Battle Talk ~ Battle Royale VII
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
- Status
Charismata
New member
quip I would suggest rereading my post or taking a course in reading comprehension because you completely missed the point.
I think this ain't valid reasoning. Events are linked together through chains of causes and effects. The cause and effect chain has no limit on either side. Therefore there is no begin to the causality chain. All the chains of all the events in the universe, therefore form eternal chains of causes and effects, without begin or end.
The error in the Kalam cosmological argument is that it is assumed that the universe had a begin. We do not find however any proof for that statement. And the assumption itself can be shown to violate causality, because the begin of the universe then was an effect without any cause, otherwise, there would not be a begin.
For a more lenghty debate on this issue, read this paragraph of the book Anti-Duhring by Friedrich Engels about Philosophy of Nature: Time and Space.
Further it is a meaningless statement to claim that only things that begin to exist have causes. The sun for example had a beginning in time (it can be viewed as the start of the thermonuclear reactions inside the gaseous sphere that define the sun), as if causality would leave the sun after it had became a sun by emitting light untouched thereafter. For every photon emitted by the sun, of course the causal laws apply.
Cause and effect can be used interchangeably, which means that any event which is a cause, also is an effect in some other causal relationship. This leads to the argument that no beginning or end of a chain of causality can be conceived of, other then in direct conflict with causality itself.
Since we assume causality to be in effect at all time, we therefore can not assume some final cause (which also would be a first effect, without a cause) to exist.
The universe exists in a causal way, which means it unfolds in time endlessly. Time therefore can not be conceived of having a begin or end.
Last edited:
Re: Questions for Atheists....
Re: Questions for Atheists....
Here are some remarks on this. Wether one is atheistic or theistic, we are all humans and as humans we are bound to our human existence, which is a product of the material reality.
As humans we can not escape from the fact that we care about our existence (wether or not we admit that fact), cause it's our biological nature. We are here, and we survived millions of years of natural struggle and building civilization.
If there had been anything withing our biological nature that permitted us as species to be careless about our survival, we would have already gone extinct. Nature is as simple as that.
For this very reason, the argument used can be shown to be false. The set up of one's mind (wether theistic or atheistic) won't change a bit to our biological nature.
I think the whole argument just show the prejudice theist have about atheism, as if being an atheist means one is careless about one's own existence and that of others.
A deity is nothing but a human invention, and the existence of such a deity, is entirely bound to minds of humans (and perhaps other intelligent species to, which can question the nature of their existence and that of the universe/nature itself).
Re: Questions for Atheists....
Here are some remarks on this. Wether one is atheistic or theistic, we are all humans and as humans we are bound to our human existence, which is a product of the material reality.
As humans we can not escape from the fact that we care about our existence (wether or not we admit that fact), cause it's our biological nature. We are here, and we survived millions of years of natural struggle and building civilization.
If there had been anything withing our biological nature that permitted us as species to be careless about our survival, we would have already gone extinct. Nature is as simple as that.
For this very reason, the argument used can be shown to be false. The set up of one's mind (wether theistic or atheistic) won't change a bit to our biological nature.
I think the whole argument just show the prejudice theist have about atheism, as if being an atheist means one is careless about one's own existence and that of others.
A deity is nothing but a human invention, and the existence of such a deity, is entirely bound to minds of humans (and perhaps other intelligent species to, which can question the nature of their existence and that of the universe/nature itself).
Quip:
Part of the Christian credo is to share the faith, not necessarily "proving" something. Atheists seem more interested in picking fights. The atheist position isn't "apathetic," Christians are apathetic TOWARD this position, which is what Charismata already said. For the Christian, atheism isn't "apathetic" -- "pathetic," maybe. Christians can hardly feel trepidation or hostility about a position whose grand conclusion is uncertainty and meaninglessness. Intellectually, there is nothing to fear from atheism, because atheism can't "know" anything. Every proposition an atheist utters is destroyed by atheism’s innate relativism and inability to posit a single knowable truth.
