A conversation with Robvalue about religion.

[Edwardo Piet]

While we all wait for my brain to work, here's a little music regarding the angst of evidence-based living.

http://youtu.be/ZXB5_DQNct8

LMFAO it was funny all the way though and then by the last line I fucking pissed myself laughing OMFG LMFAO

I love it. Watching it again. Lol.

[Simon Moon]

Lots of claims and "ifs" in your comment, zero proof.

This should be interesting.

1. This is a conversation between Robvalue and I.

2. It's not about proving, but coming to a mutual understanding of our positions.

This discussion is not meant for everyone to come in with their smart Alek remarks, or cheer lead or whatever.

It's between Robvalue and I to come to a mutual understanding.

Moderator Notice
With the exception of the debate forum, the forum rules specifically forbid limiting the participants in a thread

Putting limitations on who is allowed to post in a thread is not allowed. Unless a member is unable to post in a thread due to the permission system, all members are allowed to post in all threads.

Forum Rules

Sorry, but you posted this on a public forum, be prepared to have your fallacious, un-evidenced reasons for your beliefs to be refuted.

If you want this between only Robvalue and you, take the conversation to the PM system.

It's not our fault you continue to make unsupported assertions as if they were true.

[Mystic]

Yeah refuted. I've been here on forums for a while now. I'm very well aware of how good at refutations you guys are.

[Simon Moon]

Yeah refuted. I've been here on forums for a while now. I'm very well aware of how good at refutations you guys are.

Not our fault you don't understand all the fallacies all your posts contain.

[Edwardo Piet]

Yeah refuted. I've been here on forums for a while now. I'm very well aware of how good at refutations you guys are.

Aw. Don't be like that MK.

[Simon Moon]

Yeah refuted. I've been here on forums for a while now. I'm very well aware of how good at refutations you guys are.

Not our fault you don't understand all the fallacies all your posts contain.

But I will bow out of this thread and let you continue with Rob.

You post enough unsupported crap on other threads to keep us all busy enough already.

And besides, I like you

[dyresand]

Funny how the influence of allah on the muslims doesn't make them a better people than the norm, but rather worse, and those that expend the most effort to be close to allah are the most dangerous to women, children, and others outside of their beliefs. Wouldn't you think that a perfect god would give a perfect message to his people so that it would be understood perfectly?

Overall the quran is more of a cruel book than the bible. Ironically its less violent.

[Mystic]

The only "evidence" ever presented for religions is:

1) Religious texts
2) Fallacious or irrelevant philosophical arguments

But none of these stand alone. Religious texts along with philosophical arguments, make use of features in reality and in our souls. This is from my point of view. A lot of hinduism for example about all forms being manifestations of God are true. They aren't true because the text says them, but the religion is pointing something about God and his relationship to reality.
Philosophical arguments will never be undeniable, because, everything relies on some properly basic beliefs. But if we know those beliefs to be true, the argument built upon them are reliable.
What I mean by know is have justified warranted belief in them.

1) All of these books are exactly what one would expect to see from primitive societies trying to make sense of the world around them. Even if they happen to contain some things that are true, and even if those things are impressive by the standards of the time, that in no way validates the truth of the rest of the book. It also doesn't validate claims about where those truths came from, and certainly doesn't give the author free reign to write a load of magic stuff and expect us to just believe it. If you get to the point where you will believe whatever someone writes based on what they have already written, you are literally prepared to believe anything. I don't consider that a good position to ever be in.

Actually Quran is exactly what I would not expect a primitive society to be able to make. I will get into why in details later. It's sophistication with regards to philosophical discussions that are recent, somethings taught for example today in the structure they are in universities regard political science (I will get into details of this later), I feel are indications of something more then just primitive society or power hungry man.

2) Abstract arguments are never evidence about reality on their own. They require producing a model of reality, and then manipulating that model. When manipulated correctly, all we have are conclusions that are as true as the initial assumptions of the model. They would be true in a reality that followed this idealised model exactly. But inevitably, our models are simplified. The only way to be sure that our abstract, idealised reality bears any resemblance to how reality actually works is to go back to reality and study the results. Otherwise, we can never be sure that we haven't gone wildly off target, and are considering a fictional reality that is in line with what we want it to be, or what we can understand.

What do you mean by reality? If God was the existence by which all things exist, what would this (what you wrote above) mean for example?

The idea that these arguments can produce results that the whole of science cannot is ludicrous.

Science doesn't discover or prove everything we can know.

And further, every religion uses the same arguments to try and establish some sort of entirely abstract "God", without any evidence to check it's actually anything real, and then makes the huge non-sequitur jump of assuming "their God" is the real God.

Oversimplification over the issue, and if you read Quran or hadiths or irfan or sufism, you should know this is a huge over simplification. There is many hadiths, many verses, and much mystical philosophical writtings about this issue. You should address the position of the religion and not just assert a refutation without looking at it's position.

If there is a "God", then we currently have no way to learn anything about it with any accuracy.

Why do you assume that? I would assume the opposite, if there is a God, everything we can learn and know would can help guide us towards a more accurate position about it. Falsehood on the other hand would of course not reveal anything about God. This is given there is a god.

[ignoramus]

Yeah refuted. I've been here on forums for a while now. I'm very well aware of how good at refutations you guys are.

MK, we may have differing ideas on what constitutes proof, etc, and that's fine. Live and let live.
I'm suspecting most here don't mind you because you're not rude or a troll.

Please answer one question for me.
What drives you here. To an atheist forum? What do you enjoy most about conversing with atheists?
You're always fighting an uphill battle, like other theists. But you persist against the odds.
I personally like the tenacity and the stubborn fight in you. And the fact that you are never outright rude.

I've always wondered why theists persist here.
Kingy and CL have stayed for the social aspects of it predominantly.
I want to know what drives you deep down?

Cheers.

[Mystic]

Yeah refuted. I've been here on forums for a while now. I'm very well aware of how good at refutations you guys are.

MK, we may have differing ideas on what constitutes proof, etc, and that's fine. Live and let live.
I'm suspecting most here don't mind you because you're not rude or a troll.

Please answer one question for me.
What drives you here. To an atheist forum? What do you enjoy most about conversing with atheists?
You're always fighting an uphill battle, like other theists. But you persist against the odds.
I personally like the tenacity and the stubborn fight in you. And the fact that you are never outright rude.

I've always wondered why theists persist here.
Kingy and CL have stayed for the social aspects of it predominantly.
I want to know what drives you deep down?

Cheers.

To convert Losty from you guys, impress her, and live my fantasy with her. I will answer this question more seriously. Sometimes we have intentions inside of us and we really have to think about all of them, to explain ourselves. I will reply to this tomorrow or later tonight.