RE: Once Upon A Time
December 14, 2008 at 7:10 pm
(This post was last modified: December 14, 2008 at 7:19 pm by Daystar.)
(December 14, 2008 at 11:18 am)Tiberius Wrote:Quote:much the same as their dad had believed in GodWell, except thats not quite true now is it?
You stated that the father didn't know much about God, but rather appealed to the authority of a preacher. The difference between this and "believing" in science is that through science we can know much more than the father ever knew, and we don't have to appeal to authority to do it. Science shares the research with everyone, and anyone can redo the experiments to see the results for themselves. We teach science everywhere, and since its conception has accelerated the achievements of mankind to the points where there are almost no limits to what we can discover.
Science isn't about "wanting" to believe anything. It is accepting the results that the method gives us.
It is almost as if you have to believe that there couldn't possibly be an example of people who trust in science as blindly as some do in God. It is interesting how all of you do that repeatedly.
As if science is, like I keep suggesting, the new god. And everything about it absolutely must be perfect. It is a reflection of the religiosity obvious to everyone except those under its powerful grasp.
(December 14, 2008 at 11:28 am)EvidenceVsFaith Wrote: Yes. We don't believe things because we 'want to'. Belief is not a matter of policy. We believe something because the evidence shows it to be true. We don't believe something when there's no evidence of its truth or existence. And no reason to believe it.
Right?
Show me some evidence of that.
(December 14, 2008 at 12:02 pm)EvidenceVsFaith Wrote: I wouldn't want #2 if its without evolution. I would find it boring if we were all 'created' so easily and instantly. If there is a God I'd rather he used evolution anyway. It would be better that he could do it without the suffering somehow (don't ask me how, he's God he should know).
I find it boring and pathetic if he just goes "alakazam!" and we're all here. Thats pretty damn boring. I think evolution is much more inspiring. And partly BECAUSE its not perfect and so easy to do. Its the process that is fascinating. There's nothing fascinating about the process of "alakazam", instant creation etc. If it could be called a process at all - as far as I'm concerned.
I think it would be best if there was evolution and a loving God somehow WITHOUT all the suffering in evolution. Nevertheless evolution is still inspiring. Its more interesting and inquisitive. Unlike instant 'alakazam' like creation.
That is, if I have understood you correctly?
I would like to see some evidence of your beloved evolution.
The burden of proof compels you! [waives the bone of a monkey's ass]
The burden of proof compels you! [waives the bone of a monkey's ass]
The burden of proof compels you! [waives the bone of a monkey's ass]
(December 14, 2008 at 12:20 pm)Kyuuketsuki Wrote: Why did he believe in this god if he didn't know much about it?
(December 14, 2008 at 12:34 pm)EvidenceVsFaith Wrote: Because he wanted to? I dunno. Wishful thinking and/or indoctrination? Pascal's wager?
Fear?
Hypothetically speaking of course.
It is quite common. I think that it has more to do with culture and social reasons rather than fear or wishful thinking. I don't think Pascal's Wager has anything to do with anything except bad debates between the religious Atheists and Xians.
