Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: November 18, 2024, 12:34 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Atheism the unscientific belief (part one, two, and three)
RE: Atheism. The UNscientific belief (part two)
(September 29, 2015 at 3:00 pm)Simon Moon Wrote:
(September 29, 2015 at 10:04 am)Little Rik Wrote: The fact that you went through doesn't mean that you got it right.  Lightbulb

Belief is the state of mind in which a person thinks something to be the case..................

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belief

Yes, belief is the psychological state in which one accepts a premise or proposition as being true. 
The problem is (which I'm sure you will not understand, but here goes anyway), when someone disbelieves a claim, they do not necessarily believe the opposite claim by default. 
So, when we say we do not believe your claims, we do not, by default believe they are false. We just don't believe you have been able to support your claims enough to accept them as being true.
And on a side note, there are good reasons to believe something, and there are bad reasons. 
Good reasons:
Demonstrable, repeatable, falsifiable evidence. 
Valid and sound logic.
Bad reasons:
Personal experience. 
Anecdotal evidence. 
Ancient texts. 
The strengths of ones beliefs should be proportional to the strength of the evidence. The type of evidence that you provide is low strength.


You go round and around in circle saying so many things that mean absolutely nothing.
When you guys say........THE CONSCIOUSNESS IS A PRODUCT OF THE BRAIN, you state or make a claim but this claim doesn't have any evidence to support his validity so you can not say that is all about disbelieving a claim and similar bullshit.
This is crap.
Your argument is a total crap.  Banghead   Hi  Banghead
Reply
RE: Atheism. The UNscientific belief (part two)
(September 30, 2015 at 10:42 am)Little Rik Wrote: How the hell can physical science be able to investigate something outside his competence as the consciousness?  I'm all ears!

Consciousness is the result of physical processes.

And science is, by definition, capable of investigating anything that exists, because science is just the art of observing things and making rational conclusions based on those observations. To say that something cannot be examined scientifically is to say that it cannot be observed - but, if it cannot be observed, it does not exist, by definition.

For those who have never met me before, note the use of the word "cannot" here, not just "currently cannot" or "cannot practically". Existence does not require that we have observed something - just that it is, in some way, however difficult, observable.

(September 30, 2015 at 10:53 am)Little Rik Wrote: When you guys say........THE CONSCIOUSNESS IS A PRODUCT OF THE BRAIN, you state or make a claim but this claim doesn't have any evidence to support his validity so you can not say that is all about disbelieving a claim and similar bullshit.

Well, no. We do have evidence. In fact, we have literally everything ever experienced by anyone, ever as evidence.

Literally every experience anyone has ever had is not only consistent with the idea of consciousness arising from brain activity, but only makes sense if this is the case. For more direct evidence, there is the fact that no one without a brain (or, in the case of some simpler animals, some sort of primitive nervous system acting as a stand-in) is conscious, and that rendering the brain inoperable makes that being no longer conscious. Damaging, altering, or interacting with the brain also alters consciousness directly.

Everything that we know about the brain and consciousness - and we know quite a lot more than I think you realize - indicates that consciousness is a product of the brain.

If you believe otherwise, the onus is upon you to prove your position.
"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
  - A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Reply
RE: Atheism. The UNscientific belief (part two)
(September 30, 2015 at 10:53 am)Little Rik Wrote: You go round and around in circle saying so many things that mean absolutely nothing.[...]

It may appear that way to you - that's because you don't have the intelligence required to even begin to comprehend things. Your dog thinks the same about pretty much everything you say.

You never thought about that, did you, dumbass?

I'm all ears! Tongue I'm all ears!

