(March 24, 2009 at 5:57 am)Kyuuketsuki Wrote:That's what I said(March 23, 2009 at 6:08 pm)fr0d0 Wrote:(March 23, 2009 at 6:12 am)Kyuuketsuki Wrote: As far as I am aware the only generalisation one can make about atheists is that they don't believe in a god or gods.No, I think that's the only non generalisation.
No, all that being an atheist means is that you don't believe in god or gods ... EVERYTHING else is negotiable.
(March 24, 2009 at 5:57 am)Kyuuketsuki Wrote:I don't accept YOUR acceptable system.(March 23, 2009 at 6:08 pm)fr0d0 Wrote:(March 23, 2009 at 6:12 am)Kyuuketsuki Wrote: That depends ... yes that is true for a theist but not as true for a religionist (someone who adopts a specific religion).Theists are limited by interpretation and peer review.
Some theists maybe and all (without exception) do not put their religious belief through an acceptable formalised system of peer review.
You would ask a group of non scientists to be a peer review group for science? Of course you wouldn't. that would be ridiculous. Apply the same logic to your statement please.
(March 24, 2009 at 5:57 am)Kyuuketsuki Wrote:I have absolutely no control over these dreams. Like I said, these dreams are all personal. It's not like a plane is going to crash or anything external to my personal experience. That's just how it is.(March 23, 2009 at 6:08 pm)fr0d0 Wrote:(March 23, 2009 at 6:12 am)Kyuuketsuki Wrote: I'd put money on them not being as accurate as you think they are.Well mine take the form of me living moments in dreams. I remember sights, sounds, smells, feelings.. Re-living them is like stopping into the movie.. I sometimes realise and have an almost 3rd person perspective watching the events repeat in front of me. Sometimes I'm not so sharp. Sometimes the event will be a long time after the dream, sometimes a very short time after. It's easy to dismiss familiar surroundings but not so unknown ones. I've not really found any use for these dreams.
OK, so you maintain you have predictive dreams. Care to test that claim? Make a prediction ... something that is beyond the normal ability of humans to rationally anticipate future events.
(March 24, 2009 at 5:57 am)Kyuuketsuki Wrote:Like I said above, it's ridiculous to evaluate something using the completely wrong tool. Your foundational premise is flawed.(March 23, 2009 at 6:08 pm)fr0d0 Wrote:(March 23, 2009 at 6:12 am)Kyuuketsuki Wrote: So your god is part of the universe?No, he/she/it's outside it.
OK, let's deal with that idea shall we? The following is an answer I wrote many years ago when I edited an online publication called the " UK Atheist & Science E-Zine": <snip>
So where's your god again?
Quote:If all observable aspects of God exist outside of the universe then it is, by definition, supernatural and can have no impact on the universe or anything within it and, as such, science can safely discard it.This doesn't follow. If God is supernatural or outside this universe, why can't he interact with this universe?
Why should God's nature and our nature be mutually exclusive? Our nature can't detect his so therefore his nature can't detect ours. That sounds like playground logic. ???
Science meets it's end point, our nature. To theorise outside this limitation is beyond science. Science fails.
Fail. Try again.