EPTThoughts on God etc. - Page 2
| Blogs > D4EMON |
|
DeathSpank
United States1029 Posts
| ||
|
PH
United States6173 Posts
On May 13 2009 14:09 ShoCkeyy wrote: I would actually like to hear more about this! You left me drooling for more  My professor started posting up podcasts of his lectures...I'll try to link it to here once he posts it up. On May 13 2009 14:10 DeathSpank wrote: you can't prove or disprove god. I agree with this...very strongly. I don't get what the hoopla is on either side concerning this. The agnostics and atheists are overly concerned with their supposedly seamless empiricism. The theists get overly sensitive and try to prove it back at them and all that...it's annoying as hell. I think I read a rather outspoken atheist on here write one time that most atheist thought revolves around trying to show what differences there would be if a supposed god existed or didn't exist...and that the supposed lack of differences would lead one to infer that god's existence is therefore both inconsequential and therefore by some loose application of Occam's razor, not probable. Empirically proving or disproving the existence of something considered above natural law and rationality in its premise is retarded. | ||
|
DeathSpank
United States1029 Posts
Anyways it's more fun not knowing! | ||
|
McCrank
204 Posts
Now what does this god tell us? Yes that's right. There is something wrong with you, but if you follow his way you will be saved when you die. Now doesn't that sound like the biggest scam to you? Something is wrong with you. Do this and you will be fine after you die. Sounds like some shit cults tell you to steal all your mon.Oh wait... | ||
|
seppolevne
Canada1681 Posts
On May 13 2009 14:24 PH wrote: My professor started posting up podcasts of his lectures...I'll try to link it to here once he posts it up. I agree with this...very strongly. I don't get what the hoopla is on either side concerning this. The agnostics and atheists are overly concerned with their supposedly seamless empiricism. The theists get overly sensitive and try to prove it back at them and all that...it's annoying as hell. I think I read a rather outspoken atheist on here write one time that most atheist thought revolves around trying to show what differences there would be if a supposed god existed or didn't exist...and that the supposed lack of differences would lead one to infer that god's existence is therefore both inconsequential and therefore by some loose application of Occam's razor, not probable. Empirically proving or disproving the existence of something considered above natural law and rationality in its premise is retarded. I think you misunderstand what an agnostic is, or I misunderstand that point. | ||
|
Zozma
United States1626 Posts
| ||
|
SpiritoftheTunA
United States20903 Posts
| ||
|
PH
United States6173 Posts
On May 13 2009 14:45 seppolevne wrote: I think you misunderstand what an agnostic is, or I misunderstand that point. An agnostic, as I used the term above, is one who denies the possibility of proving or disproving the existence of a god or whatever. I use it very loosely. Perhaps I did put that in wrongly...I'm not sure. I know a lot less about agnosticism (despite supposedly being one myself) than I do atheism...and I don't know how much your run-of-the-mill agnostic would rely on empiricism or logic. | ||
|
FuDDx
United States5006 Posts
| ||
|
SpiritoftheTunA
United States20903 Posts
i hate the agnostics who insist on their own definition, there are multiple. | ||
|
DeathSpank
United States1029 Posts
| ||
|
McCrank
204 Posts
| ||
|
konadora
Singapore66063 Posts
| ||
|
samachking
Bahrain4949 Posts
On May 13 2009 14:07 PH wrote: I'm taking a class at my university right now...a mixed undergrad/graduate philosophy class on religion. Our professor is an atheist, but finds religion, and Christianity in particular, fascinating. In any case, he said something the other day that totally blew my mind. He brought up this recently deceased Cal Tech professor who helped develop the modern number theory being used right now (I can't remember his name). Anyway, his contributions to number theory helped to set the groundwork for modern mathematics and even philosophical logic as it is used today. My professor talked about how philosophers love to write about what numbers are...what they are, really. Not just the numeral, the representation we use for them in written language, but the actual number itself. However, this deceased Cal Tech physicist (I think he was actually a physicist, not a mathematician) was once quoted saying something along the lines of, "I don't know what numbers are, but I live among them". It's an interesting analogy that has given me quite a bit to think about. Existence of God or god or whatever is really not all that important of an issue in the end. There are many more and many more interesting things to talk about once you can get around that. I dunno, I just glossed on it very briefly right now...what he actually said was a lot more insightful. lol. Is that Richard Feynman? Just bought his set of textbooks, greatest Physics teacher of all time. | ||
|
PH
United States6173 Posts
On May 13 2009 14:56 SpiritoftheTunA wrote: there are a bunch of different flavors of agnosticism, just look at the wiki page i hate the agnostics who insist on their own definition, there are multiple. I know it's weird to quote someone like this for something like this...but the situation calls for it, and it's a good quote: "Did I start calling myself an agnostic or an atheist? No, and I still don't. I avoid that because I don't want to provide a category for people to apply to me. I would not want my convictions reduced to a word." - Roger Ebert Anyway, terms like "agnostic", "theist" and "atheist" are umbrella terms. It's unfair to force any individual into some arbitrary definition the latest person to edit the wiki page came up with. It's also unfair to assume that all who call themselves one of the three are the same. | ||
|
SpiritoftheTunA
United States20903 Posts
| ||
|
DeathSpank
United States1029 Posts
| ||
|
ThePhan2m
Norway2739 Posts
| ||
|
DeathSpank
United States1029 Posts
personally I find non existence scarier than a hell. At least in hell you can fuck around. | ||
|
PH
United States6173 Posts
On May 13 2009 16:08 ThePhan2m wrote: the real question is, do you think that people that believe in some Religion are more afraid of death, than those who doesn't? It can go either way...I don't think you can generalize in either direction. When I was younger and was a devout Catholic, I actually found the thought of an eternal afterlife devastatingly frightening. It was when I first realized what "eternal" and "forever" truly entailed...and considering there really are no parallels in the universe we can directly observe and experience, it was something that scared the shit out of me. On May 13 2009 16:13 DeathSpank wrote: ask suicide bombers that. personally I find non existence scarier than a hell. At least in hell you can fuck around. or more likely...in hell you'd have very large men fucking around with you... :X WOW FUCK THIS THREAD I HAVE AN ESSAY TO WRITE. Funnily enough, it's my midterm paper for that religion class. -_____-;;... | ||
| ||