You're lucky stupidity doesn't hurt - you'd never stop screaming...
"The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one." - George Bernard Shaw
Reply
RE: Atheism. The UNscientific belief (part two)
(September 30, 2015 at 10:53 am)Little Rik Wrote: When you guys say........THE CONSCIOUSNESS IS A PRODUCT OF THE BRAIN, you state or make a claim but this claim doesn't have any evidence to support his validity so you can not say that is all about disbelieving a claim and similar bullshit.
This is crap.
Your argument is a total crap.  Banghead     Hi  Banghead

Here's the thing:  Scientists have mapped thought processes in the human brain.  We have watched people think, measured how they think, etc.  Measurements have been made after death.  Electrical impulses have ceased, nothing happening there.

So if you are going to assert that our argument is total crap, then the burden of proof is upon YOU.  Prove it.  Show us a ghost.  Show us a spirit.  Make it measurable and film-able and verifiable.  Prove that disembodied intelligence exists and the argument is over.  You win. And that is the ONLY way to win.
"The family that prays together...is brainwashing their children."- Albert Einstein
Reply
RE: Atheism. The UNscientific belief (part two)
(September 30, 2015 at 10:53 am)Little Rik Wrote: You go round and around in circle saying so many things that mean absolutely nothing.
When you guys say........THE CONSCIOUSNESS IS A PRODUCT OF THE BRAIN, you state or make a claim but this claim doesn't have any evidence to support his validity so you can not say that is all about disbelieving a claim and similar bullshit.
This is crap.
Your argument is a total crap.  Banghead     Hi  Banghead

Having a bad day?
[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]
Reply
RE: Atheism. The UNscientific belief (part two)
(September 30, 2015 at 10:53 am)Little Rik Wrote: You go round and around in circle saying so many things that mean absolutely nothing.
When you guys say........THE CONSCIOUSNESS IS A PRODUCT OF THE BRAIN, you state or make a claim but this claim doesn't have any evidence to support his validity so you can not say that is all about disbelieving a claim and similar bullshit.
This is crap.
Your argument is a total crap.  Banghead     Hi  Banghead

All the evidence actually does point to consciousness being a product of a physical brain.

People can be victims of traumatic brain injuries, and their personality becomes completely different. 

If consciousness is not a product of a physical brain, please point out at least one example of a consciousness that exists, sans physical brain. 


[/quote]

You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
Reply
RE: Atheism. The UNscientific belief (part two)
(September 30, 2015 at 10:53 am)Little Rik Wrote:
(September 29, 2015 at 3:00 pm)Simon Moon Wrote: Yes, belief is the psychological state in which one accepts a premise or proposition as being true. 
The problem is (which I'm sure you will not understand, but here goes anyway), when someone disbelieves a claim, they do not necessarily believe the opposite claim by default. 
So, when we say we do not believe your claims, we do not, by default believe they are false. We just don't believe you have been able to support your claims enough to accept them as being true.
And on a side note, there are good reasons to believe something, and there are bad reasons. 
Good reasons:
Demonstrable, repeatable, falsifiable evidence. 
Valid and sound logic.
Bad reasons:
Personal experience. 
Anecdotal evidence. 
Ancient texts. 
The strengths of ones beliefs should be proportional to the strength of the evidence. The type of evidence that you provide is low strength.


You go round and around in circle saying so many things that mean absolutely nothing.
When you guys say........THE CONSCIOUSNESS IS A PRODUCT OF THE BRAIN, you state or make a claim but this claim doesn't have any evidence to support his validity so you can not say that is all about disbelieving a claim and similar bullshit.
This is crap.
Your argument is a total crap.  Banghead     Hi  Banghead

Ok, would you like to have someone completely shut down your brain so we can see if you're still conscious after that? If you're confident about your position, then you should be ok with that.
Reply
RE: Atheism. The UNscientific belief (part two)
(September 30, 2015 at 2:13 pm)Irrational Wrote:
(September 30, 2015 at 10:53 am)Little Rik Wrote: You go round and around in circle saying so many things that mean absolutely nothing.
When you guys say........THE CONSCIOUSNESS IS A PRODUCT OF THE BRAIN, you state or make a claim but this claim doesn't have any evidence to support his validity so you can not say that is all about disbelieving a claim and similar bullshit.
This is crap.
Your argument is a total crap.  Banghead     Hi  Banghead

Ok, would you like to have someone completely shut down your brain so we can see if you're still conscious after that? If you're confident about your position, then you should be ok with that.


