• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

No god, or probably not a God (for an added bonus the invese God Vs. probably God)

Which option best describes you?

  • I'm a theist - there is definitely a God/higher power

    Votes: 13 32.5%
  • I'm a theist - there is a possibility that there is not a God

    Votes: 4 10.0%
  • I'm an atheist - there is no God

    Votes: 9 22.5%
  • I'm an atheist - there is a possibility that there is a God

    Votes: 8 20.0%
  • I self identify as an agnostic, neither atheist nor theist

    Votes: 3 7.5%
  • Other - I defy the above classifications

    Votes: 3 7.5%

  • Total voters
    40

Cephus

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 15, 2007
Messages
31,034
Reaction score
11,932
Location
CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Re: No god, or probably not a God (for an added bonus the invese God Vs. probably Go

Because God would be above the laws of nature, while everything in nature is applicable to those laws. Since we matter cannot come from nowhere, then we would need someone who is above nature to create it.

Oh look, another appeal to ignorance, how special.

You don't get to just invent an exception and pretend it makes your argument any less laughable. Okay, fine, I'm going to declare that wheverver the universe came from was above the laws of nature. I declare an exception, I win! Two can play at your irrational game.
 

Cephus

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 15, 2007
Messages
31,034
Reaction score
11,932
Location
CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Re: No god, or probably not a God (for an added bonus the invese God Vs. probably Go

This applies to nature, not things that are above nature.

Says you, by fiat.
 

Cephus

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 15, 2007
Messages
31,034
Reaction score
11,932
Location
CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Re: No god, or probably not a God (for an added bonus the invese God Vs. probably Go

phattonez said:
How is it not? It is the only possible explanation. If you have a state where you had nothing, and you now have something, then something had to come from above nature because nature cannot make itself. As for quantum fluctuations, I can't understand that so I'm not even going to try; I'll wait for the problems to be figured out by people smarter than me. That said, I pointed out 5 arguments and that would only deal with 1.

No, it's the only explanation you can come up with or are willing to entertain. All that proves is that you have a very limited imagination. What you're doing is a classic case of the argument from ignorance. You don't understand it, therefore you posit a solution that you like and declare it to be the truth. Obviously there are lots of other explanations, you just don't like them.
 

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
107,817
Reaction score
51,728
Location
Georgia
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Re: No god, or probably not a God (for an added bonus the invese God Vs. probably Go

Moderator's Warning:
Let's calm this down a bit please. Thank you.
 

Orion

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
8,080
Reaction score
3,916
Location
Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Re: No god, or probably not a God (for an added bonus the invese God Vs. probably Go

I think science is rapidly approaching singularity, and eventually the line between religion and science is going to become blurred. Spirituality, in a lot of ways, is an intuitive description of the things that science develops equations for. I don't see why they should remain at odds, or why it has to come down to theism vs. atheism.

This TED talk is a good illustration:
Henry Markram builds a brain in a supercomputer | Video on TED.com

I encourage everyone, theist or atheist, to watch it.
 

Cephus

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 15, 2007
Messages
31,034
Reaction score
11,932
Location
CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Re: No god, or probably not a God (for an added bonus the invese God Vs. probably Go

Orion said:
I think science is rapidly approaching singularity, and eventually the line between religion and science is going to become blurred.

I don't think that's the case at all. Science is rapidly filling in all of the holes that religion once occupied. Religion started when man was ignorant about the world around them. What made lightning? Why did the crops grow? Why did the game animals migrate? People didn't understand it so they made up gods as an explanation. Man has evolved to be a problem-solving and pattern-seeking animal. We don't like not knowing things and, in the absence of a quick and easy explanation, we tend to just make things up. It's not thunder, it's Thor throwing his hammer. The sun rides across the sky in a supernatural chariot. As science came along, particularly modern science, people haven't needed those old explanations anymore, we've found out what really happens. I doubt anyone still thinks Thor is up there tossing his hammer. We know better. That's led religion to evolve as well. No longer are the gods openly responsible for what we see, now they work behind the scenes and are undetectable. Instead of coming down and walking with men, now they reside in invisible realms in the heavens. Instead of openly working miracles, now they play a hiding game where absolutely no one can possibly find evidence for their existence. It's funny that this has happened specifically since man has developed the methodology and the technology to actually examine claims of the divine rationally, isn't it? As we continue to grow and learn more, the need for religion, outside of appealing to the emotionally-weak, will continue to shrink. When you know what reality holds and are not terrified of it, what need have people for imaginary gods?
 

