Can Science Disprove The Existence Of God?

Coolwhip wrote:

real life wrote:
TheCorrectResponse wrote:
You have two choices here. All science is pure evil or all religion is pure evil.

I don't think too many folks here will agree with that.

I think everyone can agree that - pure evil = pure religion = fundamentalism

I thought you were a moral relativist.

How is it that you think anything is evil?

I thought it was all just a matter of opinion.

I would be very interested to hear you identify ANY behavior that is evil in an absolute sense.

Is there any?

How about:

rape
murder
cannibalism
pedophilia
theft
war

Any of those absolute evil?

0 Replies

Diest TKO wrote:

IFeelFree wrote:
Diest TKO wrote:
IFeelFree wrote:

Quote:
IFeelFree wrote:

You can't test spiritual Truth and its not repeatable. Truth also has nothing to do with belief.

Sounds conclusive to me. There is no spiritual truth avalible.

That is the point of view of the conceptual mind. Spiritual Truth is only known by transcending mind or thought. The core spiritual experience is pure radiant consciousness, silent awareness, still presence, or spaciousness. When individual awareness identifies with the conceptual mind, it does not recognize this formless dimension of consciousness.

Two words: "prove it." All the poetic language in the world doesn't give your claim any validity.

If spiritual truth is only known by any other means than any other truth, it probably isn't truth at all.

"Spiritual truth is only known by those transending mind or thought?" Prove it. Prove that the truth of science is less valid than the subjective truth one would ultimately experience in a "formless dimention of conscience." Prove that if all people were to exeriance this simultaneously, they would become aware of the SAME truth.

I could point to the research that has been done on meditation, for example, but I'm not sure what that "proves" except that there are some interesting physiological changes taking place during the practice. The spiritual dimension is known through subjective experience. If you want proof, take up some practice such as meditation. See for yourself if it is true.

You need to address more than 10% of my post.

Well, I don't agree that "the truth of science is less valid than the subjective truth one would ultimately experience in a 'formless dimention of conscience.'" I'm not sure what it means to say that one truth is less valid than another truth. As for things you're asking for proof for, my response is to suggest that you experience self-transcendence for yourself and find out if it is true. Take up meditation or some other spiritual practice.

However, I don't sense that you are really looking for an answer from me. What I sense is that you are looking to "win" the argument -- prove me wrong and yourself right. If that is the case, it is not a true question. You are not really interested in what I have to say, only to try to catch me on something and prove me wrong. Am I correct in this?

0 Replies

AHHH grasshopper...you are catching on to the A2K game.

0 Replies

real life wrote:

I thought you were a moral relativist.

How is it that you think anything is evil?

I thought it was all just a matter of opinion.

I would be very interested to hear you identify ANY behavior that is evil in an absolute sense.

Is there any?

How about:

rape
murder
cannibalism
pedophilia
theft
war

Any of those absolute evil?

No, the smiley face means it's a joke, not to be taken seriously.

But seriously, I guess you could Identify me as a moral relativist. But I don't believe in 'evil' or 'good'. I don't even believe in any of the shades in between either. I think evil and good are oversimplifications of reality to the extent that it hardly even resembles reality. But I'm no nihilist though, I still think things matter - but I don't think you can measure it in good and bad/evil.

0 Replies

TheCorrectResponse wrote:

OK ROS. You took me to task for calling RL,BD,and gunga cowards and liers. How come nothing to say about this:
http://www.able2know.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2892551#2892551

Sorry CR, I wasn't trying to take you to task on anything. I was just trying to give you a heads-up on the characters you were dealing with.

All three of those posters have very different styles and beliefs. And Gunga is so different that I hesitate to even put him on the same planet with RL and BD.

I haven't been reading much of RL's latest bunch of posts. Many of them are re-hash of debates we've had before, so I thought I would let you new guys handle them for a while, to see where your approach took the debate.

Have fun Smile

0 Replies

Calling these posts "debates" is like dropping a bottle in the ocean and calling it an ocean liner!

0 Replies

Coolwhip wrote:

IFeelFree wrote:
TheCorrectResponse wrote:
Tust me Free, this forum is NOT the place for you!

TheCorrectResponse, I'm curious. Why do you say that?

Maybe because you resort to ad hominems instead of debating? When you say:

Quote:
I remember I became disappointed with the overall level of discourse here and I stopped posting. I thought I would give it a try once again. So far, it is pretty much as I remembered. It is surprising to me that people would participate on a spirituality & religion forum if they believe its all hooey.

That was in response to a post that accused me of making things up. What can you really say to someone who accuses you of "making stuff up"?

Quote:

You basically say that you don't feel obligated to dignify TKO with an answer because he's to dumb to realize that:

Quote:
Spiritual Truth is only known by transcending mind or thought.

No, my comments about my disappointment with the level of discourse was to Steve 41oo. I have made honest attempts to reply to TKOs posts. In the end, I don't expect anyone to believe what I say, so I suggested that he find out for himself if what I say is true.

0 Replies

Quote:

Calling these posts "debates" is like dropping a bottle in the ocean and calling it an ocean liner!

yeah but 9 days out of 10, rearranging the deck chairs on them is fun.

0 Replies

TheCorrectResponse wrote:

Calling these posts "debates" is like dropping a bottle in the ocean and calling it an ocean liner!

My experience is that this is as serious as it gets on the internet, unless it's a closed group.

0 Replies

Lets not get TOOOOO serious. Cool

0 Replies

real life wrote:

Lets not get TOOOOO serious.

Sure. You look super tan by the way! Razz

0 Replies

I don't usually just post links to articles but what do you guys make of the following that was pointed out to me, from the prominent atheist Sam Harris, regarding consciousness and the nature of self.

Selfless Consciousness Without Faith

I'm sure Sam Harris wouldn't be as quick to use such poetic and colourful language as IFF has done to illustrate his points and he notes in the article itself about being cautious of drawing metaphysical conclusions BUT, that said, spirituality and religion, on this level, in the way IFF is describing his thoughts, is a really quite personal and subjective thing, it's about forming meaningful ideas/concepts of the world that are very often precious to us (this is NOT to imply that they should be beyond question of course but rather that they are not ideas to be forced onto people wholesale,it's not their nature if you like, the opposite of dogma). I say this and I post the article because, despite the differences, subtle or not (I'm not certain) I do think there's quite a bit of common ground which IFF is touching on in his own way and because, seriously, if there were people to target for "proof" chants in this forum, IMO, it ain't this guy both because of the positive nature of these kinds of views for society(what he's trying to describe to you) and because of the nature of the subject anyway i.e. it's not about the existence of other beings and physical worlds or whatever you want to come up with. Quite the opposite.

0 Replies

Ashers wrote:

I'm sure Sam Harris wouldn't be as quick to use such poetic and colourful language as IFF has done...

Interesting article by Sam Harris. I've read his book "The End of Faith", and he is someone that I have considerable respect for. He is careful to draw a distinction between spiritual experiences and blind faith. I like to think that I do that as well. If my language appears poetic at times, its because I look for ways to convey a certain type of experience that arises during the practice of meditation. Anyway, thanks for speaking up for me.

0 Replies

Can Science Disprove The Existence Of God?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know