China does not exist

[Watson]

The argument goes like this, "If you believe in only things that you can touch and see, how can you believe Australia Exists?" Basically to prop up the idea that a materialist ideology is insufficient in asserting the existence of a country you've never been to. However it's a fallacious argument because you can assert Australia (or in this case, China) exists because we can see maps of Australia, we can call someone in Australia, we can meet people from Australia, etc...

This is not sufficient proof of Australia or China. The maps can be entirely doctored, total bullshit made up by people who want you to believe in China. Not only can you not prove that the calls are to people really from China, you can't prove that the person on the other end is even real or in the real place known as China.

The same idea applies to God in the sense that if he is real and exerts some type of influence on the reality we see, we could test it and come to a conclusion, but that's not the case.

What sort of influence do you want to see? For me, there are all kinds of examples of His influence.

As I've said many times before, if God is a transcendant being that does not influence this world, then why worship? If he does, then we should be able to substantially test for it.

He is a transcendant being but that does not mean that He does not influence this world. You are simply looking for the wrong kind of influence. Everythin gis connected. Look at the bigger picture.


Oh, and Saerules, I'm quite interested- why do you disagree that nothing can be new? It isn't a dig at what you said, I'm just curious to hear some food for thought.

[Rhizomorph13]

I flew over China right before I landed there and it looked much like the maps I've seen of the area. Once you smell the open sewers of China and see the coal dust all around you will know China. Anecdotal evidence for the win! Yeah, I know...

[Watson]

Liar.

[Rhizomorph13]

I'm not lying, I went there while I was employed with RadiSys to work on Nortel-Matra boards in their cell-phone network. They were multi-bus boards built by Intel. RadiSys bought the service contract and made ass-loads of money servicing that old technology.

[Eilonnwy]

This is not sufficient proof of Australia or China. The maps can be entirely doctored, total bullshit made up by people who want you to believe in China. Not only can you not prove that the calls are to people really from China, you can't prove that the person on the other end is even real or in the real place known as China.

I simply listed a small litany of reasons to accept the existence of Australia. These examples are testable and repeatable. You can poke holes in any single example, it's the sum of the evidence that makes the case.

What sort of influence do you want to see? For me, there are all kinds of examples of His influence.

Sure but they don't stand up to the rigors of the scientific method.
Here's one example: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/31/health/31pray.html

He is a transcendant being but that does not mean that He does not influence this world. You are simply looking for the wrong kind of influence. Everything is connected. Look at the bigger picture.

Sure. e_e This amounts to the same kind of argument where people say if you look for god and don't find him that you didn't look hard enough. Blame the person, not the deity who is supposed to be sooo powerful and benevolent that he'd want you to know about him so you can go to the big orgasm in the sky.

Obviously I disagree but I'm too busy to get into a full on discussion about it.

[Xyster]

This sounds like a rewording of the Brain in a jar argument.... China is not an exstrodinary claim so extrodinary evedence is not required, but saying you cought a 50 lb bluegill or seen someone walk on water you might need somthing more than hear say or 2nd hand stories to prove it...

But if reality is all a trick and nothing can be proven.. THEN NONE OF IT FUCKIN MATTERS.


But street performers fool people all the time... Or maybe Chris Angel or David Blane is the next messia.

[Watson]

I simply listed a small litany of reasons to accept the existence of Australia. These examples are testable and repeatable. You can poke holes in any single example, it's the sum of the evidence that makes the case.

So if you can poke holes in every single example, then why should I believe that China exists? I'v enever been there. Hell, perhaps somewhere down the line it was deemed beneficial to create an entirely false place and falsify evidence for such a place. So with that in mind, I believe that the person you called is really a government agent meant to trick me. The map you showed is just something made up, and you've been force-fed the idea that that place, and all those around it exist since birth.

You just can't accept that there are chinatheists, can you? (I'm joking, this thread is a joke, but it does prove a point.)

Sure but they don't stand up to the rigors of the scientific method.
Here's one example: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/31/health/31pray.html

Nothing is credibile without having experienced it. Still then, no experience is credible without faith.

Sure. e_e This amounts to the same kind of argument where people say if you look for god and don't find him that you didn't look hard enough. Blame the person, not the deity who is supposed to be sooo powerful and benevolent that he'd want you to know about him so you can go to the big orgasm in the sky.

Knowing about Him does not equate to going to the 'big orgasm in the sky.' (Btw, what are your thoughts on Heaven? From the sound of it, not exactly correct.) And yes, blame the person, because there are many truths in this world which are held to be self-evident. As I keep saying, love is self-evident, and then understanding the nature of love can help to understand what transcendance means, and so on and so forth...

[Tiberius]

Actually it's a fair point. One cannot be a materialist and then demand evidence of a non-material being. This is why I reject materialism...

Not entirely. If the non-material being is said to interact in the world in a substantial and material way, then we have something to talk about.

If you're talking about non-material and also non-interactive then we really don't have much to talk about anyway.

If a non-material being can interact with a material world, then part of it is material in the first place. It's like saying the 2D world can interact with the 3D world. Something 2D cannot by definition interact with the 3D world, since to do so would involve it extending into three dimensions.

The reverse (3D to 2D) is fine, since the 3rd dimension is made up of the 2nd dimension plus depth. Greater dimensions can always interact with smaller dimensions, but not the other way around, only because they are made up (partly) of that smaller dimension.

So I dispute that a truly non-material being can interact with the material.

[Eilonnwy]

Adrian, I'm not the one claiming that a non-material being interacts with the material world.

[Welsh cake]

Anyway, to cover the entire spectrum, then, I propose a challenge. Prove to me that China exists. I dare you.

You get a nomination for 'The Most Pointless Thread of the Month Award', an award that I made up just this very second.

How do you know there is a China to start with? Talk about loaded questions. >.>

He is a transcendant being but that does not mean that He does not influence this world. You are simply looking for the wrong kind of influence. Everythin gis connected. Look at the bigger picture.

Your god concept either influences the world or it does not, it either manifests itself in reality or it does not, if it ever did, there would be no debate.

And we're somehow looking for the wrong signs in the wrong places? Really?


No God.


No God.


No God.


No God.


No God.


No God.


No God.


No God.


No God.


CONTINUED ...>

---

CONT...>


No God.


No God.


No God.


No God.


No God.


No God.


No God.


NO GOD.

We're not looking at the bigger picture? Sorry, but you're fooling no one but yourself Watson.