| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
26 Apr 2007 09:16:19 AM |
| Object: |
A few simple questions |
Bigfoot, Loch Ness Monster and UFO's.
You are told you will go to hell for eternity if you don't believe
they exist or simply say you don't know if they exist. The only way to
have eternal salvation is to believe they exist. It does not matter if
you are a good person, just that you believe they exist.
Say you go over the evidence...and it's just not there for you...you
can't be honest with yourself and come to the conclusion that they
exist. True, they've been seen by thousands, movies and pictures
exist, many a book written about them...but the evidence just isn't
convincing enough to win you over.
1. Can you actually "just believe"?
2. Do you think God would be fooled by you if you profess to believe
when you don't/can't?
3. Is this line of thinking logical?
.
|
|
| User: "ike milligan" |
|
| Title: Re: A few simple questions |
26 Apr 2007 08:20:24 PM |
|
|
<fsds_1998@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1177596979.348565.89110@b40g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
Bigfoot, Loch Ness Monster and UFO's.
You are told you will go to hell for eternity if you don't believe
they exist or simply say you don't know if they exist. The only way to
have eternal salvation is to believe they exist. It does not matter if
you are a good person, just that you believe they exist.
Say you go over the evidence...and it's just not there for you...you
can't be honest with yourself and come to the conclusion that they
exist. True, they've been seen by thousands, movies and pictures
exist, many a book written about them...but the evidence just isn't
convincing enough to win you over.
1. Can you actually "just believe"?
2. Do you think God would be fooled by you if you profess to believe
when you don't/can't?
3. Is this line of thinking logical?
Beside the point. Do they exist or not?
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: A few simple questions |
26 Apr 2007 10:25:57 PM |
|
|
On Apr 26, 8:20 pm, "ike milligan" <accordion...@mindspring.com>
wrote:
<fsds_1...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1177596979.348565.89110@b40g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
Bigfoot, Loch Ness Monster and UFO's.
You are told you will go to hell for eternity if you don't believe
they exist or simply say you don't know if they exist. The only way to
have eternal salvation is to believe they exist. It does not matter if
you are a good person, just that you believe they exist.
Say you go over the evidence...and it's just not there for you...you
can't be honest with yourself and come to the conclusion that they
exist. True, they've been seen by thousands, movies and pictures
exist, many a book written about them...but the evidence just isn't
convincing enough to win you over.
1. Can you actually "just believe"?
2. Do you think God would be fooled by you if you profess to believe
when you don't/can't?
3. Is this line of thinking logical?
Beside the point. Do they exist or not?
Soon, grasshopper, soon.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rev. Karl E. Taylor" |
|
| Title: Re: A few simple questions |
26 Apr 2007 10:02:20 AM |
|
|
wrote:
Bigfoot, Loch Ness Monster and UFO's.
You are told you will go to hell for eternity if you don't believe
they exist or simply say you don't know if they exist. The only way to
have eternal salvation is to believe they exist. It does not matter if
you are a good person, just that you believe they exist.
Say you go over the evidence...and it's just not there for you...you
can't be honest with yourself and come to the conclusion that they
exist. True, they've been seen by thousands, movies and pictures
exist, many a book written about them...but the evidence just isn't
convincing enough to win you over.
1. Can you actually "just believe"?
No.
2. Do you think God would be fooled by you if you profess to believe
when you don't/can't?
No gods either, so I don't care if they can be fooled or not.
3. Is this line of thinking logical?
No.
--
There are none more ignorant and useless,
than they that seek answers on their knees,
with their eyes closed.
____________________________________________________________________
Rev. Karl E. Taylor http://www.secularity.com/ktayloraz
A.A #1143 http://azhotops.blogspot.com/
Apostle of Dr. Lao EAC: Virgin Conversion Unit Director
____________________________________________________________________
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Stephen Knight" |
|
| Title: Re: A few simple questions |
26 Apr 2007 09:36:13 PM |
|
|
On 26 Apr 2007 07:16:19 -0700, wrote:
snip
1. Can you actually "just believe"?
I couldn't. I tried, just to keep peace in my family but being an
atheist isn't something you can walk away from. Once you come to a
simple conclusion, you can't go back.
People that claim to 'find' religion are pathetic suckers that
never were atheists to begin with. In my ten years on AA, I have never
seen an atheist lose his mind to superstition despite the thousands of
arguments from Trolls, well meaning Kristers or endless scriptural
begging.
No one of any religious significance has ever dared enter AA for
the simple fact that they would get their ***** kicked in public.
What atheist wouldn't like to drag Haggie, Robertson or Fawell over
the coals in a public forum?
Warlord Steve
BAAWA
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Captain Compassion" |
|
| Title: Re: A few simple questions |
26 Apr 2007 10:39:02 AM |
|
|
On 26 Apr 2007 07:16:19 -0700, wrote:
Bigfoot, Loch Ness Monster and UFO's.
You are told you will go to hell for eternity if you don't believe
they exist or simply say you don't know if they exist. The only way to
have eternal salvation is to believe they exist. It does not matter if
you are a good person, just that you believe they exist.
Say you go over the evidence...and it's just not there for you...you
can't be honest with yourself and come to the conclusion that they
exist. True, they've been seen by thousands, movies and pictures
exist, many a book written about them...but the evidence just isn't
convincing enough to win you over.
1. Can you actually "just believe"?
2. Do you think God would be fooled by you if you profess to believe
when you don't/can't?
3. Is this line of thinking logical?
When it comes to the unknowable both belief and disbelief are
irrational positions.
--
There may come a time when the CO2 police will wander the earth telling
the poor and the dispossed how many dung chips they can put on their
cook fires. -- Captain Compassion.
Wherever I go it will be well with me, for it was well with me here, not
on account of the place, but of my judgments which I shall carry away
with me, for no one can deprive me of these; on the contrary, they alone
are my property, and cannot be taken away, and to possess them suffices
me wherever I am or whatever I do. -- EPICTETUS
"Civilization is the interval between Ice Ages." -- Will Durant.
"Progress is the increasing control of the environment by life.
--Will Durant
Joseph R. Darancette
daranc@NOSPAMcharter.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: A few simple questions |
26 Apr 2007 11:47:53 AM |
|
|
"Captain Compassion" <daranc@NOSPAMcharter.net> wrote in message
news:keh133h19pcb4ja3khiv5e9d2rrggu2bct@4ax.com...
On 26 Apr 2007 07:16:19 -0700, wrote:
Bigfoot, Loch Ness Monster and UFO's.
You are told you will go to hell for eternity if you don't believe
they exist or simply say you don't know if they exist. The only way to
have eternal salvation is to believe they exist. It does not matter if
you are a good person, just that you believe they exist.
Say you go over the evidence...and it's just not there for you...you
can't be honest with yourself and come to the conclusion that they
exist. True, they've been seen by thousands, movies and pictures
exist, many a book written about them...but the evidence just isn't
convincing enough to win you over.
1. Can you actually "just believe"?
2. Do you think God would be fooled by you if you profess to believe
when you don't/can't?
