Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: December 13, 2024, 1:00 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Atheism Undermines Knowledge
#1
Atheism Undermines Knowledge
Is the modern atheist belief that only efficient causes exist consistent with the reliability of observed physical laws on which the acquisition of knowledge depends? No.

The two cornerstones of modern atheism are: 1) the physical universe is causally closed, i.e. devoid of any influence apart from the deterministic chain of cause and effect and 2) dependant on nothing outside itself its continuity or regularity. The modern atheist removes from consideration teleology, final causes and intentionality. In practice, atheism presupposes that everything we know can be described in terms of ‘material’ interactions by means of efficient causes. This excludes any type of formal or final causes that would lead one to posit divine influence. However, this cannot be the case.

An infinite series of ever smaller intermediate causes and effects separates each cause from its corresponding effect.* In order to avoid this paradox, there must be a smallest possible finite unit. You can stack small finite units (of time, space, etc.) to fill a finite gap. In quantum physics, you have a smallest possible unit of time, Plank time or tP. Yet no efficient cause links one tP to the next. They just happen to be ‘next’ to one another. Either relationship between one tP and another is random OR a transcendent order links one tP to all others.

If random, the physical universe would have no logical continuity. In such a universe, no knowledge would be justified. Since the modern atheist denies any transcendentally imposed order he must accept that the universe has no logical continuity on which the base his knowledge. Therefore, the atheist cannot also believe in the valid acquisition of knowledge without contradiction.

* (as per David Hume)
Reply
#2
RE: Atheism Undermines Knowledge
When that shithead...or you...can demonstrate that the "supernatural" exists, give me a call.

Until then this is just more fodder for the round file.
Reply
#3
RE: Atheism Undermines Knowledge
I must be suffering from Friday burnout.... all I see are non-sequiturs... O.o

Atheists simply do not believe a god exists.
We have time and time again observed science show how the world, or the Universe, works, removing a lot of events from the faith sphere.
Thus far, the track records stands at ZERO for faiths and all the scientific knowledge for atheism.

Here, we extrapolate, and assume that current faiths, just like previously held ones, are all man-made fantasy.
It's looks like a HUGE leap of faith from the atheists, huh? Shifty

Apart from that, the correct answer is "I don't know".
- I don't know if there is any intentionality.... there doesn't seem to be, but hey... I won't take the word of another human for that... how would he have come across such information?
- I don't know if there is any "final cause".... There doesn't seem to be, but hey... I won't take the word of another human for that... how would he have come across such information?


All that stuff about causes and effects and paradoxes... it all seems too much non-sense.... I can't even understand the paragraph...
Reply
#4
RE: Atheism Undermines Knowledge
Damn, take the smarminess out of wooters and all you would have left is a drich.
Reply
#5
RE: Atheism Undermines Knowledge
(May 3, 2013 at 1:51 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: Is the modern atheist belief that only efficient causes exist consistent with the reliability of observed physical laws on which the acquisition of knowledge depends? No.

The two cornerstones of modern atheism are: 1) the physical universe is causally closed, i.e. devoid of any influence apart from the deterministic chain of cause and effect and 2) dependant on nothing outside itself its continuity or regularity. The modern atheist removes from consideration teleology, final causes and intentionality. In practice, atheism presupposes that everything we know can be described in terms of ‘material’ interactions by means of efficient causes. This excludes any type of formal or final causes that would lead one to posit divine influence. However, this cannot be the case.

An infinite series of ever smaller intermediate causes and effects separates each cause from its corresponding effect.* In order to avoid this paradox, there must be a smallest possible finite unit. You can stack small finite units (of time, space, etc.) to fill a finite gap. In quantum physics, you have a smallest possible unit of time, Plank time or tP. Yet no efficient cause links one tP to the next. They just happen to be ‘next’ to one another. Either relationship between one tP and another is random OR a transcendent order links one tP to all others.

If random, the physical universe would have no logical continuity. In such a universe, no knowledge would be justified. Since the modern atheist denies any transcendentally imposed order he must accept that the universe has no logical continuity on which the base his knowledge. Therefore, the atheist cannot also believe in the valid acquisition of knowledge without contradiction.

* (as per David Hume)

Just a few of the points you are wrong about.

1 Atheism isn't a belief in anything it is a lack of a belief in a god or gods.

2 There are no corner stones to atheism.

3 You can be an atheist and believe that there is no physical universe or that a universe is completely NOT devoid of any influence.

4 In practice atheism is a lack of a belief in god, there is no presupposing anything. You can be an atheist and believe in ghosts and the non material world.