Soulman
Part of the Christian credo is to share the faith, not necessarily "proving" something. Atheists seem more interested in picking fights. The atheist position isn't "apathetic," Christians are apathetic TOWARD this position, which is what Charismata already said. For the Christian, atheism isn't "apathetic" -- "pathetic," maybe. Christians can hardly feel trepidation or hostility about a position whose grand conclusion is uncertainty and meaninglessness. Intellectually, there is nothing to fear from atheism, because atheism can't "know" anything. Every proposition an atheist utters is destroyed by atheism’s innate relativism and inability to posit a single knowable truth.
Soulman
Re: Re: Re: Questions for Atheists....
Re: Re: Re: Questions for Atheists....
As an atheist I do have a grounding, which in my case is the conviction of (dialectical-)materialism. Materialism states that matter is the primary substance, and consciousness is secondary.
Materialism is a clear foundation for science and human society, since it correctly describes the nature of the material reality we live in. Without materialism, human progress would not have been the same, and there would be significantly less investigations and research into the material world, if all humans would have adopted the point of view and beliefs of religion.
Materialism is the foundation for the future society, in which mankind can determine it's own future, and through science we can acquire true knowledge about the material world we live in.
Re: Re: Re: Questions for Atheists....
As an atheist I do have a grounding, which in my case is the conviction of (dialectical-)materialism. Materialism states that matter is the primary substance, and consciousness is secondary.
Materialism is a clear foundation for science and human society, since it correctly describes the nature of the material reality we live in. Without materialism, human progress would not have been the same, and there would be significantly less investigations and research into the material world, if all humans would have adopted the point of view and beliefs of religion.
Materialism is the foundation for the future society, in which mankind can determine it's own future, and through science we can acquire true knowledge about the material world we live in.
One Eyed Jack
New member
What's kept us from determining our own future so far?
No. Human history has shown us how primitive man lacked knowledge about natural phenomena, and because of the total dependece of early mankind on nature, invented and cultivated deities for explaining these phenomena.
Current day science has no problem in explaining these phenomena, and does not need a deity to explain how nature works.
Where did Jack go? I thought we were having fun with the Noah’s ark animal thing.
I live on a lake and as an experiment, I fenced in the neighbor’s wolf-kind with one side exposed to the lake and am waiting for him to start catching fish. It’s been two days now and so far nothing. If I get taken to jail for abuse to dumb animals, would you be available to help with my defense? If you refuse to come to my aid, I will have to assume you don’t really like me.
I live on a lake and as an experiment, I fenced in the neighbor’s wolf-kind with one side exposed to the lake and am waiting for him to start catching fish. It’s been two days now and so far nothing. If I get taken to jail for abuse to dumb animals, would you be available to help with my defense? If you refuse to come to my aid, I will have to assume you don’t really like me.
Scrimshaw
New member
Re: Re: Questions for Atheists....
Re: Re: Questions for Atheists....
Actually, most theists believe that humans possess a spiritual apsect to their existence as well.
But if our very existence is arbitrary, so is anything we care about, including caring about ourselves.
You're missing the point. It is irrelevant what caused us to care about our survival. Our survival itself would be arbitrary, meaningless. Our survival would be POINTLESS because what is the point of surviving if your life inevitably ends in death anyway?? Why spend your whole life trying to avoid what is inevitably going to happen anyway. (Death) What an utterly futile waste of time; trying to survive when surviving is an impossible task to acheive. The fact is, survival would be irrelevant because our existence would be irrelvant. Our existence would be no more important or meaningful than that of an interstellar gas cloud.
Wrong. The argument exposes that if there is no higher power that gives meaning to existence, and if our existence is the arbitrary by-product of a cosmic accident, then there is no point in living, arguing, debating, or caring about anything whatsoever. If all we are is merely another collection of molecules in a hostile universe, then we would have no logical reason to care about anything. Sure, you may say we can be puppets of our instincts and biological chemicals, like the rest of the animal kingdom, but the existence of our elaborate consciousness and self-awareness would never allows us to act as mere puppets - and be content. Our conscious intelligence overrides our instincts.