3. Is this line of thinking logical?
When it comes to the unknowable both belief and disbelief are
irrational positions.
Unfortunately, since belief is a binary proposition, you are forced to one
of the other. There is no middle ground concerning one's state of belief.
For instance, if you almost believe something, that means you don't believe
it.
--
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http//www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
| User: "Andy W" |
|
| Title: Re: A few simple questions |
26 Apr 2007 03:02:31 PM |
|
|
On 26 Apr, 17:47, "Denis Loubet" <dlou...@io.com> wrote:
"Captain Compassion" <dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net> wrote in message
news:keh133h19pcb4ja3khiv5e9d2rrggu2bct@4ax.com...
On 26 Apr 2007 07:16:19 -0700, wrote:
Bigfoot, Loch Ness Monster and UFO's.
You are told you will go to hell for eternity if you don't believe
they exist or simply say you don't know if they exist. The only way to
have eternal salvation is to believe they exist. It does not matter if
you are a good person, just that you believe they exist.
Say you go over the evidence...and it's just not there for you...you
can't be honest with yourself and come to the conclusion that they
exist. True, they've been seen by thousands, movies and pictures
exist, many a book written about them...but the evidence just isn't
convincing enough to win you over.
1. Can you actually "just believe"?
2. Do you think God would be fooled by you if you profess to believe
when you don't/can't?
3. Is this line of thinking logical?
When it comes to the unknowable both belief and disbelief are
irrational positions.
Unfortunately, since belief is a binary proposition, you are forced to one
of the other. There is no middle ground concerning one's state of belief.
For instance, if you almost believe something, that means you don't believe
it.
--
Denis Loubet
dlou...@io.com
http//www.io.com/~dloubet- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Isn't that just a restriction of language though? I mean, you just
said you can almost believe something, implying a spectrum of belief
exists.
For example: I tend to consider "beliefs" to mean "things I think are
true" (for whatever reason).
"Disbelief" would then mean "things I think are false" and "unbelief"
is "things I do not have a view on if they are true or false." But
then what do you call "things I think are probably true"? If you
almost disbelieve something, does that mean you do believe it? Can you
quantify how much you believe something?
I hope I'm making sense here.
Andy
.
|
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: A few simple questions |
26 Apr 2007 07:28:05 PM |
|
|
"Andy W" <vorath@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:1177617751.689063.51970@o40g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
On 26 Apr, 17:47, "Denis Loubet" <dlou...@io.com> wrote:
"Captain Compassion" <dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net> wrote in message
news:keh133h19pcb4ja3khiv5e9d2rrggu2bct@4ax.com...
On 26 Apr 2007 07:16:19 -0700, wrote:
Bigfoot, Loch Ness Monster and UFO's.
You are told you will go to hell for eternity if you don't believe
they exist or simply say you don't know if they exist. The only way to
have eternal salvation is to believe they exist. It does not matter if
you are a good person, just that you believe they exist.
Say you go over the evidence...and it's just not there for you...you
can't be honest with yourself and come to the conclusion that they
exist. True, they've been seen by thousands, movies and pictures
exist, many a book written about them...but the evidence just isn't
convincing enough to win you over.
1. Can you actually "just believe"?
2. Do you think God would be fooled by you if you profess to believe
when you don't/can't?
3. Is this line of thinking logical?
When it comes to the unknowable both belief and disbelief are
irrational positions.
Unfortunately, since belief is a binary proposition, you are forced to
one
of the other. There is no middle ground concerning one's state of belief.
For instance, if you almost believe something, that means you don't
believe
it.
--
Denis Loubet
dlou...@io.com
http//www.io.com/~dloubet- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Isn't that just a restriction of language though? I mean, you just
said you can almost believe something, implying a spectrum of belief
exists.
No. The threshold from almost believing (not believing) to believing is
sharp as a knife.
For example: I tend to consider "beliefs" to mean "things I think are
true" (for whatever reason).
Ok.
"Disbelief" would then mean "things I think are false"
Ok.
and "unbelief"
is "things I do not have a view on if they are true or false."
Is there such a thing?
When asked whether you believe something to be true in your "unbelief"
catagory, if you can't answer yes, then it's clearly not in your belief
catagory. That means you don't believe it. The absence of a yes means no.
Just like "almost" is another way of avoiding saying yes.
But
then what do you call "things I think are probably true"?
If you can say yes when asked if you believe they're true, then they're in
the beliefs catagory. If you can't say yes, then obviously they're NOT in
the beliefs catagory, and you don't believe in things that are not in the
beliefs catagory.
If you
almost disbelieve something, does that mean you do believe it?
Yes. The threshold has not been passed. You can still say yes when asked if
you believe it.
Can you
quantify how much you believe something?
That's a good question. I don't have an answer to that.
I hope I'm making sense here.
Oh yes. I only hope I am. ;-)
--
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http//www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
| User: "Andy W" |
|
| Title: Re: A few simple questions |
27 Apr 2007 06:11:27 PM |
|
|
On 27 Apr, 01:28, "Denis Loubet" <dlou...@io.com> wrote:
"AndyW" <vor...@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:1177617751.689063.51970@o40g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
On 26 Apr, 17:47, "Denis Loubet" <dlou...@io.com> wrote:
"Captain Compassion" <dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net> wrote in message
news:keh133h19pcb4ja3khiv5e9d2rrggu2bct@4ax.com...
On 26 Apr 2007 07:16:19 -0700, wrote:
Bigfoot, Loch Ness Monster and UFO's.
You are told you will go to hell for eternity if you don't believe
they exist or simply say you don't know if they exist. The only way to
have eternal salvation is to believe they exist. It does not matter if
you are a good person, just that you believe they exist.
Say you go over the evidence...and it's just not there for you...you
can't be honest with yourself and come to the conclusion that they
exist. True, they've been seen by thousands, movies and pictures
exist, many a book written about them...but the evidence just isn't
convincing enough to win you over.
1. Can you actually "just believe"?
2. Do you think God would be fooled by you if you profess to believe
when you don't/can't?
3. Is this line of thinking logical?
When it comes to the unknowable both belief and disbelief are
irrational positions.
Unfortunately, since belief is a binary proposition, you are forced to
one
of the other. There is no middle ground concerning one's state of belief.
For instance, if you almost believe something, that means you don't
believe
it.
--
Denis Loubet
dlou...@io.com
http//www.io.com/~dloubet-Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Isn't that just a restriction of language though? I mean, you just
said you can almost believe something, implying a spectrum of belief
exists.
No. The threshold from almost believing (not believing) to believing is
sharp as a knife.
I'll come back to that later! Time for some rambling...
For example: I tend to consider "beliefs" to mean "things I think are
true" (for whatever reason).
Ok.
"Disbelief" would then mean "things I think are false"
Ok.
and "unbelief"
is "things I do not have a view on if they are true or false."
Is there such a thing?
I think there is. I came up with it after reading the weak/strong
atheism descriptions. Weak atheism would be unbelief (don't believe in
gods). Strong atheism would be disbelief (believe gods do not exist).
