Posts: 1114
Threads: 28
Joined: June 13, 2011
Reputation:
18
RE: Proof of God
March 3, 2015 at 11:16 pm
MM, you're equivocating different definitions of "nothingness."
It is very important not to mistake hemlock for parsley, but to believe or not believe in God is not important at all. - Denis Diderot
We are the United States of Amnesia, we learn nothing because we remember nothing. - Gore Vidal
Posts: 8225
Threads: 40
Joined: March 18, 2014
Reputation:
54
RE: Proof of God
March 4, 2015 at 1:14 am
(February 27, 2015 at 1:57 am)Harris Wrote: Nothingness:
Nothingness can only produce non-existence, and so it cannot be the foundation of any ideology.
Thief and assassin for hire. Member in good standing of the Rogues Guild.
Posts: 29107
Threads: 218
Joined: August 9, 2014
Reputation:
155
RE: Proof of God
March 4, 2015 at 3:46 am
(This post was last modified: March 4, 2015 at 3:46 am by robvalue.)
I'm still waiting to hear how I'm meant to give thanks to this creator thing, Harris, whatever it may be.
Where do I go? What do I do? How can I know it is getting my message?
Posts: 29107
Threads: 218
Joined: August 9, 2014
Reputation:
155
RE: Proof of God
March 4, 2015 at 6:47 am
Why should we need anything in its place?
Posts: 1121
Threads: 53
Joined: February 5, 2013
Reputation:
15
RE: Proof of God
March 4, 2015 at 7:37 am
(This post was last modified: March 4, 2015 at 7:39 am by ManMachine.)
(March 3, 2015 at 11:16 pm)Pizz-atheist Wrote: MM, you're equivocating different definitions of "nothingness."
No, I'm not. Don't get me wrong, I do understand the differences in those definitions but it's not necessary to distinguish them to make the theory work.
If you want the hard-science then you need to begin with the quantum vacuum but the soft theory (experimentally un-verifiable) is still reasonable, that is to say it can be reasoned.
For example, it is reasonable to assume at some point there could have been nothingness in the sense of a total absence of anything. We have some soft-theory on how that might give rise to a quantum vacuum from the likes of
Victor J Stenger but we can never experimentally prove it, only mathematically.
MM
"The greatest deception men suffer is from their own opinions" - Leonardo da Vinci
"I think I use the term “radical” rather loosely, just for emphasis. If you describe yourself as “atheist,” some people will say, “Don’t you mean ‘agnostic’?” I have to reply that I really do mean atheist, I really do not believe that there is a god; in fact, I am convinced that there is not a god (a subtle difference). I see not a shred of evidence to suggest that there is one ... etc., etc. It’s easier to say that I am a radical atheist, just to signal that I really mean it, have thought about it a great deal, and that it’s an opinion I hold seriously." - Douglas Adams (and I echo the sentiment)
Posts: 1114
Threads: 28
Joined: June 13, 2011
Reputation:
18
RE: Proof of God
March 4, 2015 at 4:29 pm
So you're claiming the quantum vacuum is the first cause/uncaused cause? Okay that's a live option.
It is very important not to mistake hemlock for parsley, but to believe or not believe in God is not important at all. - Denis Diderot
We are the United States of Amnesia, we learn nothing because we remember nothing. - Gore Vidal