(January 16, 2017 at 6:18 pm)ApeNotKillApe Wrote:

(January 16, 2017 at 6:15 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: No one said it did..

Think about how many different  "faiths" that exists they can't all be true now can they?

No, they can't.

We can't even be sure that any of them are true. Maybe none are.

(January 15, 2017 at 9:37 pm)Stimbo Wrote:

(January 15, 2017 at 7:14 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: "Why is there something rather than nothing?" There just is.
"Why does the world have a rational order?" It just does.
"Why do causes produce regular effects?" They just do.

Yeah, those are reasonable answers...not.

Well, let's try your alternative:

"Why is there something rather than nothing?" God did it.
"Why does the world have a rational order?" God did it.
"Why do causes produce regular effects?" God does it.

Are those answers more reasonable?

Except those do not fairly represent the answers....

---

(January 15, 2017 at 8:05 pm)Faith No More Wrote:

(January 15, 2017 at 7:14 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: "Why is there something rather than nothing?" There just is.
"Why does the world have a rational order?" It just does.
"Why do causes produce regular effects?" They just do.

Yeah, those are reasonable answers...not.

Let's try this again...

"Why is there something rather than nothing?" I don't know.  Let's investigate.  Is this even a sensible question?
"Why does the world have a rational order?" I don't know.  Let's investigate, even though I'm not sure how it could have an irrational order.
"Why do causes produce regular effects?"   I don't know, but is it even possible that causes could produce irregular effects?

Same difference. No answer at all.

(January 16, 2017 at 6:23 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote:

(January 15, 2017 at 9:37 pm)Stimbo Wrote: Well, let's try your alternative:

"Why is there something rather than nothing?" God did it.
"Why does the world have a rational order?" God did it.
"Why do causes produce regular effects?" God does it.

Are those answers more reasonable?

Except those do not fairly represent the answers....

---

(January 15, 2017 at 8:05 pm)Faith No More Wrote: Let's try this again...

"Why is there something rather than nothing?" I don't know.  Let's investigate.  Is this even a sensible question?
"Why does the world have a rational order?" I don't know.  Let's investigate, even though I'm not sure how it could have an irrational order.
"Why do causes produce regular effects?"   I don't know, but is it even possible that causes could produce irregular effects?

Same difference. No answer at all.

"I don't know" IS an answer.  Theists often seem to have the belief that admitting you don't know something is some kind of weakness.  On the contrary, the weakness is pretending that you know something you don't.  It's a sign of a weak mind.

(January 16, 2017 at 5:17 pm)Simon Moon Wrote: Please just stop with the strawman arguments already!

While there are some physicists that say the universe came from nothing, they do not mean 'nothing' as in complete nonexistence.

The definition that most physicists use for nothing is "no space at all, and no time, no particles, no fields, no laws of nature".

*emphasis mine*

You kind of make my point, if none of the above exist, then you are dealing with the supernatural by definition.

---

(January 16, 2017 at 6:29 pm)Asmodee Wrote: "I don't know" IS an answer.  Theists often seem to have the belief that admitting you don't know something is some kind of weakness.  On the contrary, the weakness is pretending that you know something you don't.  It's a sign of a weak mind.

Except you guys never lead with "I don't know".

Calling something a fairy tale implies you DO know...

Not knowing means you can't say one way or the other.

(January 15, 2017 at 9:45 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(January 15, 2017 at 9:13 pm)Aroura Wrote: Please point out how it is bias?

It may seem like common sense, but you know common sense is just flat out wrong as often as not.

There may be specific I stances where religion influenced a person to do a good thing, bit the point is, people n general will do those good things even without religion. Unless you honestly believe all of us on this forum dont do good things?

And evil people will do bad things regardless of religion. Believe in god and thinking they will go to hell didn't stop any number of serial killers and such. Lack of religion doesn't make a bad person more evil, either.

But for a good , nonviolent, normal person to become a murders requires some extreme, and religion can provide that extreme, though it is not the only influence that can.

It's not bias to say religion does not cause morality, its fact. To be clear, its the other way round. Human Morality causes religion. All evidence points to this.

I understand you will continue to disagree, otherwise what would be the point of belief? Which is really my point, too.

