Why it is silly to look for evidence of God

Not if you're looking for the meaning of a poem.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Do they?

Can we?

Your total lack of logic makes my brain hurt...

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

CC -

I need to think about something, I'll reply to your post tomorrow.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I can also study an Algebra text book for an American Literature exam but chances are I will fail. The final outcome will not consider my feelings and the way I equate the two.

The TOE doesn't set out to provide answers to war, violence, famine etc any more then gravity does. Your only criteria should be the truth value of the theory itself.

 

There are aspects of ''satanism'' that do not acknowledge in form of supernaturalism.

jan.

 

They are just idiots.

 

wynn,

Are they really scientific theories?
Or are they philosophical ideologies lead by the reality of the nature of science?

Our bodies are made to work in order to survive.
Our bodies will be discarded when it ceases to be of use.
Once the fuse runs out, the body decays.
The body is connected to the world.

This can be very comforting to those who do not believe in anything other than what they directly percieve. Indeed it is becoming a very potent force, and will be the dominent one in time, if the description of kali-yuga holds water.

If we can connect to the theory, and it explains something, I think we should.
If it is seemingly unconnected, and uncomprehensible, then we can render it as such, or believe it.
Truth can't really hurt us, and as science is a way to find truth, through it's eyes, it is obviously useful.

For people who think like this, that IS how life is.
If you follow the points I made earlier, it's easy to see how we could think like this.
What you are describing, is the reality of a God-less consciousness in which there can be no happy outcome. The only happiness you are entitled to, is that which you have earned, and enjoyment of the world becomes the goal of life.


jan.

 

Why are they ''just idiots''?

jan.

 

Or perhaps not. If we look at how some neuroscientists are ready to accept that there is no free will, or that our personalities, our "who we are" is basically biochemical mishmash with nothing more substantial to it, then there is no category error to be made, because for them, "us" and "atoms" aren't really any separate categories to begin with ...

Whether the influence is from (Christian) monotheism or ancient Greeks, there is another driving force behind the ought: our one-lifetime conception.

In cultures that operate with concepts of karma and reincarnation, moral imperatives seem to play a different role than in our one-lifetime culture.

But unless we take for granted that such perfect laws exist, how can we do science at all? We can't.

 

A capitalist treats his capitalist policies with the same regard and gives them the same relevance
as a scientist treats his scientific theories,
or as an artist his artistic principles.

That doesn't mean that the three are interchangeable; just that for all practical intents and purposes, it makes no difference whether something is a scientific theory, a worldview or a policy. People can consider something to be normative, in its respective field of application, regardless whether it is a scientific theory, a worldview or a policy.

Science eventually cannot say anything about the truth value of a theory, given the criterion of falsifiability and the continuity of scientific pursuits.

 

According to which criteria of "science"?

To be sure, there are controversial debates on the nature of science even among scientists.

Well, I can't relate to this worldview.

 

Not exactly, a capitalist may prefer his own policies in certain applications but understands that it's a matter of opinion. Same with an artist....they may prefer their own principles but it's not a matter of fact. Scientific Theories explain facts, they do not describe opinions and predictions based on preferences.

Sure it can....it depends on the theory you are referring to. But in every case it's the best thing to describe what we observe to be true. Does that not have value?

 

If it makes us miserable and doesn't give us reason to hope for a brighter future?

 

Because they use the highly charged rhetoric of theism to refer to a religion or philosophy that basically has nothing to do with it. If they are atheists they should stop implying that they believe in Satan, a supernatural mythological figure.

 

Yes, since the scientific method is based on empirical evidence. If empiricism
happens to lead to ones misery, perhaps the person needs to be examined, not the theory itself.

 

Yeah, along with the Stalinist

No man, no problem.

 

That is where the disconnect is and perhaps why you keep entertaining your argument. Stalinism is an ideology. Again, I would agree that a good ideology is one that makes everyone "eventually happy". However, this has no relevance to a scientific theory.

 

No. Scientific theories are free to kill.

 

not sure where you are going with this but scientific theories, something that explains and predicts phenomenons, do not kill. They ummm, explain and predict. The phenomena may in fact Kill.

 

Fallacy of equivocation!
Let me contribute to the fallacy -
What's the alternative? God solves all problems?

I wonder what this guy -

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Would say to these -

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Especially when [his thinking patterns and abilities are] -

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Ain't much of a solution for everyone's happiness, is it Wynn?

Fallacies aside, only a rationalistic and a naturalistic theory/ideology has a good chance to be a fair, unbaised and objective model of reality and based on that must come our decisions and policies - the disconnect between scientific worldview and the human condition is and can be bridged by secular humanism. When people make and stick to make-believe, subjective and incorrect and wishful ideologies, problems occur [hitler, stalin]. Only a proper, precise, explanatory and predictively applicable, realistic worldview can give us the best and most accurate representation of the world and its problems. From that comes the data to be used by humanistic and humanitarian efforts to make objective and correct decisions for the greater good of mankind. Divinded, individual or subjective solutions often lead to cross-cultural problems. The only real and sustainable solution is scientific humanism.