Subtle difference but it seems to be important to some people.
This would also cover things you don't believe in because you never
encountered them, such as the "default atheism" of babies, and things
you have heard of but just don't have enough information on e.g. is
there life on Mars? However I'm not sure I have the right word, and
saying "I unbelieve this" just sounds wrong.
When asked whether you believe something to be true in your "unbelief"
catagory. That means you don't believe it. The absence of a yes means no.
Just like "almost" is another way of avoiding saying yes.
When asked whether you believe something to be false in the "unbelief"
catagory, if you can't answer yes, then it's clearly not in the
disbelief category either.
But
then what do you call "things I think are probably true"?
If you can say yes when asked if you believe they're true, then they're in
the beliefs catagory. If you can't say yes, then obviously they're NOT in
the beliefs catagory, and you don't believe in things that are not in the
beliefs catagory.
If you
almost disbelieve something, does that mean you do believe it?
Yes. The threshold has not been passed. You can still say yes when asked if
you believe it.
There are a couple of other points that have occured to me while
thinking about this. The first is that although there seem to be at
least two categories outside of belief, I haven't thought of any
inside belief. And the second is that belief and disbelief are not
symmetrical opposites. If I consider the proposition "George W Bush is
an idiot" to be true, then I automatically consider the contradictory
proposition "George W Bush is a genius" false. But if I consider
"George W Bush is an idiot" false it doesn't necessarily mean I
believe "George W Bush is a genius". There are other possibilities.
Generally you can disbelieve many propositions but believe only one.
You stated earlier that "The threshold from almost believing (not
believing) to believing is sharp as a knife." I have tried to explain
why I think there is a spectrum. But I'm starting to think they might
both be true. Perhaps the spectrum only exists on the disbelief side,
but there's still a sharp boundary when you cross over into believing.
Just like water getting hotter until it turns to steam, a phase
transition.
Or I could just be spouting crap again. I'm very tired.
Andy
Can you
quantify how much you believe something?
That's a good question. I don't have an answer to that.
I hope I'm making sense here.
Oh yes. I only hope I am. ;-)
--
Denis Loubet
dlou...@io.com
http//www.io.com/~dloubet- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Captain Compassion" |
|
| Title: Re: A few simple questions |
26 Apr 2007 12:42:17 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 11:47:53 -0500, "Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com>
wrote:
"Captain Compassion" <daranc@NOSPAMcharter.net> wrote in message
news:keh133h19pcb4ja3khiv5e9d2rrggu2bct@4ax.com...
On 26 Apr 2007 07:16:19 -0700, wrote:
Bigfoot, Loch Ness Monster and UFO's.
You are told you will go to hell for eternity if you don't believe
they exist or simply say you don't know if they exist. The only way to
have eternal salvation is to believe they exist. It does not matter if
you are a good person, just that you believe they exist.
Say you go over the evidence...and it's just not there for you...you
can't be honest with yourself and come to the conclusion that they
exist. True, they've been seen by thousands, movies and pictures
exist, many a book written about them...but the evidence just isn't
convincing enough to win you over.
1. Can you actually "just believe"?
2. Do you think God would be fooled by you if you profess to believe
when you don't/can't?
3. Is this line of thinking logical?
When it comes to the unknowable both belief and disbelief are
irrational positions.
Unfortunately, since belief is a binary proposition, you are forced to one
of the other. There is no middle ground concerning one's state of belief.
For instance, if you almost believe something, that means you don't believe
it.
A rational position would be that the "something" is unknowable.
--
There may come a time when the CO2 police will wander the earth telling
the poor and the dispossed how many dung chips they can put on their
cook fires. -- Captain Compassion.
Wherever I go it will be well with me, for it was well with me here, not
on account of the place, but of my judgments which I shall carry away
with me, for no one can deprive me of these; on the contrary, they alone
are my property, and cannot be taken away, and to possess them suffices
me wherever I am or whatever I do. -- EPICTETUS
"Civilization is the interval between Ice Ages." -- Will Durant.
"Progress is the increasing control of the environment by life.
--Will Durant
Joseph R. Darancette
daranc@NOSPAMcharter.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: A few simple questions |
26 Apr 2007 07:14:54 PM |
|
|
"Captain Compassion" <daranc@NOSPAMcharter.net> wrote in message
news:6vo133he7qor24305opnc5o8lll79l8d4f@4ax.com...
On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 11:47:53 -0500, "Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com>
wrote:
"Captain Compassion" <daranc@NOSPAMcharter.net> wrote in message
news:keh133h19pcb4ja3khiv5e9d2rrggu2bct@4ax.com...
On 26 Apr 2007 07:16:19 -0700, wrote:
Bigfoot, Loch Ness Monster and UFO's.
You are told you will go to hell for eternity if you don't believe
they exist or simply say you don't know if they exist. The only way to
have eternal salvation is to believe they exist. It does not matter if
you are a good person, just that you believe they exist.
Say you go over the evidence...and it's just not there for you...you
can't be honest with yourself and come to the conclusion that they
exist. True, they've been seen by thousands, movies and pictures
exist, many a book written about them...but the evidence just isn't
convincing enough to win you over.
1. Can you actually "just believe"?
2. Do you think God would be fooled by you if you profess to believe
when you don't/can't?
3. Is this line of thinking logical?
When it comes to the unknowable both belief and disbelief are
irrational positions.
Unfortunately, since belief is a binary proposition, you are forced to one
of the other. There is no middle ground concerning one's state of belief.
For instance, if you almost believe something, that means you don't
believe
it.
A rational position would be that the "something" is unknowable.
We're not talking about knowledge, we're talking about belief. Belief is
binary. You either believe the something or you don't.
If something being unknowable means you don't believe it, then you don't
believe it.
--
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http//www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
| User: "Captain Compassion" |
|
| Title: Re: A few simple questions |
26 Apr 2007 08:02:47 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 19:14:54 -0500, "Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com>
wrote:
"Captain Compassion" <daranc@NOSPAMcharter.net> wrote in message
news:6vo133he7qor24305opnc5o8lll79l8d4f@4ax.com...
On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 11:47:53 -0500, "Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com>
wrote:
"Captain Compassion" <daranc@NOSPAMcharter.net> wrote in message
news:keh133h19pcb4ja3khiv5e9d2rrggu2bct@4ax.com...
On 26 Apr 2007 07:16:19 -0700, wrote:
Bigfoot, Loch Ness Monster and UFO's.
You are told you will go to hell for eternity if you don't believe
they exist or simply say you don't know if they exist. The only way to
have eternal salvation is to believe they exist. It does not matter if
you are a good person, just that you believe they exist.
Say you go over the evidence...and it's just not there for you...you
can't be honest with yourself and come to the conclusion that they
exist. True, they've been seen by thousands, movies and pictures
exist, many a book written about them...but the evidence just isn't
convincing enough to win you over.
1. Can you actually "just believe"?
2. Do you think God would be fooled by you if you profess to believe
when you don't/can't?