Hey, btw, why does a gorilla adopt a kitten and care for it she it could easily rip it to bits or squash it? The kitten does not feed the gorilla, it is not really anything to the gorilla except extra work. Yes, it gets cuddles, but A snake would eat the kitten without a second thought, even if the kitten tried to give it the same cuddles.

Neither the gorilla nor the snake are good or evil, unless you are the kitten of course, they are just acting according to their natures. And so it is with humans. Our natures are social, like the gorilla. We don't need a priest to tell us to care for the kitten, we just naturally do it. Good ones anyway. The bad ones light it on fire. With or without the idea of god.

(I'm not saying people can't be moral without religion. I would never take that stance.)

There can be positive and negative influences in ppl's lives. To say religion can ever only influence ppl negatively and never positively, really doesn't make any sense.

Well, at least I can have a discussion with you where we disagree and it stays civil. I really do appreciate that. Thank you.

(January 16, 2017 at 6:23 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote:

(January 15, 2017 at 9:37 pm)Stimbo Wrote: Well, let's try your alternative:

"Why is there something rather than nothing?" God did it.
"Why does the world have a rational order?" God did it.
"Why do causes produce regular effects?" God does it.

Are those answers more reasonable?

Except those do not fairly represent the answers....

Oh? Then what would fairly represent the theist's answer to those questions?

(January 16, 2017 at 3:05 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:

(January 16, 2017 at 2:46 pm)Stimbo Wrote: Are you seriously suggesting the Universe didn't begin?

No, what I'm saying is that trying to pretend that the universe having a creator is somehow more ridiculous than the universe creating itself is kinda delusional...

It's the notion of a "creator" itself which defines ridiculous in this instance.

(January 16, 2017 at 6:36 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:

(January 16, 2017 at 6:29 pm)Asmodee Wrote: "I don't know" IS an answer.  Theists often seem to have the belief that admitting you don't know something is some kind of weakness.  On the contrary, the weakness is pretending that you know something you don't.  It's a sign of a weak mind.

Except you guys never lead with "I don't know".

Calling something a fairy tale implies you DO know...

Not knowing means you can't say one way or the other.

This is bullshit. Not knowing doesn't preclude one from ruling out specific answers. And in the case of naturalists answering the question, it's often implied that what they don't know is a plausible naturalistic explanation. Supernatural explanations are unbounded. Unless you've got something better than magic as an explanation, you've got nothing. The number of potential magical beings that could be responsible is infinite, and you have no way of narrowing that pool to one.

(January 16, 2017 at 6:36 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:

(January 16, 2017 at 5:17 pm)Simon Moon Wrote: Please just stop with the strawman arguments already!

While there are some physicists that say the universe came from nothing, they do not mean 'nothing' as in complete nonexistence.

The definition that most physicists use for nothing is "no space at all, and no time, no particles, no fields, no laws of nature".

*emphasis mine*

You kind of make my point, if none of the above exist, then you are dealing with the supernatural by definition.

Absolutely not.

The laws of nature, and the all the other stuff mentioned, are the attributes of this universe. These things did not exist, at least in the way they exist in our current universe, until this universe existed.

Still no supernatural entity necessary.

---

(January 16, 2017 at 6:29 pm)Asmodee Wrote: "I don't know" IS an answer.  Theists often seem to have the belief that admitting you don't know something is some kind of weakness.  On the contrary, the weakness is pretending that you know something you don't.  It's a sign of a weak mind.

Quote:Except you guys never lead with "I don't know".

Calling something a fairy tale implies you DO know...

Not knowing means you can't say one way or the other.

Sorry, but not knowing the exact cause of the universe, does not mean we can't know, and rule out, what ancient myths are.

(January 16, 2017 at 6:56 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote:

(January 16, 2017 at 6:36 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: Except you guys never lead with "I don't know".

Calling something a fairy tale implies you DO know...

Not knowing means you can't say one way or the other.

This is bullshit.  Not knowing doesn't preclude one from ruling out specific answers.  And in the case of naturalists answering the question, it's often implied that what they don't know is a plausible naturalistic explanation.  Supernatural explanations are unbounded.  Unless you've got something better than magic as an explanation, you've got nothing.  The number of potential magical beings that could be responsible is infinite, and you have no way of narrowing that pool to one.

Wrong.

On what basis can you rule anything out if you don't know?

Say you haven't learn the concept of math, on what basis can you say 2+2= 4 is right or wrong if you don't know?