OK Bob - I'll play:
Oh dear. What we see and perceive is what we make of reality. Reality doesn't change - just the perceptions of reality. Were we equipped with different sense organs, or a different perspective (say - at the scale of an election) the universe would look very different to us, but, would still be the same structurally - a diamond would still be a formation of a carbon lattice with each bound chemically to 4 other carbon atoms.
Lets not confuse perception with reality. We know it can be perceived differently but the fundamental structures, forces and physical rules would apply.
At least from a sensory POV we have room to play with how things look and appear. Our hand, under an X-ray for example, becomes transparent and we can see the bones. That doesn't mean that the X-ray view is either more or less real than that of the naked eye - merely different.
Not really, no. It is as much how we perceive it as it is how anyone or anything else perceives it according to sense and scale as above.
Not sure what blind means in the above sentence, nor fluke. Which scientists are "realizing this"? No miracles - just processes we don't yet understand.
Well - you appear to be assuming a similar version of time outside the universe to within it. You are also, in common with most Christian apologists, hung up on the idea of causality - which is probably a rather universe bound phenomenon.
Was the beginning of the universe a miracle? What do you mean by miracle? If miracle merely means extraordinarily unlikely event then it might be - or it might be the common activity outside of our universe (and possibly common enough within it, subject to your views on black holes).
Here's the thing Bob - your quest is doomed. You will never find an absolute truth because there isn't one. There are versions of the truth that are largely determined by your viewpoint - as you have alluded to.
To expect Atheists to be able to answer your questions seems to be very naive. As others have indicated atheists are an amorphous group linked only by the lack of belief in a deity. In my experience you'd be hard pushed to find 2 that agree on everything and commonly find 2 that agree on nothing beyond that negative on a deity.
Quote:We know without a shadow of a doubt that what we see and perceive is not reality.
Oh dear. What we see and perceive is what we make of reality. Reality doesn't change - just the perceptions of reality. Were we equipped with different sense organs, or a different perspective (say - at the scale of an election) the universe would look very different to us, but, would still be the same structurally - a diamond would still be a formation of a carbon lattice with each bound chemically to 4 other carbon atoms.
Lets not confuse perception with reality. We know it can be perceived differently but the fundamental structures, forces and physical rules would apply.
At least from a sensory POV we have room to play with how things look and appear. Our hand, under an X-ray for example, becomes transparent and we can see the bones. That doesn't mean that the X-ray view is either more or less real than that of the naked eye - merely different.
Quote:So to say, 'we know the material world exists' is actually quite naive. I am not saying it doesn't, in some form, but not how we perceive it.
Not really, no. It is as much how we perceive it as it is how anyone or anything else perceives it according to sense and scale as above.
Quote:If materialism is correct, and this universe is simply a ball of blind matter that happened to spring into existence and then spawn consciousness as pure fluke (scientists are realising this doesn't make any sense) then you have to believe in miracles.
Not sure what blind means in the above sentence, nor fluke. Which scientists are "realizing this"? No miracles - just processes we don't yet understand.
Quote:Here's why;
If the universe is purely matter, then either;
Something came out of nothing, or
it is infinite.
The idea of an infinite universe within time and space is a highly illogical one and that has been clear for centuries. So, if something came out of nothing, then how? Well that's a miracle no matter how it happened. And don't give me the theories of multiple universes etc. because it had to start somewhere, and creating multiple universes is an unnecessary complication to the matter.
Well - you appear to be assuming a similar version of time outside the universe to within it. You are also, in common with most Christian apologists, hung up on the idea of causality - which is probably a rather universe bound phenomenon.
Was the beginning of the universe a miracle? What do you mean by miracle? If miracle merely means extraordinarily unlikely event then it might be - or it might be the common activity outside of our universe (and possibly common enough within it, subject to your views on black holes).
Here's the thing Bob - your quest is doomed. You will never find an absolute truth because there isn't one. There are versions of the truth that are largely determined by your viewpoint - as you have alluded to.
To expect Atheists to be able to answer your questions seems to be very naive. As others have indicated atheists are an amorphous group linked only by the lack of belief in a deity. In my experience you'd be hard pushed to find 2 that agree on everything and commonly find 2 that agree on nothing beyond that negative on a deity.
Kuusi palaa, ja on viimeinen kerta kun annan vaimoni laittaa jouluvalot!
