RE: Non-existing objects
June 26, 2017 at 2:07 pm
(This post was last modified: June 26, 2017 at 2:07 pm by Astonished.)
(June 26, 2017 at 2:03 pm)KerimF Wrote:(June 26, 2017 at 12:10 pm)Astonished Wrote: If I could understand what the fuck you were trying to say I'd probably have some negative comments. But I'll just go by your geometry example and give the usual anti-theist spiel. Yes, all of those things are nonexistent objects (hell, NUMBERS are nonexistent objects) but the difference between math and deities is that one of them has practical application and utility in life and the others do not and in fact only impede it at every turn.
You say it and I agree with you.
A rational person, as most people are, shouldn't lose his time thinking about things that are not useful to his nature (to the structure he is made of) in the first place.
On the other hand, if someone gets a computer as a present and likes to use it for playing computer games only, would he be interested in testing all its functions while searching any available information about it that are provided by its original maker (usually a company)? He would be greatly satisfied just in playing games on it, till it will be broken.
But if a professional engineer got a powerful advanced computer, he won't hesitate learning almost everything about it and he would be glad if he got useful hints provided, in a way or another, by its maker.
Obviously this analogy is not perfect because both computers, when dead, will be thrown, sooner or later, into fire... to return them back to their raw state.
Does this fire has anything to do with the eternal torture place called Hell? Of course not, Hell is created by men to scare other men as some parents do with their children when they were kids.
But this fire reminds me the expression used in an ancient story "The Everlasting Fire". Indeed, fire is much like the black holes that have one-way ticket with no return. (For instance, I heard that one-way tickets are also available to travel into outer space).
So you're just presupposing there's more to everything? What basis do you have for that? What empirical data do you have to justify that assumption? What empirical data can you study to concretely learn anything about this supposed creator/designer so that it's more than just an abstract concept with no meaning and ultimately just wastes your time and how did you come by this information that 7.1 billion other people have failed to discover? Otherwise are you just contemplating something completely imaginary and making things up as you go as a means of amusement? I'm honestly still not sure at all that I understand what the hell it is you're getting at. Sounds like the watch-watchmaker thing on a beach where every grain of sand is a watch against an ocean where all the water is watches.
Religions were invented to impress and dupe illiterate, superstitious stone-age peasants. So in this modern, enlightened age of information, what's your excuse? Or are you saying with all your advantages, you were still tricked as easily as those early humans?
---
There is no better way to convey the least amount of information in the greatest amount of words than to try explaining your religious views.
---
There is no better way to convey the least amount of information in the greatest amount of words than to try explaining your religious views.