porchrat
Honorary Master
Of course. To claim otherwise seems to me to be illogical.
-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: Have you ever ordered a product online and received a fake knock-off?
Muslim medical students boycotting lectures on evolution
TheHiveMind
Banned
You going to defend the tokoloshe too?
Apparently there is as great a chance of it being real as not being real, because you can't prove it's not. That's how that works.
Nerfherder
Honorary Master
MightyMuffinMan
Expert Member
wp gg. guys you'e lost ...now bow down
falcon786
Honorary Master
Good your reasoning is still intact,we can then agree that its 50/50 and there is no right or wrong way correct?You do whats good for your heart and I do whats good for mine agreed?
Same as above agreed?its 50/50 can you really criticize someone that believes or someone that doesn't?
falcon786
Honorary Master
Im not even going to answer that as it has no relevance to this topic at all and besides its rhetorical.
Nerfherder
Honorary Master
Schrodinger's god ?
So because god might exist in the future we must believe in him now ?
Nerfherder
Honorary Master
Checkmate
Its cool, I have to leave my job based on fake science to drive home in my car that may exist in the future, to go to my house that I believe in.
Atheists may not have contributed to anything in any way, and why would we be expecting this, seeing as atheism isn't some organisation. At least they don't behave like the "religion of peace" in the above example.
Those "faults" of the "religion of peace" impact on us all, and should be pointed out.
porchrat
Honorary Master
Not really that simple. I need evidence, you don't.
To me the claim "there is no god(s)" is just as illogical as the claim "there is a god(s)". You don't know. Which is my response. I don't know. It is the only logical stance that I can see.
TheHiveMind
Banned
This appears to be a rather simple concept. I understand this to imply at least two different things. Firstly, that there are things that exist outside our brain whether we exist or not. Scholastics called this real being or actual being. “Real being” is basically anything that has, or can have, existence independent of our brains and our actual knowledge of it
.But it can also mean that our brains are able to intellectually abstract sensual experience to generate certain facts about what has independent existence separately from our "brain-generated" facts. The Scholastics labeled such facts as ideal being. Ideal being is any thing in so far as it is known. See here for example if interested.
So yes, I agree, reality is based on facts that have actual being as well as ideal being.
This is actually a very strange way of looking at things. Aquinas' 5 ways use change (1st), causality (2nd), contingency (3rd), degrees of being (4th) and final causality (5th) as premises in proofs that can in principle demonstrate the existence of something that just is necessary being itself (3rd), whose essence is its existence (2nd), that is intelligence analogously speaking (5th), that just is good (4th) and is purely actual (1st) and that is what classical theists call God. If such arguments are successful, and they appear to be successful to me (and you are welcome to discuss this via PM if you are interested), then it just logically follows that every contingent being that has ever existed and will ever exist is evidence for God.
There are at least two ways to interpret this. Firstly you may claim that some things are unprovable. For example you can't prove married bachelors exist. I agree with this. But this just begs the question, are you saying God is unprovable in this? If yes then you are essentially claiming God is a logical contradiction without proving it.
The second way one may interpret this is that things that are not proven now are not real and by real I understand it to mean it has no real being (see above). But this is simply fallacious for obvious reasons.
If it it the first way then it just begs the question, if it is the second way then it is simply fallacious. And if you look at Aquinas' five ways, you can logically defend classical theism based on deductive logic.
There is no evidence that removal of religion will result in less wars. If anything, the evidence of the last century suggests that most of the major wars are as a result of ideologies not associated with the doctrines of any religion.
Aristotle just improved their ideas
.
Last edited:
I didn't say atheists haven't contributed. Of course atheists have contributed to many things, good and bad. I am just saying it is not because of their atheism since it is a pretty useless. It is just a negative statement towards theism, nothing more.
falcon786
Honorary Master
I see yes,so you saying that an atheist can safely say I dont know,but he cannot say there is no GOD correct?
Jamals argument makes sense,an atheist can say I BELIEVE IMO that there is no god,While a religious person can say I BELIEVE IMO that there is a GOD correct.
As far as stance is concerned yes the logical proof is simply non existent so its a "i don't know" situation as you say.This would hold true for both sides.
It is actually,I dont believe in it but I cant disprove it.Unlike unicorns etc apparently sane people living today claimed to have seen it.I personally dont buy it but I cant laugh at them or mock them since I cant even prove it lol how ignorant(AND ARROGANT!) would that be of me to mock them?