Teh Internets

Active member
Joined
Jun 13, 2010
Messages
351
Reaction score
125
Location
Virginia, USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Re: No god, or probably not a God (for an added bonus the invese God Vs. probably Go

42

(I voted other.):peace
 

Orion

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
8,080
Reaction score
3,916
Location
Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Re: No god, or probably not a God (for an added bonus the invese God Vs. probably Go

I don't think that's the case at all. Science is rapidly filling in all of the holes that religion once occupied. Religion started when man was ignorant about the world around them. What made lightning? Why did the crops grow? Why did the game animals migrate? People didn't understand it so they made up gods as an explanation. Man has evolved to be a problem-solving and pattern-seeking animal. We don't like not knowing things and, in the absence of a quick and easy explanation, we tend to just make things up. It's not thunder, it's Thor throwing his hammer. The sun rides across the sky in a supernatural chariot. As science came along, particularly modern science, people haven't needed those old explanations anymore, we've found out what really happens. I doubt anyone still thinks Thor is up there tossing his hammer. We know better. That's led religion to evolve as well. No longer are the gods openly responsible for what we see, now they work behind the scenes and are undetectable. Instead of coming down and walking with men, now they reside in invisible realms in the heavens. Instead of openly working miracles, now they play a hiding game where absolutely no one can possibly find evidence for their existence. It's funny that this has happened specifically since man has developed the methodology and the technology to actually examine claims of the divine rationally, isn't it? As we continue to grow and learn more, the need for religion, outside of appealing to the emotionally-weak, will continue to shrink. When you know what reality holds and are not terrified of it, what need have people for imaginary gods?

The thing is, the Gods aren't imaginary. They are very real to the people who worship them. This all goes back to the individual unique realities that each person creates within their own mind. You shoud check out the link I posted earlier. In order for you to perceive a room, your brain has to basically make a "photocopy" of the room within the confines of its own neural net, which it then translates into something you experience. It is therefore completely possible for people to experience an event as something related to God, if that is how their own neural net has developed to process the world. The same goes for the very scientists who are doing neuroscience research... they too have a conceptual reality that they are working within, it is just a scientific one.

All of these perceptual realities are possible and they exist simultaneously, given the fact that all of the people who embody them exist simultaneously. We can pretend that there is common reality and have practical application for it, but when it comes to Gods or no Gods, there is no common reality. So stop pretending there is and that theists are wrong. They can believe what ever they want and it is "right" to them.
 

TheGirlNextDoor


DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 21, 2009
Messages
20,027
Reaction score
7,646
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
Re: No god, or probably not a God (for an added bonus the invese God Vs. probably Go

I think science is rapidly approaching singularity, and eventually the line between religion and science is going to become blurred. Spirituality, in a lot of ways, is an intuitive description of the things that science develops equations for. I don't see why they should remain at odds, or why it has to come down to theism vs. atheism.

This TED talk is a good illustration:
Henry Markram builds a brain in a supercomputer | Video on TED.com

I encourage everyone, theist or atheist, to watch it.

Thanks for posting this - very interesting!!
 

Kernel Sanders

Norville Rogers
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2008
Messages
3,730
Reaction score
1,931
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Re: No god, or probably not a God (for an added bonus the invese God Vs. probably Go

The thing is, the Gods aren't imaginary. They are very real to the people who worship them. This all goes back to the individual unique realities that each person creates within their own mind. You shoud check out the link I posted earlier. In order for you to perceive a room, your brain has to basically make a "photocopy" of the room within the confines of its own neural net, which it then translates into something you experience. It is therefore completely possible for people to experience an event as something related to God, if that is how their own neural net has developed to process the world. The same goes for the very scientists who are doing neuroscience research... they too have a conceptual reality that they are working within, it is just a scientific one.

All of these perceptual realities are possible and they exist simultaneously, given the fact that all of the people who embody them exist simultaneously. We can pretend that there is common reality and have practical application for it, but when it comes to Gods or no Gods, there is no common reality. So stop pretending there is and that theists are wrong. They can believe what ever they want and it is "right" to them.

By that standard god is as real as any hallucination or delusion
 

Orion

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
8,080
Reaction score
3,916
Location
Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Re: No god, or probably not a God (for an added bonus the invese God Vs. probably Go

By that standard god is as real as any hallucination or delusion

Precisely.

There is no such thing as objective reality because our brain uses the filter of our senses to create a construct within itself, which we then experience as reality. Someone on hallucinogenic drugs is experiencing reality. A scientist who doesn't believe in God is experiencing reality. A religious person praying to a deity is indeed praying to a deity.

Our minds have limitless creative potential because of this.
 

molten_dragon

Anti-Hypocrite
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
10,344
Reaction score
4,951
Location
Southeast Michigan
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Re: No god, or probably not a God (for an added bonus the invese God Vs. probably Go

I'm an atheist, but not an extreme one. I don't believe there is a god, but until there is more evidence one way or the other, I cannot discount the possibility that one exists.
 

spud_meister

Veni, vidi, dormivi!
Dungeon Master
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 6, 2009
Messages
36,138
Reaction score
21,538
Location
Didjabringabeeralong
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Communist
Re: No god, or probably not a God (for an added bonus the invese God Vs. probably Go

I'm an atheist, but I do not deny god or gods, I just have no need for them.
 
Top Bottom