The rest of the universe cares for nothing at all, so if all we are is an arbitrary component of the universe, why should we care about anything either?
Or, humans are nothing but an invention of a deity. :think:
All you're doing now is restating atheistic assumptions, not justifying or explaining atheism's end game. My post was about atheism's end game. Your response failed to give any meaningful answers to any of the questions I raised in my first post.
Re: Re: Questions for Atheists....
Actually, most theists believe that humans possess a spiritual apsect to their existence as well.
But if our very existence is arbitrary, so is anything we care about, including caring about ourselves.
You're missing the point. It is irrelevant what caused us to care about our survival. Our survival itself would be arbitrary, meaningless. Our survival would be POINTLESS because what is the point of surviving if your life inevitably ends in death anyway?? Why spend your whole life trying to avoid what is inevitably going to happen anyway. (Death) What an utterly futile waste of time; trying to survive when surviving is an impossible task to acheive. The fact is, survival would be irrelevant because our existence would be irrelvant. Our existence would be no more important or meaningful than that of an interstellar gas cloud.
Wrong. The argument exposes that if there is no higher power that gives meaning to existence, and if our existence is the arbitrary by-product of a cosmic accident, then there is no point in living, arguing, debating, or caring about anything whatsoever. If all we are is merely another collection of molecules in a hostile universe, then we would have no logical reason to care about anything. Sure, you may say we can be puppets of our instincts and biological chemicals, like the rest of the animal kingdom, but the existence of our elaborate consciousness and self-awareness would never allows us to act as mere puppets - and be content. Our conscious intelligence overrides our instincts.
The rest of the universe cares for nothing at all, so if all we are is an arbitrary component of the universe, why should we care about anything either?
Or, humans are nothing but an invention of a deity. :think:
All you're doing now is restating atheistic assumptions, not justifying or explaining atheism's end game. My post was about atheism's end game. Your response failed to give any meaningful answers to any of the questions I raised in my first post.
Last edited:
In early manhood, the dependence on nature kept mankind from determining it's own future. More advanced societies overcame this dependence partly by human inventions.
Since the time of primitive manhood, mankind has learnt to overcome these dependencies on nature. But current day society is disabling large part of humanity to live in a human dignitive way, and is destroying natural resources on a large scale.
Overcoming these difficulities will be essential for the future of mankind, and to built a society worth living for every human being, and in harmony with nature and the resources we as humans need for survival.
One Eyed Jack
New member
You're not one of those tree-huggers, are you?
cheeezywheeezy
New member
Hank,
you fenced in some dogs/wolves with access to water and think it is absurd that they would fish. YET...you believe that they could mutate and grow fins and become aquatic animals as evolution teaches about whales. A land animal "turned into" an aquatic animal. Now that's something to laugh about.
you fenced in some dogs/wolves with access to water and think it is absurd that they would fish. YET...you believe that they could mutate and grow fins and become aquatic animals as evolution teaches about whales. A land animal "turned into" an aquatic animal. Now that's something to laugh about.
PureX
Well-known member
I'm an agnostic who believes in God, so I can't speak for anyone else. *smile* But I don't have any problems with people choosing to believe in a God, what worries me are people who believe that to believe in something they have to believe in it ABSOLUTELY. I got no truck with theism, it's this bizarre "hyper-theism" that seems to be growing these days, and in various religions, that really bothers me (even the Buddhist have been killing each other!).
Humankind, I think because of our recent advances in science and technology, seems to be dividing itself up into to "absolutists" and "relativists". I am convinced that 9/11 was not so much about religion as it was the result of a few extreme absolutists who were feeling completely disenfranchised by the "modern" world, and so struck out in a violent desperate effort to gain back some recognition and respect. In fact, I think the attraction of this absolutist (fundimentalist) world view is that it discredits the modern world, with all it's "high-falutin" science and it's unbridled materialism and most of all it's incomprehensible complexity, within which the value of a "good God-fearin' man" becomes invisible.
