Jason Lisle: Creationism exists, but atheism doesn't
|
Jason Lisle: Creationism exists, but atheism doesn't
|
 (May 13, 2015 at 7:51 pm)Stimbo Wrote: Maybe he's got a point. I know for a fact that I don't exist. Ah an Astimboist eh. I would like to see you prove that you don't exist. You can fix ignorance, you can't fix stupid. Tinkety Tonk and down with the Nazis.  (May 14, 2015 at 3:54 pm)orangebox21 Wrote:(May 13, 2015 at 3:28 pm)KevinM1 Wrote: It's just the same apologist "try harder" BS.It is true that the conclusions we draw are filtered through our worldview. That being said, if our worldview is flawed or even self-refuting, we wouldn't be able to trust any conclusions that we make. Well, since belief in the Christian god is flawed, for a multitude of reasons....
"I was thirsty for everything, but blood wasn't my style" - Live, "Voodoo Lady"
 RE: Jason Lisle: Creationism exists, but atheism doesn't
May 18, 2015 at 3:41 pm
(This post was last modified: May 18, 2015 at 3:43 pm by orangebox21.)
(May 18, 2015 at 10:53 am)robvalue Wrote: Generally, yes. If you can't test something, you can't learn anything about it. It may be you can measure it directly, or else you can assess it in some way that is fairly objective. To clarify, and please answer yes or no, is empiricism the sole means by which knowledge can be obtained? (May 18, 2015 at 10:53 am)robvalue Wrote: Can you give me an example of something apart from religion that is untestable/unfalsifiable that you can learn about?The statement: "rocks are hard." Given that statement, observation, and inductive deduction we can conclude that all rocks are hard. Yet, the conclusion all rocks are hard is unfalsifiable. So if a person believes that all rocks are hard, he/she does so non-empirically. And if a person's belief is that empiricism is the sole means by which knowledge can be obtained, he/she believes that "all rocks are hard" without knowledge [a fabrication]. (May 18, 2015 at 10:53 am)robvalue Wrote: It's a false dichotomy to say either you can measure something exactly or you can know nothing about it.I agree. (May 18, 2015 at 10:53 am)robvalue Wrote: People always go to emotions and stuff. We still have a lot of evidence regarding people's emotions, including being able to scan people's brains. Just because it isn't totally reliable, doesn't mean we can't learn about it. However with religion there is nothing to test, no falsifiable hypothesis.Are you then assuming without a falsifiable hypothesis we cannot learn? Are you saying that apart from empiricism we cannot learn anything? (May 18, 2015 at 10:53 am)robvalue Wrote: No, we can't learn about everything because we don't even know what it is that we don't know. But that doesn't mean that we should make up stuff to fill any gaps that may or may not be there.I agree. (May 18, 2015 at 1:01 pm)KevinM1 Wrote:By what standard is the belief in the Christian god flawed?(May 14, 2015 at 3:54 pm)orangebox21 Wrote: It is true that the conclusions we draw are filtered through our worldview. That being said, if our worldview is flawed or even self-refuting, we wouldn't be able to trust any conclusions that we make. If it could be proven beyond doubt that God exists... and that He is the one spoken of in the Bible... would you repent of your sins and place your faith in Jesus Christ? 
If a hypothesis is unfalsifiable it's also unconfirmable...
In every country and every age, the priest had been hostile to Liberty.
- Thomas Jefferson  (May 15, 2015 at 4:12 pm)orangebox21 Wrote: He would most likely demonstrate the atheist worldview cannot account for the entirety of our reality, and therefore anyone claiming to be an atheist is doing so from a position that is not consistent with reality (see Van Til's TAG).I don't think he can actually demonstrate that. He'd have to prove that reality requires a god. The best attempts at that seem to be either a gaps argument or an argument from design, and neither of those is sufficient.
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape- like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered."
-Stephen Jay Gould  (May 18, 2015 at 3:43 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote: If a hypothesis is unfalsifiable it's also unconfirmable... I like this. Pithy, to the point and not too taxing for the fundie 'brain'.
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist. This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair. Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second. That means there's a situation vacant.'
 RE: Jason Lisle: Creationism exists, but atheism doesn't
May 19, 2015 at 6:17 am
(This post was last modified: May 19, 2015 at 6:58 am by robvalue.)
Orange: "All rocks are hard" is a falsifiable claim. If you can find one rock that isn't hard, then it is falsified.
My belief is that empiricism of some form is needed to gain knowledge. But I don't claim that I know this absolutely to be true. If there is a counter example, I'd be interested to hear it. What exactly "knowledge" is must be carefully defined if it is to be discussed in detail. It's not a clear cut term. This is an interesting video about "knowledge", while deconstructing presup arguments. I'd recommend watching it all, but he gets right into "knowledge" at about 11:00. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Y1f9G4Bk_c Feel free to send me a private message.
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists. Index of useful threads and discussions Index of my best videos Quickstart guide to the forum 
I doubt very seriously that there is a way to define knowledge that both atheists and theists will agree on. If we just make it clear what we mean, the theist will be forced to come up with convoluted explanation and obfuscations for what he means and why his beliefs don't dovetail with reality. He will never acknowledge this, but he can't help revealing this. There's an African proverb that betrays the theist's attempt to explain himself: Where words fail, more will not prevail.
The god who allows children to be raped out of respect for the free will choice of the rapist, but punishes gay men for engaging in mutually consensual sex couldn't possibly be responsible for an intelligently designed universe.
I may defend your right to free speech, but i won't help you pass out flyers. Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities. --Voltaire Nietzsche isn't dead. How do I know he lives? He lives in my mind. (June 9, 2015 at 3:03 pm)Rhondazvous Wrote: Where words fail, more will not prevail. Makes note for future reference. You can fix ignorance, you can't fix stupid. Tinkety Tonk and down with the Nazis.  (June 9, 2015 at 3:03 pm)Rhondazvous Wrote: I doubt very seriously that there is a way to define knowledge that both atheists and theists will agree on. If we just make it clear what we mean, the theist will be forced to come up with convoluted explanation and obfuscations for what he means and why his beliefs don't dovetail with reality. He will never acknowledge this, but he can't help revealing this. There's an African proverb that betrays the theist's attempt to explain himself: Where words fail, more will not prevail. The funny thing is that IF and this is a big if, you are in classroom discussing things that have no obvious religious impact, theists tend to define knowledge in about the same terms as atheists. It's only when religious beliefs enter the mix that knowledge begins to change definition. . . In fact it's definitional special pleading.
If there is a god, I want to believe that there is a god. If there is not a god, I want to believe that there is no god.
|
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Jason Lisle: Creationism exists, but atheism doesn't
