Why I am an athiest

@fresco,

Quote:

the word "information" as you have used it above, is disputed by some celebrated philosophers

Their own prose must therefore be devoid of any information, if they remain consistant with themselves...

@fresco,

"Socially useful" depends on one's perception of what it can mean, and have different interpretations of the same social activity. Useful to whom and what? "Social utility" seems more influenced from culture, politics, religion, and economics.

2 Replies

@Olivier5,

No. "Information" is always relative to some paradigm, or zeitgeist. It has no independent status. The position which postulates the impermanence of "selves" also implies the impermanence of paradigms which evoke such "selves". In essence this a rejection of naive realism in which "selves" are independent of "the world". It implies that "existence" is relative, not absolute, and by extrapolation so is "knowledge".

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

I mean religions can help reduce crimes.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Hmm...for me "social utility" is about the cohesion of groups or the reification of stable social structures. As such it may clash with views of individuals yet remain a self-sustaining dynamic system from a statistical point of view.

1 Reply

@fresco,

Quote:

No. "Information" is always relative to some paradigm, or zeitgeist. It has no independent status.

Nothing has an independent status from anything else, mind you, so that's a truism, and paradigms too can be communicated via language.

Quote:

The position which postulates the impermanence of "selves" also implies the impermanence of paradigms which evoke such "selves". In essence this a rejection of naive realism in which "selves" are independent of "the world". It implies that "existence" is relative, not absolute, and by extrapolation so is "knowledge".

Everything is relative, mind you... so that's another truism.

Selves exist. Even if only as a representation, or theater, or space. They trully and really do. You are one.

Or 2 or 3. Certainly if you keep tinkering with your own mental operating system like you say you do, the consciental level may fail to ignite at some point and you'll end up with several different dudes under your hood... Or no mental life at all.

1 Reply

@fresco,

But, doesn't my list include your

Quote:

is about the cohesion of groups or the reification of stable social structures

?

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Quote:

Selves exist. Even if only as a representation, or theater, or space. They trully and really do. You are one.

Try examining that mantra the next time you cosider where "you" were most of the night...or wake from a bizarre dream, ....or when you catch yourself having an internal argument,....or when you use a different name for different context.....
So with apologies to Karl Marx..."Thinkers of the world unite. You have nothing to lose but your "selves"!
I'll leave it there !

1 Reply

@gungasnake,

gungasnake wrote:

So you don't believe in modern mathematics or probability theory...
Some reason why??

I haven't said that I don't believe in either and I can't see how my response to your post would even allow you to infer it. Perhaps you need to recheck my previous response to your post. You don't believe that my disagreeing with you means that I have rejected mathematics or probability theory... do you?

Are you inferring that you have successfully employed those tools in a way that refutes evolution and proves ID? As I said in my previous post... your post seems to arrive at conclusions that require the misinterpretation of biological evolution theory.

1 Reply

@fresco,

Quote:

Try examining that mantra the next time you cosider where "you" were most of the night...or wake from a bizarre dream, ....or when you catch yourself having an internal argument

Internal to what?

In one single theater, a group of actors can play anything. They can be a character one day and another one the next. And they can dream too. But they still need and cherish their theater, and they wouldn't deny its existence or importance.

0 Replies

@FBM,

Maybe you don't although I have a very hard time believing that anyone doesn't have any beliefs, but I don't you well enough identify yours.

0 Replies

@igm,

Quote:

I haven't said that I don't believe in either and I can't see how my response to your post would even allow you to infer it.

That shows a lack of logical thinking abilities on your part. A number of prominent mathematicians have publicly stated that evolution is a bunch of bullshit and that it is incompatible with modern mathematics, e.g. Sir Fred Hoyle:

Quote:

"The likelihood of the formation of life from inanimate matter is one to a
number with 40,000 noughts after it... It is big enough to bury Darwin and
the whole theory of Evolution. There was no primeval soup, neither on this
planet nor on any other, and if the beginnings of life were not random,
they must therefore have been the product of purposeful intelligence."

Sir Fred Hoyle
Nature, Nov 12, 1981, p. 148

2 Replies

@gungasnake,

You can't be right! Scientists - through math - are looking at other universes and planets. That has "everything" to do with evolution.

Also, isn't it a fact that scientists have measured the life of planet earth and humans in terms of math (numbers of years)? Sure, they are human concepts, but it seems to have agreement among scientists that one day equals about 24 hours, and the earth based on those 24 hour days is equal to 4.54 billion years old.

Numbers = math = evolution.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

That has much to do with math, physics and optics. It has nothing to do with evoloserism or any other flavor of junk science.

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Quote:

Monotheism has always puzzled me, from that perspective: there are so many contradictions in life and nature; why assume only one god?

Realistically, O5. preceding Monotheism the practice of polytheism was widespread. Myriad religions always bring about competition as to which religion is the true one. Today, we have Judaism waiting for the Messiah to come, and Christianity believes the Messiah has already come and awaiting his return....Christianity worships Jesus as the Son of God and Jesus scriptures say my father and I are one in the same and no one can enter into the Kingdom accept by me. Jews do not believe in Jesus as the Son of God.

If one is unsure about the existence of a god one can only surmise there will always be contradictions/questions of one kind or another.

1 Reply

@gungasnake,

You have said that Hoyle didn’t understand how life began. You don’t believe that evolution explains how life began do you?

1 Reply

@Moment-in-Time,

Quote:

O5: Monotheism has always puzzled me, from that perspective: there are so many contradictions in life and nature; why assume only one god?

MIT: Christianity worships Jesus as the Son of God and Jesus scriptures say my father and I are one in the same and no one can enter into the Kingdom accept by me. Jews do not believe in Jesus as the Son of God.

The mere idea of a Son of God is polytheist, as I am sure you realize. Christianity is indeed a return to polytheism in the guise of monotheism. That'd be why it worked so well. Pure monotheism is logically harder to sustain and it's best that each of us talks to his or her own version of the deity/spiritual guide... Jesus, Mary, God, the Holy Spirit, the apostoles... And all the saints in tow.

2 Replies

@Olivier5,

Quote:

The mere idea of a Son of God is polytheist

But according to the New Testament Jesus and his father are one and the same; hence, monotheism....one cannot separate the two for the two are one.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

This is the beauty of mysticism Olivier. Christian theologists don't get stuck on apparent paradoxes anymore than do Quantum Physicists.

One man's superstitious nonsense is another's profound paradox.

0 Replies

@Moment-in-Time,

Quote:

But according to the New Testament Jesus and his father are one and the same

Except Jesus was a human being. Humans who become gods is a polytheist trait. Another thing is: Jesus and his Father and the old testament God aren't the same guy. The latter is tribal, angry and jealous, while the former(s?) is all-loving and forgiving.

1 Reply

Why I am an athiest

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know