3. Is this line of thinking logical?
When it comes to the unknowable both belief and disbelief are
irrational positions.
Unfortunately, since belief is a binary proposition, you are forced to one
of the other. There is no middle ground concerning one's state of belief.
For instance, if you almost believe something, that means you don't
believe
it.
A rational position would be that the "something" is unknowable.
We're not talking about knowledge, we're talking about belief. Belief is
binary. You either believe the something or you don't.
Belief assumes hidden knowledge.
If something being unknowable means you don't believe it, then you don't
believe it.
Belief is not a rational position.
"There is no mathematical symbol for belief." -- Captain Compassion
--
There may come a time when the CO2 police will wander the earth telling
the poor and the dispossed how many dung chips they can put on their
cook fires. -- Captain Compassion.
Wherever I go it will be well with me, for it was well with me here, not
on account of the place, but of my judgments which I shall carry away
with me, for no one can deprive me of these; on the contrary, they alone
are my property, and cannot be taken away, and to possess them suffices
me wherever I am or whatever I do. -- EPICTETUS
"Civilization is the interval between Ice Ages." -- Will Durant.
"Progress is the increasing control of the environment by life.
--Will Durant
Joseph R. Darancette
daranc@NOSPAMcharter.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Vic" |
|
| Title: Re: A few simple questions |
27 Apr 2007 01:11:31 AM |
|
|
One fine day in alt.atheism, Captain Compassion
<daranc@NOSPAMcharter.net> bloodied us up with this:
A rational position would be that the "something" is unknowable.
We're not talking about knowledge, we're talking about belief. Belief
is binary. You either believe the something or you don't.
Belief assumes hidden knowledge.
And "assume" makes an ***** out of U and Me. The only knowledge behind
belief is that one knows he believes.
If something being unknowable means you don't believe it, then you
don't believe it.
Belief is not a rational position.
"There is no mathematical symbol for belief." -- Captain Compassion
I'll agree with that.
--
Uncle Vic
aa Atheist #2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department.
Convicted by Earthquack. Plonked by Fester.
Member Duke Spanking Club.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Captain Compassion" |
|
| Title: Re: A few simple questions |
27 Apr 2007 10:36:45 AM |
|
|
On 27 Apr 2007 06:11:31 GMT, Uncle Vic <address@withheld.com> wrote:
One fine day in alt.atheism, Captain Compassion
<daranc@NOSPAMcharter.net> bloodied us up with this:
A rational position would be that the "something" is unknowable.
We're not talking about knowledge, we're talking about belief. Belief
is binary. You either believe the something or you don't.
Belief assumes hidden knowledge.
And "assume" makes an ***** out of U and Me. The only knowledge behind
belief is that one knows he believes.
Correct
If something being unknowable means you don't believe it, then you
don't believe it.
Belief is not a rational position.
"There is no mathematical symbol for belief." -- Captain Compassion
I'll agree with that.
But wouldn't asserting the negative (disbelief) with no way to verify
of falsify the hypothesis also be not rational?
--
There may come a time when the CO2 police will wander the earth telling
the poor and the dispossed how many dung chips they can put on their
cook fires. -- Captain Compassion.
Wherever I go it will be well with me, for it was well with me here, not
on account of the place, but of my judgments which I shall carry away
with me, for no one can deprive me of these; on the contrary, they alone
are my property, and cannot be taken away, and to possess them suffices
me wherever I am or whatever I do. -- EPICTETUS
"Civilization is the interval between Ice Ages." -- Will Durant.
"Progress is the increasing control of the environment by life.
--Will Durant
Joseph R. Darancette
daranc@NOSPAMcharter.net
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: A few simple questions |
26 Apr 2007 03:52:27 PM |
|
|
On Apr 26, 10:39 am, Captain Compassion <dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net>
wrote:
On 26 Apr 2007 07:16:19 -0700, wrote:
Bigfoot, Loch Ness Monster and UFO's.
You are told you will go to hell for eternity if you don't believe
they exist or simply say you don't know if they exist. The only way to
have eternal salvation is to believe they exist. It does not matter if
you are a good person, just that you believe they exist.
Say you go over the evidence...and it's just not there for you...you
can't be honest with yourself and come to the conclusion that they
exist. True, they've been seen by thousands, movies and pictures
exist, many a book written about them...but the evidence just isn't
convincing enough to win you over.
1. Can you actually "just believe"?
2. Do you think God would be fooled by you if you profess to believe
when you don't/can't?
3. Is this line of thinking logical?
When it comes to the unknowable both belief and disbelief are
irrational positions.
--
There may come a time when the CO2 police will wander the earth telling
the poor and the dispossed how many dung chips they can put on their
cook fires. -- Captain Compassion.
Wherever I go it will be well with me, for it was well with me here, not
on account of the place, but of my judgments which I shall carry away
with me, for no one can deprive me of these; on the contrary, they alone
are my property, and cannot be taken away, and to possess them suffices
me wherever I am or whatever I do. -- EPICTETUS
"Civilization is the interval between Ice Ages." -- Will Durant.
"Progress is the increasing control of the environment by life.
--Will Durant
Joseph R. Darancette
dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net
By stating it is unknowable to know if god exists in reality you are
stating he doesn't exist.
If he does exist, then it is knowable...he can make himself known to
you. Only if he does not exist would it be unknowable, since he will
never make himself known.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Captain Compassion" |
|
| Title: Re: A few simple questions |
26 Apr 2007 07:59:02 PM |
|
|
On 26 Apr 2007 13:52:27 -0700, wrote:
On Apr 26, 10:39 am, Captain Compassion <dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net>
wrote:
On 26 Apr 2007 07:16:19 -0700, wrote:
Bigfoot, Loch Ness Monster and UFO's.
You are told you will go to hell for eternity if you don't believe
they exist or simply say you don't know if they exist. The only way to
have eternal salvation is to believe they exist. It does not matter if
you are a good person, just that you believe they exist.
Say you go over the evidence...and it's just not there for you...you
can't be honest with yourself and come to the conclusion that they
exist. True, they've been seen by thousands, movies and pictures
exist, many a book written about them...but the evidence just isn't
convincing enough to win you over.
1. Can you actually "just believe"?
2. Do you think God would be fooled by you if you profess to believe
when you don't/can't?
3. Is this line of thinking logical?
When it comes to the unknowable both belief and disbelief are
irrational positions.
--
There may come a time when the CO2 police will wander the earth telling
the poor and the dispossed how many dung chips they can put on their
cook fires. -- Captain Compassion.
Wherever I go it will be well with me, for it was well with me here, not
on account of the place, but of my judgments which I shall carry away
with me, for no one can deprive me of these; on the contrary, they alone
are my property, and cannot be taken away, and to possess them suffices
me wherever I am or whatever I do. -- EPICTETUS
"Civilization is the interval between Ice Ages." -- Will Durant.
"Progress is the increasing control of the environment by life.
--Will Durant
Joseph R. Darancette
dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net
By stating it is unknowable to know if god exists in reality you are
stating he doesn't exist.