STS
Mafia Detective
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2009
- Messages
- 32,797
- Reaction score
- 2,943
it depends on how you want to settle something.
if i tell you that there is a text document in your my documents, and you go there and there is nothing, you can say that it isn't there. i can say that it is there, you just can't see it. you say that you've checked and that you're sure. i say that you can't prove that there ISN'T a text file there, and you say you can, and you call me to show me.
now let's pretend hidden folders and files are turned off. we've set the criteria, there is no 1.) textfile 2.) in the specific folder. we may find other files and we may find textfiles in other folders, but we cannot find a textfile in that folder. do we remain agnostic to the fact that there could be a textfile in that folder, even though we've spent ages looking at it?
in the same way we've set the criteria for a God/Gods. they are apparent to other people, but not so apparent to others. if they were apparent to people as textfiles were, they should be easily conveyable, but it isn't.
/end of poor ramble
TheHiveMind
Banned
You can't disprove unicorns. If tokoloshe is 50/50 then everything that cannot be proven is 50/50
That's what makes your logic such a failure
I wonder, are you as adament about informing muslims that there is a 50% chance they are wrong and it's all bs? Didn't think so.
falcon786
Honorary Master
now let's pretend hidden folders and files are turned off.
/end of poor ramble
Aah now theres the thing,we as humans cant see the option to unhide folder,to a newbie computer user that doesnt know about pc's he will be willing to bet his life or everything that there is no text file in that folder but the reality is that IT WAS ALWAYS THERE.With the right knowledge we may be able to get to that information,but unlike windows theres always a reason that system files in this world are hidden.....we are simply users of this world...theres no need for us to be able to reprogram the pc(or the universe in this case).
It not its the truth,thats how science works.
And yes Im sure they are aware of it if they are intelligent,only silly people will think that they can prove GODs existence,but BELIEVING in GOD is a conscious choice which people make.Thats why its called FAITH.
Nicodeamus
Honorary Master
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2006
- Messages
- 14,477
- Reaction score
- 4,530
apples and oranges. You can show him. "hey there is an option to unhide a folder".Aah now theres the thing,we as humans cant see the option to unhide folder,to a newbie computer user that doesnt know about pc's he will be willing to bet his life or everything that there is no text file in that folder but the reality is that IT WAS ALWAYS THERE.With the right knowledge we may be able to get to that information,but unlike windows theres always a reason that system files in this world are hidden.....we are simply users of this world...theres no need for us to be able to reprogram the pc(or the universe in this case).
You can't show God. - fact.
[/quote] Faith seems to be just another word for guessing. Please disprove my all knowing fly tea my that is orbiting the sun. You have to realize that any belief in fantasy, myth or fables is just as good as believing in a God. I can have the best faith in the Lord of the Rings, fact is if I can't prove that mordor exists (apart from Drop zone in Pretoria) then there is no LOTR.
porchrat
Honorary Master
Well not "safely", just logically. I don't see how one can logically claim that there is/are no god(s), just as I can't see how one can logically claim there is/are god(s).
I'm sure there are some atheists that take the "there are definitely no gods" position. I'm guessing they are in the minority though.
Yes. For me it is about believing versus knowing.
I have encountered folks that insist they know for certain but have no way to objectively demonstrate it. Claiming to know something for certain without a way to verify it seems very strange to me.
@ falcon786
The only way to prove something exists or does not exist is via deductive logic. For example, I can prove a married bachelor does not exist as follows:
1) All bachelors are not married.
2) All married men are not bachelors.
3) Therefore a married bachelor does not exist.
Similarly, Aquinas' five ways or other arguments for the existence of God can be used as proofs. Read up on them. Sure, one can say not everyone will accept them, this is perfectly normal. A person may not accept the proof for the Pythagorean theroem by claiming that 2D planes don't exist or that it is just all made up nonsense or whatever. But that does not mean there are no proofs for the existence of God or proofs for the Pythagorean theroem. There are, just not everyone will accept them for whatever reason.
The only way to prove something exists or does not exist is via deductive logic. For example, I can prove a married bachelor does not exist as follows:
1) All bachelors are not married.
2) All married men are not bachelors.
3) Therefore a married bachelor does not exist.
Similarly, Aquinas' five ways or other arguments for the existence of God can be used as proofs. Read up on them. Sure, one can say not everyone will accept them, this is perfectly normal. A person may not accept the proof for the Pythagorean theroem by claiming that 2D planes don't exist or that it is just all made up nonsense or whatever. But that does not mean there are no proofs for the existence of God or proofs for the Pythagorean theroem. There are, just not everyone will accept them for whatever reason.