy logical explanation, because they are illogical. And so the insisting to be allowed to use science to measure what is real is folly and arrogance.
Science is meant to measure the world, not to attack, ridicule or do away with all other possible systems of explanation. Please try to understand that.
Quote:
I've even heard religious people say they would commit suicide and or go chaotic and kill everyone if their god didn't exist. That is fucking hilarious and equally disturbing at the same time. What is so wrong in that we are humans on planet Earth that is situated in a super vast Universe that might as well be infinite to us? Isn't that enough? You still need a god? You still need to believe in magic so you don't slit your wrists? You can't metaphorically and literally just stop and look at a flower and appreciate it? It has to have some supernatural meaning or else you aren't content?
If anything is sad it's those people. Those people who aren't content with their own lives so they have to make some bs up just to stay sane.
I agree that too much of a good thing becomes a bad thing. That is why both you and I should strife for a balanced view. You might not go out killing if science totally fails in someway, somehow. But some ultra scientific thinkers might. People who are so deeply psychologically invested in any specific system of explanation may lose it. Hence my continuing effort to balance rationality with intuition.
And have you ever wondered how it is that our language reflects this struggle?
I can use the word rationality, but what is a word that describes exactly the precise opposite? Intuition doesn't seem to cover it totally. Language is a logical construct, therefore it can find words to describe rational things very well. But intuition is not a strict definable situation, is it? In science, things are measured to be exact. But intuition by definition suddenly becomes hazy.
A word like creativity has the same issue. What is its opposite?
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: GilbertC06]
#18377103 - 06/06/13 10:02 AM (10 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Oh I get it It was confusing because he continued to call the other poster a fool.
-------------------- "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
|
clam_dude
stranger in astrange land

Registered: 09/10/03
Posts: 1,717
Loc: twilight zone
Last seen: 6 years, 3 months
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: Icelander]
#18377157 - 06/06/13 10:19 AM (10 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Let me clarify...using the word "scientism" makes one sound like a fool (to me anyway). I'm just trying to help ya'll out.
-------------------- "I would like to thank god for making me an atheist" - Ricky Gervais
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: clam_dude]
#18377483 - 06/06/13 11:47 AM (10 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Well it has nothing to do with science from what I can see. Still I think a case can be made for some knee jerk responses from some supposed proponents of the scientific method. They just don't know what they're talking about like many others.
-------------------- "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
|
GilbertC06
Omnipotent to a fault.


Registered: 01/29/13
Posts: 597
Last seen: 3 years, 3 months
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: Icelander]
#18378409 - 06/06/13 03:20 PM (10 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
So let's examine your examples. To me they all seem useful. If I encounter a bump in the road I do not think in terms of material science not in terms of paranormal phenomenon. As soon as you want to think about what it was, you enter into a realm of speculation. You can look back and see a hole in the road, measure it scientifically and get a satisfactory answer/conclusion. But what if a person would say, that hole was caused by a ghost, or a ghost made me drive my wheels over the hole? This to me sounds like an an alternative explanation that is as valid as the scientific one. Both can satisfy the mind but it just depends on preferences.
Wow. You are digging yourself a VERY deep hole if you are really going to argue this way...
I'll let you reconsider for a few hours or so.
Edited by GilbertC06 (06/06/13 03:20 PM)
|
GilbertC06
Omnipotent to a fault.