I'm stating that I can't know this. To state that God doesn't exist
assumes I have some sort of knowledge of the subject.
If he does exist, then it is knowable...he can make himself known to
you. Only if he does not exist would it be unknowable, since he will
never make himself known.
Many things are unknowable.
--
There may come a time when the CO2 police will wander the earth telling
the poor and the dispossed how many dung chips they can put on their
cook fires. -- Captain Compassion.
Wherever I go it will be well with me, for it was well with me here, not
on account of the place, but of my judgments which I shall carry away
with me, for no one can deprive me of these; on the contrary, they alone
are my property, and cannot be taken away, and to possess them suffices
me wherever I am or whatever I do. -- EPICTETUS
"Civilization is the interval between Ice Ages." -- Will Durant.
"Progress is the increasing control of the environment by life.
--Will Durant
Joseph R. Darancette
daranc@NOSPAMcharter.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: A few simple questions |
26 Apr 2007 09:54:41 PM |
|
|
On Apr 26, 7:59 pm, Captain Compassion <dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net>
wrote:
On 26 Apr 2007 13:52:27 -0700, wrote:
On Apr 26, 10:39 am, Captain Compassion <dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net>
wrote:
On 26 Apr 2007 07:16:19 -0700, wrote:
Bigfoot, Loch Ness Monster and UFO's.
You are told you will go to hell for eternity if you don't believe
they exist or simply say you don't know if they exist. The only way to
have eternal salvation is to believe they exist. It does not matter if
you are a good person, just that you believe they exist.
Say you go over the evidence...and it's just not there for you...you
can't be honest with yourself and come to the conclusion that they
exist. True, they've been seen by thousands, movies and pictures
exist, many a book written about them...but the evidence just isn't
convincing enough to win you over.
1. Can you actually "just believe"?
2. Do you think God would be fooled by you if you profess to believe
when you don't/can't?
3. Is this line of thinking logical?
When it comes to the unknowable both belief and disbelief are
irrational positions.
--
There may come a time when the CO2 police will wander the earth telling
the poor and the dispossed how many dung chips they can put on their
cook fires. -- Captain Compassion.
Wherever I go it will be well with me, for it was well with me here, not
on account of the place, but of my judgments which I shall carry away
with me, for no one can deprive me of these; on the contrary, they alone
are my property, and cannot be taken away, and to possess them suffices
me wherever I am or whatever I do. -- EPICTETUS
"Civilization is the interval between Ice Ages." -- Will Durant.
"Progress is the increasing control of the environment by life.
--Will Durant
Joseph R. Darancette
dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net
By stating it is unknowable to know if god exists in reality you are
stating he doesn't exist.
I'm stating that I can't know this.
It would be correct for you to say you don't know. Saying you can't
know would not be correct. If god did exist, it would be possible for
you to know. By saying you can't know implies that god is not capable
of telling you he exists. A god that isn't powerful enough to let you
know he exists is no god by any definition.
To state that God doesn't exist
assumes I have some sort of knowledge of the subject.
Actually, it is not possible to state with 100% certainty that god
does not exist, no matter how much knowledge you have of the subject.
But it is possible to state god does exist, given he exists of course.
If he does exist, then it is knowable...he can make himself known to
you. Only if he does not exist would it be unknowable, since he will
never make himself known.
Many things are unknowable.
Again, to be correct you should say there are many things you don't
know. There is no way for you to know if something is unknowable.
--
There may come a time when the CO2 police will wander the earth telling
the poor and the dispossed how many dung chips they can put on their
cook fires. -- Captain Compassion.
Wherever I go it will be well with me, for it was well with me here, not
on account of the place, but of my judgments which I shall carry away
with me, for no one can deprive me of these; on the contrary, they alone
are my property, and cannot be taken away, and to possess them suffices
me wherever I am or whatever I do. -- EPICTETUS
"Civilization is the interval between Ice Ages." -- Will Durant.
"Progress is the increasing control of the environment by life.
--Will Durant
Joseph R. Darancette
dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ben Kaufman" |
|
| Title: Re: A few simple questions |
27 Apr 2007 07:12:29 AM |
|
|
On 26 Apr 2007 19:54:41 -0700, wrote:
Actually, it is not possible to state with 100% certainty that god
does not exist, no matter how much knowledge you have of the subject.
But it is possible to state god does exist, given he exists of course.
That's incorrect and especially if you claim to have vast amounts of knowledge
on the subject. For example, are you not 100% sure that (deliberately picking a
less controversial god) Zeus was a myth?
Ben
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: A few simple questions |
27 Apr 2007 08:26:31 AM |
|
|
On Apr 27, 7:12 am, Ben Kaufman <spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-
doll...@pobox.com> wrote:
On 26 Apr 2007 19:54:41 -0700, wrote:
Actually, it is not possible to state with 100% certainty that god
does not exist, no matter how much knowledge you have of the subject.
But it is possible to state god does exist, given he exists of course.
That's incorrect and especially if you claim to have vast amounts of knowledge
on the subject. For example, are you not 100% sure that (deliberately picking a
less controversial god) Zeus was a myth?
Ben
There is no way for me to have enough knowledge to state with 100%
certainty that Zeus was a myth. There is always that small chance, no
matter how unlikely, that he does exist. You say he was a myth, maybe
I put him in a jar and buried him in my backyard. Prove me wrong.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ben Kaufman" |
|
| Title: Re: A few simple questions |
28 Apr 2007 06:47:38 AM |
|
|
On 27 Apr 2007 06:26:31 -0700, wrote:
On Apr 27, 7:12 am, Ben Kaufman <spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-
doll...@pobox.com> wrote:
On 26 Apr 2007 19:54:41 -0700, wrote:
Actually, it is not possible to state with 100% certainty that god
does not exist, no matter how much knowledge you have of the subject.
But it is possible to state god does exist, given he exists of course.
That's incorrect and especially if you claim to have vast amounts of knowledge
on the subject. For example, are you not 100% sure that (deliberately picking a
less controversial god) Zeus was a myth?
Ben
There is no way for me to have enough knowledge to state with 100%
certainty that Zeus was a myth. There is always that small chance, no
matter how unlikely, that he does exist. You say he was a myth, maybe
I put him in a jar and buried him in my backyard. Prove me wrong.
There is indisputable evidence that Zeus was a fictional character in Greek
mythology. There is no possibility that this "king of gods" actually existed in
real life too because history and science both contradict what, according to
mythology, he did.
So, if someone were to actually claim that "the zeus" was over at their house I
would not ask for proof because I am certain the person is being either
untruthful, extremely gullible or has mental problems.
Ben
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: A few simple questions |
30 Apr 2007 09:12:16 AM |
|
|
On Apr 28, 6:47 am, Ben Kaufman <spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-
doll...@pobox.com> wrote:
On 27 Apr 2007 06:26:31 -0700, wrote:
On Apr 27, 7:12 am, Ben Kaufman <spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-
doll...@pobox.com> wrote:
On 26 Apr 2007 19:54:41 -0700, wrote:
Actually, it is not possible to state with 100% certainty that god
does not exist, no matter how much knowledge you have of the subject.