5 Explain why without god there can be no logical continuity.


Are you ready for the fire? We are firemen. WE ARE FIREMEN! The heat doesn’t bother us. We live in the heat. We train in the heat. It tells us that we’re ready, we’re at home, we’re where we’re supposed to be. Flames don’t intimidate us. What do we do? We control the flame. We control them. We move the flames where we want to. And then we extinguish them.

Impersonation is treason.





Reply
#6
RE: Atheism Undermines Knowledge
I have to say I'm disappointed in you, Chad. I would have thought you would have learned more during your time here.

I will sum up my position and the position that I have seen many others take on this forum. I don't have all of the answers, but I refuse to fill those gaps in knowledge with god until it can be conclusively demonstrated to exist. Otherwise, I have to accept the argument from ignorance that you seem to be advocating.

Just remember, centuries ago people were using this exact same argument to try to demonstrate that god controlled lightning. I refuse to fall into the trap of that same type of fallacious thinking.
Even if the open windows of science at first make us shiver after the cozy indoor warmth of traditional humanizing myths, in the end the fresh air brings vigor, and the great spaces have a splendor of their own - Bertrand Russell
Reply
#7
RE: Atheism Undermines Knowledge
(May 3, 2013 at 1:51 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: Is the modern atheist belief that only efficient causes exist consistent with the reliability of observed physical laws on which the acquisition of knowledge depends? No.

The two cornerstones of modern atheism are: 1) the physical universe is causally closed, i.e. devoid of any influence apart from the deterministic chain of cause and effect and 2) dependant on nothing outside itself its continuity or regularity. The modern atheist removes from consideration teleology, final causes and intentionality. In practice, atheism presupposes that everything we know can be described in terms of ‘material’ interactions by means of efficient causes. This excludes any type of formal or final causes that would lead one to posit divine influence. However, this cannot be the case.

An infinite series of ever smaller intermediate causes and effects separates each cause from its corresponding effect.* In order to avoid this paradox, there must be a smallest possible finite unit. You can stack small finite units (of time, space, etc.) to fill a finite gap. In quantum physics, you have a smallest possible unit of time, Plank time or tP. Yet no efficient cause links one tP to the next. They just happen to be ‘next’ to one another. Either relationship between one tP and another is random OR a transcendent order links one tP to all others.

If random, the physical universe would have no logical continuity. In such a universe, no knowledge would be justified. Since the modern atheist denies any transcendentally imposed order he must accept that the universe has no logical continuity on which the base his knowledge. Therefore, the atheist cannot also believe in the valid acquisition of knowledge without contradiction.

* (as per David Hume)


Yeah, because explaining a mystery with a bigger mystery makes so much more sense. [end sarcasm]

Thinking

You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
Reply
#8
RE: Atheism Undermines Knowledge
I'm marking all you guys with an F. Please answer the question rather than addressing your own that wasn't asked.
Reply
#9
RE: Atheism Undermines Knowledge
Everything that wooters said boils down to:

1. Christainity should be regarded as valid because otherwise he wouldn't feel better.

2. Therefore everyone else ought humor him and agree with him that christianity is valid.

Which is the same subbasement cognative level that drich and other needy low lifes operate at.

Appearently drich and wooters have such a high opinion of themselves that it seem to them that the duty of making drich and wooters feel better ought to be imposed as a cosmic tax on all sentient beings more cognatively accomplished than they are.
Reply
#10
RE: Atheism Undermines Knowledge
Cool so you can't think of anything to challenge what he said.

Next.
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  ultimate knowledge dr. underhill 2 59 9 hours ago
Last Post: Paleophyte
  Atheism VS Christian Atheism? IanHulett 80 30040 June 13, 2017 at 11:09 am
Last Post: vorlon13
  Scientific knowledge versus spiritual knowledge LadyForCamus 471 88671 February 17, 2016 at 12:36 pm
Last Post: LadyForCamus
  Atheism, Scientific Atheism and Antitheism tantric 33 13770 January 18, 2015 at 1:05 pm
Last Post: helyott
  The enemy of knowledge dyresand 34 6209 November 4, 2014 at 7:02 pm
Last Post: dyresand
  Strong/Gnostic Atheism and Weak/Agnostic Atheism Dystopia 26 12837 August 30, 2014 at 1:34 pm
Last Post: Dawsonite
  Debate share, young earth? atheism coverup? atheism gain? xr34p3rx 13 10952 March 16, 2014 at 11:30 am
Last Post: fr0d0
  A different definition of atheism. Atheism isn't simply lack of belief in god/s fr0d0 14 12588 August 1, 2012 at 2:54 pm
Last Post: Mister Agenda
  Scientific Knowledge? If there is no God? QuestingHound08 64 14777 September 9, 2011 at 8:40 am
Last Post: Epimethean
  The worth of Knowledge diffidus 20 7791 June 14, 2011 at 2:16 am
Last Post: Faith No More



Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)