Registered: 01/29/13
Posts: 597
Last seen: 3 years, 3 months
|
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: GilbertC06]
#18378591 - 06/06/13 03:59 PM (10 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
The word 'choose' here is vital, isn't it. The fact that science cannot find this spirit world does not mean it doesn't exist. Why is evidence so important? Why must everything be provable? What sort of mind would demand such of reality? It is quite arrogant, is it not, to believe that only science can render the truth about the nature of reality and that other means of exploring reality must therefore be folly of some kind.
It is a choice we make. But you have never made the choice consciously. You see to have been indoctrinated very well and it sticks to you because it follows your personality, which is prominently rational - and you pride yourself on that I bet. zzrip, me, others here have a personality much less in that groove. To you this seems very strange, you don't get us. Personally I am 50-50, right in between rationality and intuition. I pride myself on that.
I like science, when it 'behaves' as it was intended for. And I like spirituality when it is similarly pure, so no scientism and no religion for me.
Even if I chose to be the most fundamental creationist christian who thought everything in the Bible was true... The Earth would still be billions of years old instead of thousands.
Even if I choose to believe I have a million dollars in my bank account, I don't.
Truth is not a choice. Reality is not a choice.
Belief is a choice and I do agree that people are indoctrinated into belief systems sometimes not by their own choice. People are born into religions and ways of thinking.
But guess what? Reality and truth stand by themselves. They don't need your acknowledgement. Gravity doesn't need you to believe in it to be true. Ironically an all powerful god needs faith and belief to be true...
Quote:
And yet, they ARE real in some sense, because we read these books, films have been made, they are alive in our human collective subconscience, somehow, in some strange way that makes them real, but not scientifically real. But these stories resonate in us, like mythology. There is a reason for that, these stories make us think, enlighten us, give cultural clues to right and wrong and give a fundament to our cultural psyche. How is that unreal? It is real, but in another way. But that doesn't make it less real or worse epiphenomenon.
I totally agree with you. Stories do change peoples minds in a very real way. In fact I myself am a writer and have told all types of stories and constantly add characters who are religious and who do believe in the supernatural. I recently wrote prose about me being in a comedy club and witnessing a handicapped person in the audience being told a handicap joke by a comedian and had an uplifting ending of the handicapped person just enjoying the show. Guess what? A girl told me she was very moved by it and then started to ask me questions as if I was actually there. I told her the truth and said it was all fiction.
Yeah stories can change humans profoundly, but it does not mean the the story is LITERALLY TRUE. There is a reason books are separated between fiction and non-fiction. That is where you have to make the distinction. That is where you have to draw the line. That is where you tell a kid:
"Hey I know this book is about a murdering psychopath but it is not true and it's only a piece of art that is not meant to be taken literally."
You have just then prevented a kid possibly adopting a hazardous mentality because he perceived the book to be "real".
And the same thing should be said about a book that promotes: racism, sexism, violence, human sacrafices, and things that promote fear in people. That book is the Bible.
Quote:
That sums it up, agreed? You make a mistake here believing that these other people 'need' something supernatural to be happy while you seem blind to the fact that looking at you, these people don't get why your rationality provides you with such happiness. Your baseline assumption is not neutral. It is science and rationality. But whoever said that science and rationality should necessarily be the baseline assumption? To me, both science and the supernatural have equal standing and both serve us in different ways.
The mistake is that people like you insist that science must be the ultimate arbiter of reality BECAUSE it does away with supernatural claims. I say that science can never hope to prove supernatural or paranormal phenomenon because these things by their nature defy logical explanation, because they are illogical. And so the insisting to be allowed to use science to measure what is real is folly and arrogance.
Science is meant to measure the world, not to attack, ridicule or do away with all other possible systems of explanation. Please try to understand that.
This is explained above. Science and rationality stand by themselves. Someone can believe all they want that they can fly, but if they jump off the building, without any equipment, they will fall.
No. I never said science does away with supernatural claims. On the contrary, science itself is not even interested in the supernatural because there is no evidence. There is nothing. Nada, zip, zero. You don't see scientist investigating comic books. And people wouldn't even be talking about the supernatural really, EXCEPT there is a huge percentage of people who buy into it.
Imagine if people thought that the Movie Blade was based on reality. That they truly believed in it as much as people believe in religions now. Guess what would happen? Those people would claim they would know certain people were vampires and that the world was controlled by vampires and that they should kill them all. And then you would hear on the news some assassination attempts and people getting hurt and killed.
That is what YOU don't understand. You think believing in the supernatural is harmless. You think that believing in something without evidence is harmless. Well guess what? It isn't. People do kill other people over ideology and religion. It is a problem. I's an aspect of society that has done so much harm. You know what you never see? Someone who believes in science and then has to kill someone because they didn't. You know why? Because it stands by itself, unlike faith.
Quote:
I agree that too much of a good thing becomes a bad thing. That is why both you and I should strife for a balanced view. You might not go out killing if science totally fails in someway, somehow. But some ultra scientific thinkers might. People who are so deeply psychologically invested in any specific system of explanation may lose it. Hence my continuing effort to balance rationality with intuition.
And have you ever wondered how it is that our language reflects this struggle?
I can use the word rationality, but what is a word that describes exactly the precise opposite? Intuition doesn't seem to cover it totally. Language is a logical construct, therefore it can find words to describe rational things very well. But intuition is not a strict definable situation, is it? In science, things are measured to be exact. But intuition by definition suddenly becomes hazy.
A word like creativity has the same issue. What is its opposite?
Science itself cannot fundamentally fail. A claim by a scientist may or may not be true. And if something new is found then it is just added. It is just modified. It happens all the time. We learn more things everyday.
You know what doesn't change? You know what can't change or else the whole thing is undermined? Christianity. Sure they change petty things like what types of colors they use during mass, a few words in the prayer. But you know what they can't change? The Bible. They can read it and say they think it means different things but they an never go in and edit an ancient text that was made before people knew about viruses. There are no actual questions being asked in religion. No one is saying "What if there is no God?" "What if Satan isn't real?" They are bound in this very old way of thinking and they are set in their ways.
And the answer to your question is very simple:
Irrational.
And the whole creative thing. No one is saying don't be creative. I'm not saying people should not see movies and read books. But once people take them as reality is when the problem occurs.
Edited by GilbertC06 (06/06/13 04:18 PM)
|
|