But it is possible to state god does exist, given he exists of course.
That's incorrect and especially if you claim to have vast amounts of knowledge
on the subject. For example, are you not 100% sure that (deliberately picking a
less controversial god) Zeus was a myth?
Ben
There is no way for me to have enough knowledge to state with 100%
certainty that Zeus was a myth. There is always that small chance, no
matter how unlikely, that he does exist. You say he was a myth, maybe
I put him in a jar and buried him in my backyard. Prove me wrong.
There is indisputable evidence that Zeus was a fictional character in Greek
mythology. There is no possibility that this "king of gods" actually existed in
real life too because history and science both contradict what, according to
mythology, he did.
So, if someone were to actually claim that "the zeus" was over at their house I
would not ask for proof because I am certain the person is being either
untruthful, extremely gullible or has mental problems.
Ben
I am not saying I think Zeus or any other gods exist, just stating
that there is no way to prove the negative statement with 100%
certainty that there is no (fill in the blank with the god of your
choice).
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ben Kaufman" |
|
| Title: Re: A few simple questions |
01 May 2007 08:43:36 PM |
|
|
On 30 Apr 2007 07:12:16 -0700, wrote:
On Apr 28, 6:47 am, Ben Kaufman <spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-
doll...@pobox.com> wrote:
On 27 Apr 2007 06:26:31 -0700, wrote:
On Apr 27, 7:12 am, Ben Kaufman <spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-
doll...@pobox.com> wrote:
On 26 Apr 2007 19:54:41 -0700, wrote:
Actually, it is not possible to state with 100% certainty that god
does not exist, no matter how much knowledge you have of the subject.
But it is possible to state god does exist, given he exists of course.
That's incorrect and especially if you claim to have vast amounts of knowledge
on the subject. For example, are you not 100% sure that (deliberately picking a
less controversial god) Zeus was a myth?
Ben
There is no way for me to have enough knowledge to state with 100%
certainty that Zeus was a myth. There is always that small chance, no
matter how unlikely, that he does exist. You say he was a myth, maybe
I put him in a jar and buried him in my backyard. Prove me wrong.
There is indisputable evidence that Zeus was a fictional character in Greek
mythology. There is no possibility that this "king of gods" actually existed in
real life too because history and science both contradict what, according to
mythology, he did.
So, if someone were to actually claim that "the zeus" was over at their house I
would not ask for proof because I am certain the person is being either
untruthful, extremely gullible or has mental problems.
Ben
I am not saying I think Zeus or any other gods exist, just stating
that there is no way to prove the negative statement with 100%
certainty that there is no (fill in the blank with the god of your
choice).
The claim of not being able to attain 100% certainty would be valid for a god
that never did anything so there is nothing to refute. However, most gods have
a long list of "accomplishments" attributed to them, which are refuted by
history and science.
Ben
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: A few simple questions |
02 May 2007 10:28:14 AM |
|
|
On May 1, 8:43 pm, Ben Kaufman <spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-
doll...@pobox.com> wrote:
On 30 Apr 2007 07:12:16 -0700, wrote:
On Apr 28, 6:47 am, Ben Kaufman <spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-
doll...@pobox.com> wrote:
On 27 Apr 2007 06:26:31 -0700, wrote:
On Apr 27, 7:12 am, Ben Kaufman <spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-
doll...@pobox.com> wrote:
On 26 Apr 2007 19:54:41 -0700, wrote:
Actually, it is not possible to state with 100% certainty that god
does not exist, no matter how much knowledge you have of the subject.
But it is possible to state god does exist, given he exists of course.
That's incorrect and especially if you claim to have vast amounts of knowledge
on the subject. For example, are you not 100% sure that (deliberately picking a
less controversial god) Zeus was a myth?
Ben
There is no way for me to have enough knowledge to state with 100%
certainty that Zeus was a myth. There is always that small chance, no
matter how unlikely, that he does exist. You say he was a myth, maybe
I put him in a jar and buried him in my backyard. Prove me wrong.
There is indisputable evidence that Zeus was a fictional character in Greek
mythology. There is no possibility that this "king of gods" actually existed in
real life too because history and science both contradict what, according to
mythology, he did.
So, if someone were to actually claim that "the zeus" was over at their house I
would not ask for proof because I am certain the person is being either
untruthful, extremely gullible or has mental problems.
Ben
I am not saying I think Zeus or any other gods exist, just stating
that there is no way to prove the negative statement with 100%
certainty that there is no (fill in the blank with the god of your
choice).
The claim of not being able to attain 100% certainty would be valid for a god
that never did anything so there is nothing to refute. However, most gods have
a long list of "accomplishments" attributed to them, which are refuted by
history and science.
Ben
Which technically is still not the case. Zeus could have done all the
things written about him, and being all powerful and all he could have
made it look like he didn't/wiped all evidence. Don't worry, I'm not
arguing in favor of any of the gods, just making a point.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Painter" |
|
| Title: Re: A few simple questions |
02 May 2007 11:44:57 AM |
|
|
wrote:
I am not saying I think Zeus or any other gods exist, just stating
that there is no way to prove the negative statement with 100%
certainty that there is no (fill in the blank with the god of your
choice).
The claim of not being able to attain 100% certainty would be valid
for a god that never did anything so there is nothing to refute.
However, most gods have a long list of "accomplishments" attributed
to them, which are refuted by history and science.
Ben
Which technically is still not the case. Zeus could have done all the
things written about him, and being all powerful and all he could have
made it look like he didn't/wiped all evidence. Don't worry, I'm not
arguing in favor of any of the gods, just making a point.
Yes and near the foot of that slippery slope is Maeve The Cat who created
the universe Last Thursday. Not only did she make the universe look old but
she made us think we were alive more than a week ago.
She even made me believe that there used to be a web site with her picture
on it and my name listed among the faithful.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ben Kaufman" |
|
| Title: Re: A few simple questions |
02 May 2007 09:36:21 PM |
|
|
On 2 May 2007 08:28:14 -0700, wrote:
On May 1, 8:43 pm, Ben Kaufman <spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-
doll...@pobox.com> wrote:
On 30 Apr 2007 07:12:16 -0700, wrote:
On Apr 28, 6:47 am, Ben Kaufman <spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-
doll...@pobox.com> wrote:
On 27 Apr 2007 06:26:31 -0700, wrote:
On Apr 27, 7:12 am, Ben Kaufman <spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-
doll...@pobox.com> wrote:
On 26 Apr 2007 19:54:41 -0700, wrote:
Actually, it is not possible to state with 100% certainty that god
does not exist, no matter how much knowledge you have of the subject.
But it is possible to state god does exist, given he exists of course.
That's incorrect and especially if you claim to have vast amounts of knowledge
on the subject. For example, are you not 100% sure that (deliberately picking a
less controversial god) Zeus was a myth?