It's a fact that most violent behavior is male behavior, and the most common reason for men to act violently is in response to a perceived insult or humiliation. As the world becomes more and more complex, and the people who are good at dealing with this complexity gain control of more and more of the world's assets, the people being left out get resentful, especially men. And this is when fundimentalism, with it's propensity for over-simplification, and absolutism, with it's implied unassailable rightiousness, becomes attractive.
But if you ask me it's like a drug. Pretending the world is simple, and that "we" are absolutely right and "they" are absolutely wrong may make us feel good, and even justify our desire to vent our anger, but it's based on lies, and in the end our own lies will always imprison us. History has shown us time and time again what happens when we adopt absolutism as a culture, and it's not pretty! I am far more frightened by the blind rightiousness of religious zealots like Jerry Falwell than I am of the supposed shiftless morality of any relativistic atheist. At least a relativist understands the possibility of being wrong.
I'm hoping that as time passes, and more people come to understand the concept of relativism, these absolutist views and behaviors will die out. But in the mean time, I'm thinkin' we're in for some violent and difficult days. It's already begun. Those of you out there who are being drawn into this culture of absolutism should try and do some serious thinking and self-reflection. It doesn't go anywhere good.
Humankind, I think because of our recent advances in science and technology, seems to be dividing itself up into to "absolutists" and "relativists". I am convinced that 9/11 was not so much about religion as it was the result of a few extreme absolutists who were feeling completely disenfranchised by the "modern" world, and so struck out in a violent desperate effort to gain back some recognition and respect. In fact, I think the attraction of this absolutist (fundimentalist) world view is that it discredits the modern world, with all it's "high-falutin" science and it's unbridled materialism and most of all it's incomprehensible complexity, within which the value of a "good God-fearin' man" becomes invisible.
It's a fact that most violent behavior is male behavior, and the most common reason for men to act violently is in response to a perceived insult or humiliation. As the world becomes more and more complex, and the people who are good at dealing with this complexity gain control of more and more of the world's assets, the people being left out get resentful, especially men. And this is when fundimentalism, with it's propensity for over-simplification, and absolutism, with it's implied unassailable rightiousness, becomes attractive.
But if you ask me it's like a drug. Pretending the world is simple, and that "we" are absolutely right and "they" are absolutely wrong may make us feel good, and even justify our desire to vent our anger, but it's based on lies, and in the end our own lies will always imprison us. History has shown us time and time again what happens when we adopt absolutism as a culture, and it's not pretty! I am far more frightened by the blind rightiousness of religious zealots like Jerry Falwell than I am of the supposed shiftless morality of any relativistic atheist. At least a relativist understands the possibility of being wrong.
I'm hoping that as time passes, and more people come to understand the concept of relativism, these absolutist views and behaviors will die out. But in the mean time, I'm thinkin' we're in for some violent and difficult days. It's already begun. Those of you out there who are being drawn into this culture of absolutism should try and do some serious thinking and self-reflection. It doesn't go anywhere good.
Last edited:
Scrimshaw
New member
What is somewhat paradoxical about your expressed sentiment is the fact that you seem "absolutely" sure that "absolutism" is dangerous. Kind of a contradradiction, yes? In your very act of opposing fundamentalism, you become fundametalist yourself. How can one become "absolutely" convinced that absolutism is false? They can't. It's a catch-22. It's a paradox. A self-contradiction. So we find that relativism is self-refuting for it absolutely states that everything is relative. Any claim that contradicts itself, refutes itself, and therefore cannot be true. Thus, I am convinced that relativism is false, and there are absolute truths and morals in the universe. Not all absolute beliefs are dangerous. For example, Jesus, an absolutist, stated that we should:
Matt 22:37 - "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: Love your neighbor as yourself.'
and.......
Matt 5:44 - But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you"
I think these are absolutes that could be followed ABSOLUTELY, and much good would come into the world.
Last edited:
- Status