Or explain why people born without brains (anancephalic) have no consciousnesses?



I think this needs to be emphasized to Little Rik as often as possible, but here it is again:

Why is it every time, without fail, we see evidence of consciousness, it is associated with a physical brain. 

And, as of yet, no one has ever been able to provide demonstrable evidence of  consciousness that exists without a physical brain.

You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
Reply
RE: Atheism. The UNscientific belief (part two)
Moderator Notice
I'd like to put down the personal attacks being thrown about in this thread, and remind everyone that we are here for a civil discussion. 

That said, carry on
If I were to create self aware beings knowing fully what they would do in their lifetimes, I sure wouldn't create a HELL for the majority of them to live in infinitely! That's not Love, that's sadistic. Therefore a truly loving god does not exist!

Quote:The sin is against an infinite being (God) unforgiven infinitely, therefore the punishment is infinite.

Dead wrong.  The actions of a finite being measured against an infinite one are infinitesimal and therefore merit infinitesimal punishment.

Quote:Some people deserve hell.

I say again:  No exceptions.  Punishment should be equal to the crime, not in excess of it.  As soon as the punishment is greater than the crime, the punisher is in the wrong.

[Image: tumblr_n1j4lmACk61qchtw3o1_500.gif]
Reply
RE: Atheism. The UNscientific belief (part two)
I'm too lazy to read all the posts so I'll just give my 1.5 cents (i'm too poor to give all 2 cents)

plainly this.

The religious TELL us to believe. We say show us evidence. They say here it is. Then we look and say that's not clear evidence by any stretch of the imagination. The scientific method agrees way more with us than them.
remember lack of evidence is not confirmation and the burden of proof is always on the one who asserts the idea.
We did not assert the idea that there isn't a god just that their is no proof for one/or more.

Then the religious do EVERYTHING in their power to convince us that we should follow their religion.

WHY?

It is always a hard road for an atheist to remain on this narrow track of being open to possibilities and at the same time remaining true to fact.

As always the religious will use this open mind to drive a wedge just so they can "save" another soul.

That they have to drive out all doubt around them shows that they are insecure about their faith.
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Christian and Atheism Worldwide Demographics: Current Realities and Future Trends. Nishant Xavier 55 4204 July 9, 2023 at 6:07 am
Last Post: no one
  How do I deal with the belief that maybe... Just maybe... God exists and I'm... Gentle_Idiot 75 8656 November 23, 2022 at 5:34 pm
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  How may one refute the religious stonewall argument "all is one"? Osopatata 29 3365 December 21, 2020 at 4:05 pm
Last Post: HappySkeptic
  Philosophical Failures of Christian Apologetics, Part 11: The Holy Spirit Cepheus Ace 18 3694 June 22, 2020 at 7:45 pm
Last Post: Fake Messiah
  Belief in God is a clinic Interaktive 55 7422 April 1, 2019 at 10:55 pm
Last Post: LostLocke
  Is atheism a belief? Agnostico 1023 105696 March 16, 2019 at 1:42 pm
Last Post: Catharsis
  Isn't Atheism anti Christian than anti religious? Western part atleast Kibbi 14 3851 October 5, 2018 at 9:09 pm
Last Post: Dr H
  Do you know that homeopathy doesn't work, or do you just lack belief that it does? I_am_not_mafia 24 6128 August 25, 2018 at 4:34 am
Last Post: EgoDeath
  Two Myths I Wish Atheists Would Stop Buying Into Rhondazvous 26 5390 June 7, 2018 at 8:21 pm
Last Post: chimp3
  Why Atheism/Secular Humanism... Part II TheReal 53 27149 April 23, 2018 at 4:48 pm
Last Post: Mystic



Users browsing this thread: 4 Guest(s)