Ben
There is no way for me to have enough knowledge to state with 100%
certainty that Zeus was a myth. There is always that small chance, no
matter how unlikely, that he does exist. You say he was a myth, maybe
I put him in a jar and buried him in my backyard. Prove me wrong.
There is indisputable evidence that Zeus was a fictional character in Greek
mythology. There is no possibility that this "king of gods" actually existed in
real life too because history and science both contradict what, according to
mythology, he did.
So, if someone were to actually claim that "the zeus" was over at their house I
would not ask for proof because I am certain the person is being either
untruthful, extremely gullible or has mental problems.
Ben
I am not saying I think Zeus or any other gods exist, just stating
that there is no way to prove the negative statement with 100%
certainty that there is no (fill in the blank with the god of your
choice).
The claim of not being able to attain 100% certainty would be valid for a god
that never did anything so there is nothing to refute. However, most gods have
a long list of "accomplishments" attributed to them, which are refuted by
history and science.
Ben
Which technically is still not the case. Zeus could have done all the
things written about him, and being all powerful and all he could have
made it look like he didn't/wiped all evidence. Don't worry, I'm not
arguing in favor of any of the gods, just making a point.
I disagree because an absurd hypothesis can be impossible.
Ben
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A.Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: A few simple questions |
30 Apr 2007 09:14:52 AM |
|
|
On 30 Apr 2007 07:12:16 -0700, wrote:
On Apr 28, 6:47 am, Ben Kaufman <spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-
doll...@pobox.com> wrote:
There is no way for me to have enough knowledge to state with 100%
certainty that Zeus was a myth. There is always that small chance, no
matter how unlikely, that he does exist. You say he was a myth, maybe
I put him in a jar and buried him in my backyard. Prove me wrong.
There is indisputable evidence that Zeus was a fictional character in Greek
mythology. There is no possibility that this "king of gods" actually existed in
real life too because history and science both contradict what, according to
mythology, he did.
So, if someone were to actually claim that "the zeus" was over at their house I
would not ask for proof because I am certain the person is being either
untruthful, extremely gullible or has mental problems.
Ben
I am not saying I think Zeus or any other gods exist, just stating
that there is no way to prove the negative statement with 100%
certainty that there is no (fill in the blank with the god of your
choice).
But theirs is different - whichever one it is. Just as Zeus was
different for the ancient Greeks.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A.Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: A few simple questions |
28 Apr 2007 06:52:50 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 28 Apr 2007 07:47:38 -0400, Ben Kaufman
<spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-dollars@pobox.com> wrote:
On 27 Apr 2007 06:26:31 -0700, wrote:
On Apr 27, 7:12 am, Ben Kaufman <spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-
doll...@pobox.com> wrote:
On 26 Apr 2007 19:54:41 -0700, wrote:
Actually, it is not possible to state with 100% certainty that god
does not exist, no matter how much knowledge you have of the subject.
But it is possible to state god does exist, given he exists of course.
That's incorrect and especially if you claim to have vast amounts of knowledge
on the subject. For example, are you not 100% sure that (deliberately picking a
less controversial god) Zeus was a myth?
Ben
There is no way for me to have enough knowledge to state with 100%
certainty that Zeus was a myth. There is always that small chance, no
matter how unlikely, that he does exist. You say he was a myth, maybe
I put him in a jar and buried him in my backyard. Prove me wrong.
There is indisputable evidence that Zeus was a fictional character in Greek
mythology. There is no possibility that this "king of gods" actually existed in
real life too because history and science both contradict what, according to
mythology, he did.
So, if someone were to actually claim that "the zeus" was over at their house I
would not ask for proof because I am certain the person is being either
untruthful, extremely gullible or has mental problems.
Not even to get them to put up or shut up?
But in any case this makes it no different than Christians.
Ben
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ben Kaufman" |
|
| Title: Re: A few simple questions |
29 Apr 2007 07:06:10 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 28 Apr 2007 07:52:50 -0400, Christopher A.Lee <calee@optonline.net>
wrote:
On Sat, 28 Apr 2007 07:47:38 -0400, Ben Kaufman
<spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-dollars@pobox.com> wrote:
On 27 Apr 2007 06:26:31 -0700, wrote:
On Apr 27, 7:12 am, Ben Kaufman <spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-
doll...@pobox.com> wrote:
On 26 Apr 2007 19:54:41 -0700, wrote:
Actually, it is not possible to state with 100% certainty that god
does not exist, no matter how much knowledge you have of the subject.
But it is possible to state god does exist, given he exists of course.
That's incorrect and especially if you claim to have vast amounts of knowledge
on the subject. For example, are you not 100% sure that (deliberately picking a
less controversial god) Zeus was a myth?
Ben
There is no way for me to have enough knowledge to state with 100%
certainty that Zeus was a myth. There is always that small chance, no
matter how unlikely, that he does exist. You say he was a myth, maybe
I put him in a jar and buried him in my backyard. Prove me wrong.
There is indisputable evidence that Zeus was a fictional character in Greek
mythology. There is no possibility that this "king of gods" actually existed in
real life too because history and science both contradict what, according to
mythology, he did.
So, if someone were to actually claim that "the zeus" was over at their house I
would not ask for proof because I am certain the person is being either
untruthful, extremely gullible or has mental problems.
Not even to get them to put up or shut up?
But in any case this makes it no different than Christians.
Have you ever succeeded in getting one of them to shut up? :-)
Ben
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Captain Compassion" |
|
| Title: Re: A few simple questions |
27 Apr 2007 12:31:37 AM |
|
|
On 26 Apr 2007 19:54:41 -0700, wrote:
On Apr 26, 7:59 pm, Captain Compassion <dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net>
wrote:
On 26 Apr 2007 13:52:27 -0700, wrote:
On Apr 26, 10:39 am, Captain Compassion <dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net>
wrote:
On 26 Apr 2007 07:16:19 -0700, wrote:
Bigfoot, Loch Ness Monster and UFO's.
You are told you will go to hell for eternity if you don't believe
they exist or simply say you don't know if they exist. The only way to
have eternal salvation is to believe they exist. It does not matter if
you are a good person, just that you believe they exist.
Say you go over the evidence...and it's just not there for you...you
can't be honest with yourself and come to the conclusion that they
exist. True, they've been seen by thousands, movies and pictures
exist, many a book written about them...but the evidence just isn't
convincing enough to win you over.
1. Can you actually "just believe"?
2. Do you think God would be fooled by you if you profess to believe
when you don't/can't?
3. Is this line of thinking logical?
When it comes to the unknowable both belief and disbelief are
irrational positions.
--
There may come a time when the CO2 police will wander the earth telling
the poor and the dispossed how many dung chips they can put on their
cook fires. -- Captain Compassion.
Wherever I go it will be well with me, for it was well with me here, not
on account of the place, but of my judgments which I shall carry away
with me, for no one can deprive me of these; on the contrary, they alone
are my property, and cannot be taken away, and to possess them suffices
me wherever I am or whatever I do. -- EPICTETUS
"Civilization is the interval between Ice Ages." -- Will Durant.
