Posts: 2082
Threads: 72
Joined: March 12, 2013
Reputation:
44
RE: Question for Atheists
February 2, 2014 at 5:48 pm
(This post was last modified: February 2, 2014 at 5:49 pm by The Reality Salesman01.)
(February 1, 2014 at 10:35 am)whateverist Wrote: Of course our being able to assemble these bodies of ours does not depend on science. But science more and more is revealing how we do it. If anything can be called miraculous -as in jaw-droppingly amazing- this is it. And isn't it interesting how the continuity of our state of being and enduring sense of self seem to be entirely contingent upon the normative function of the precise replacement of these cells? To suggest that the mind is something that can endure continuity apart from the mind is faced with the problems caused on the mind by the impact of discontinuity of the material cells ability to seamlessly replace themselves. If the mind is something separate, then why is it that when physical cells fail to replace themselves, or replace themselves with bad cells, the result is degenerative brain diseases or other debilitative trauma? Such diseases have drastic negative impact on the mind's cognitive functions and the senses of consciousness which correspond to them. If the whole brain is damaged, what reason is there to think that the mind will be magically restored and maintain separate continuity apart from its physical vessel? Dualism is constructed of layer upon layer of impossibilities and irreconcilable problems such as these. Until a single substance explanation can be completely ruled out, I see no need in entertaining the absurdities of adding nonphysical "stuff", ectoplasm, pixie dust or any other magical substance to the equation. Let's figure out Infinity before we start entertaining the product of Infinity x Infinity...
Posts: 25314
Threads: 239
Joined: August 26, 2010
Reputation:
156
RE: Question for Atheists
February 2, 2014 at 5:51 pm
(February 1, 2014 at 11:34 pm)rasetsu Wrote: It's Plato's fault.
Yeah - let's blame the cartoon dog.
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist. This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair. Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second. That means there's a situation vacant.'
Posts: 18510
Threads: 129
Joined: January 19, 2014
Reputation:
91
RE: Question for Atheists
February 2, 2014 at 6:03 pm
@The Reality Salesman
Exactly. I've heard it summarized roughly like this: if we have an immaterial soul in addition to our brain, it doesn't seem to *do* anything worth speaking of!
Posts: 2082
Threads: 72
Joined: March 12, 2013
Reputation:
44
RE: Question for Atheists
February 2, 2014 at 6:06 pm
(This post was last modified: February 2, 2014 at 6:07 pm by The Reality Salesman01.)
(February 1, 2014 at 2:23 am)ChadWooters Wrote: Nah, I've given lots of long thoughtful posts and am starting to get bored. As for your question, I advocate panentheist, process theology. And I really don't have time to explain all that. You can do your own research. You have offered many thoughtful posts, Chad. I didn't know that you were an advocate of Panentheism. You've always struck me as an advocate of Christianity. I guess from your view, Christianity is not necessarily incompatible with what you hold to be true, but I think that Christianity is not compatible with your views. While your views allow afford Christians the right to be wrong, theirs don't seem to be quite as forgiving. When thinking about how power is made manifest, any theist position that is a proponent of Creatio ex Nihilo seems to be reduced to either Pantheism, Panentheism or some other absurd movement of the goal posts. I think I tend to be a little more accepting of pantheism, but instead of God, universe suits me just fine. To use "God" in a pantheistic context seems intentionally ambiguous. To me, Panentheism is an unnecessary complication to the whole thing, and while I disagree with you, I do appreciate you taking the time to discuss it. I hope we can come back to it another time.
(February 2, 2014 at 6:03 pm)Alex K Wrote: @The Reality Salesman
Exactly. I've heard it summarized roughly like this: if we have an immaterial soul in addition to our brain, it doesn't seem to *do* anything worth speaking of!
And anything that is indistinguishable from nothing, might just as well be nothing as far as I'm concerned. Coincidentally, this is a great argument against God and His nothing-like properties.
Posts: 29590
Threads: 116
Joined: February 22, 2011
Reputation:
159
RE: Question for Atheists
February 3, 2014 at 12:02 am
(February 2, 2014 at 5:48 pm)The Reality Salesman Wrote: Let's figure out Infinity before we start entertaining the product of Infinity x Infinity...
Posts: 2082
Threads: 72
Joined: March 12, 2013
Reputation:
44
RE: Question for Atheists
February 3, 2014 at 12:16 am
That's fucking impressive! My son has that toy and it's pretty damn big. I don't know how that wizard crammed that thing into the southern orifice of their choosing, and I don't want to know. When a magician reveals their secret, they remove the luster. Bravo!
Posts: 5399
Threads: 256
Joined: December 1, 2013
Reputation:
60
RE: Question for Atheists
February 3, 2014 at 2:03 am
Reality_salesman, do you consider pantheism as nature elevated or God demystified or are those one in the same?
Posts: 2082
Threads: 72
Joined: March 12, 2013
Reputation:
44
RE: Question for Atheists
February 3, 2014 at 6:27 pm
That all depends on the pantheist that's peddling the position, I guess. I think I'd be more accepting of a demystifying God approach, but only because I don't care for the mystifying attributes I normally hear being prescribed to God(s). But if in the end, we're just talking about the universe, I prefer to just call it that. God seems to complicate discussions about nature. Good question. I guess those are two distinct ways of looking at it. I don't really know too many pantheists, and I'm not sure how many versions are out there. I think my opinion would probably vary, just like they do with the more common Monotheist propositions.
Posts: 4344
Threads: 43
Joined: February 21, 2012
Reputation:
64
RE: Question for Atheists
February 3, 2014 at 6:36 pm
Poor Buzz...
Posts: 3022
Threads: 34
Joined: May 11, 2013
Reputation:
30
RE: Question for Atheists
February 4, 2014 at 3:52 am
I always thought woody would end up there one day.....guess I was wrong
'The more I learn about people the more I like my dog'- Mark Twain
'You can have all the faith you want in spirits, and the afterlife, and heaven and hell, but when it comes to this world, don't be an idiot. Cause you can tell me you put your faith in God to put you through the day, but when it comes time to cross the road, I know you look both ways.' - Dr House
“Young earth creationism is essentially the position that all of modern science, 90% of living scientists and 98% of living biologists, all major university biology departments, every major science journal, the American Academy of Sciences, and every major science organization in the world, are all wrong regarding the origins and development of life….but one particular tribe of uneducated, bronze aged, goat herders got it exactly right.” - Chuck Easttom
"If my good friend Doctor Gasparri speaks badly of my mother, he can expect to get punched.....You cannot provoke. You cannot insult the faith of others. You cannot make fun of the faith of others. There is a limit." - Pope Francis on freedom of speech
|