"Progress is the increasing control of the environment by life.
--Will Durant
Joseph R. Darancette
dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net
By stating it is unknowable to know if god exists in reality you are
stating he doesn't exist.
I'm stating that I can't know this.
It would be correct for you to say you don't know. Saying you can't
know would not be correct. If god did exist, it would be possible for
you to know. By saying you can't know implies that god is not capable
of telling you he exists. A god that isn't powerful enough to let you
know he exists is no god by any definition.
I wouldn't know this.
To state that God doesn't exist
assumes I have some sort of knowledge of the subject.
Actually, it is not possible to state with 100% certainty that god
does not exist, no matter how much knowledge you have of the subject.
But it is possible to state god does exist, given he exists of course.
If he does exist, then it is knowable...he can make himself known to
you. Only if he does not exist would it be unknowable, since he will
never make himself known.
Many things are unknowable.
Again, to be correct you should say there are many things you don't
know. There is no way for you to know if something is unknowable.
Taking existing laws of relativity it is impossible to know what is
happening on Alpha Centari in real time. I can know what was happening
4.37 years ago.
A policeman pulls Werner Heisenberg over on the autobahn for speeding.
Policeman: Sir, do you know how fast you were going ?
Heisenberg: No, but I know exactly where I am. -- Unk
--
There may come a time when the CO2 police will wander the earth telling
the poor and the dispossed how many dung chips they can put on their
cook fires. -- Captain Compassion.
Wherever I go it will be well with me, for it was well with me here, not
on account of the place, but of my judgments which I shall carry away
with me, for no one can deprive me of these; on the contrary, they alone
are my property, and cannot be taken away, and to possess them suffices
me wherever I am or whatever I do. -- EPICTETUS
"Civilization is the interval between Ice Ages." -- Will Durant.
"Progress is the increasing control of the environment by life.
--Will Durant
Joseph R. Darancette
dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net
--
There may come a time when the CO2 police will wander the earth telling
the poor and the dispossed how many dung chips they can put on their
cook fires. -- Captain Compassion.
Wherever I go it will be well with me, for it was well with me here, not
on account of the place, but of my judgments which I shall carry away
with me, for no one can deprive me of these; on the contrary, they alone
are my property, and cannot be taken away, and to possess them suffices
me wherever I am or whatever I do. -- EPICTETUS
"Civilization is the interval between Ice Ages." -- Will Durant.
"Progress is the increasing control of the environment by life.
--Will Durant
Joseph R. Darancette
daranc@NOSPAMcharter.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: A few simple questions |
27 Apr 2007 08:18:35 AM |
|
|
On Apr 27, 12:31 am, Captain Compassion <dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net>
wrote:
On 26 Apr 2007 19:54:41 -0700, wrote:
On Apr 26, 7:59 pm, Captain Compassion <dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net>
wrote:
On 26 Apr 2007 13:52:27 -0700, wrote:
On Apr 26, 10:39 am, Captain Compassion <dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net>
wrote:
On 26 Apr 2007 07:16:19 -0700, wrote:
Bigfoot, Loch Ness Monster and UFO's.
You are told you will go to hell for eternity if you don't believe
they exist or simply say you don't know if they exist. The only way to
have eternal salvation is to believe they exist. It does not matter if
you are a good person, just that you believe they exist.
Say you go over the evidence...and it's just not there for you...you
can't be honest with yourself and come to the conclusion that they
exist. True, they've been seen by thousands, movies and pictures
exist, many a book written about them...but the evidence just isn't
convincing enough to win you over.
1. Can you actually "just believe"?
2. Do you think God would be fooled by you if you profess to believe
when you don't/can't?
3. Is this line of thinking logical?
When it comes to the unknowable both belief and disbelief are
irrational positions.
--
There may come a time when the CO2 police will wander the earth telling
the poor and the dispossed how many dung chips they can put on their
cook fires. -- Captain Compassion.
Wherever I go it will be well with me, for it was well with me here, not
on account of the place, but of my judgments which I shall carry away
with me, for no one can deprive me of these; on the contrary, they alone
are my property, and cannot be taken away, and to possess them suffices
me wherever I am or whatever I do. -- EPICTETUS
"Civilization is the interval between Ice Ages." -- Will Durant.
"Progress is the increasing control of the environment by life.
--Will Durant
Joseph R. Darancette
dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net
By stating it is unknowable to know if god exists in reality you are
stating he doesn't exist.
I'm stating that I can't know this.
It would be correct for you to say you don't know. Saying you can't
know would not be correct. If god did exist, it would be possible for
you to know. By saying you can't know implies that god is not capable
of telling you he exists. A god that isn't powerful enough to let you
know he exists is no god by any definition.
I wouldn't know this.
To state that God doesn't exist
assumes I have some sort of knowledge of the subject.
Actually, it is not possible to state with 100% certainty that god
does not exist, no matter how much knowledge you have of the subject.
But it is possible to state god does exist, given he exists of course.
If he does exist, then it is knowable...he can make himself known to
you. Only if he does not exist would it be unknowable, since he will
never make himself known.
Many things are unknowable.
Again, to be correct you should say there are many things you don't
know. There is no way for you to know if something is unknowable.
Taking existing laws of relativity it is impossible to know what is
happening on Alpha Centari in real time. I can know what was happening
4.37 years ago.
Which is not the same as saying you can't know. Again, saying you
don't know is correct. Can't implies there is no way for you to
know,ever, no matter what. Who knows, maybe a Casimir vaccum or
Tachyons or something else not yet discovered would allow this.
A policeman pulls Werner Heisenberg over on the autobahn for speeding.
Policeman: Sir, do you know how fast you were going ?
Heisenberg: No, but I know exactly where I am. -- Unk
--
There may come a time when the CO2 police will wander the earth telling
the poor and the dispossed how many dung chips they can put on their
cook fires. -- Captain Compassion.
Wherever I go it will be well with me, for it was well with me here, not
on account of the place, but of my judgments which I shall carry away
with me, for no one can deprive me of these; on the contrary, they alone
are my property, and cannot be taken away, and to possess them suffices
me wherever I am or whatever I do. -- EPICTETUS
"Civilization is the interval between Ice Ages." -- Will Durant.
"Progress is the increasing control of the environment by life.
--Will Durant
Joseph R. Darancette
dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net
--
There may come a time when the CO2 police will wander the earth telling
the poor and the dispossed how many dung chips they can put on their
cook fires. -- Captain Compassion.
Wherever I go it will be well with me, for it was well with me here, not
on account of the place, but of my judgments which I shall carry away
with me, for no one can deprive me of these; on the contrary, they alone
are my property, and cannot be taken away, and to possess them suffices
me wherever I am or whatever I do. -- EPICTETUS
"Civilization is the interval between Ice Ages." -- Will Durant.
"Progress is the increasing control of the environment by life.
--Will Durant
Joseph R. Darancette
dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
