Collarchat.com

Join Our Community
Collarchat.com

Home  Login  Search 

RE: Is Atheism a religion?


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Is Atheism a religion? Page: <<   < prev  21 22 23 24 [25]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Is Atheism a religion? - 9/14/2009 8:40:23 PM   
GotSteel


Posts: 5871
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi


quote:

ORIGINAL: StrictStacey

It really makes me laugh when people use strings of ridiculous words to try and sound intelligent on the internet, I hope you don't all talk like that in real life because you come accross as egotistical morons.


I am still trying to figure out which words she thought were ridiculous. I have reread the post it was in reponse to, but I am not seeing them. Maybe she responded to the wrong post?

edited to add....ok I read her profile and I understand now.

Maybe she was responding to the multiple posts trying to prove that unicorns are real. 

< Message edited by GotSteel -- 9/14/2009 8:42:01 PM >

(in reply to thishereboi)
Profile   Post #: 481
RE: Is Atheism a religion? - 9/14/2009 8:43:27 PM   
kittinSol


Posts: 16926
Status: offline
Putain de bordel de merde.

< Message edited by kittinSol -- 9/14/2009 8:45:57 PM >


_____________________________



(in reply to GotSteel)
Profile   Post #: 482
RE: Is Atheism a religion? - 9/14/2009 8:47:44 PM   
kittinSol


Posts: 16926
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: kittinSol

Putain de bordel de merde.


Et qu'ils aillent se faire foutre.

_____________________________



(in reply to kittinSol)
Profile   Post #: 483
RE: Is Atheism a religion? - 9/15/2009 11:02:24 PM   
Rule


Posts: 10479
Joined: 12/5/2005
Status: offline
Upon my request, Elisabella has researched my suspicion that the biblical unicorn often referred to the one humped / hilled dromedary.

She found what I was looking for: "the following shows a correlation between a horn and strength in Hebrew, so I'd guess "unicorn" was used metaphorically in that passage to symbolize the strongest animal imaginable?" and "The word also denotes the peak or summit of a hill (Isa. 5:1, where the word "hill" is the rendering of the same Hebrew word)".

The dromedary: the one hilled animal. (I do note that in my opinion not all biblical mentions of the unicorn refer to the dromedary - but likely many or most do.)

Eureka! (And for Elisabella an Eureka! as well.)

< Message edited by Rule -- 9/15/2009 11:03:19 PM >

(in reply to Rule)
Profile   Post #: 484
RE: Is Atheism a religion? - 9/16/2009 1:49:52 PM   
Aswad


Posts: 9374
Joined: 4/4/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lostkitten3

al-Aswad, I don't see worshipping people for their supposed talents as god worship.


Nowadays, it's not all that common. Used to be, though.

quote:

Your speech reminded me of down the rabbit hole. I get that I exist in many realms at once, with infinite possibilities, until I make a choice and appear in this reality, right now, but that has very little to do with god and more with physics.


Not so much in many realms. Though valid, that's not what I was getting at.

More like on many levels of abstraction. That is what I was getting at. Consider.

Up and down quarks on one level, baryons on the next, then atoms, then molecules, then organelles and such, then cells, then organs etc, then an organism, and on the final level, which is the one your mind interacts with, we have the person. Consider, then, that human social networks organize in the same way as a neural network: in a small-world topology, with folding. Consider further that a human exchanges messages with other humans, initiating processes in their minds by way of these messages, with many of these processes being subconscious, and many being stateful. I wouldn't want to go through all the details (too much to type, even for me), but in short, it would be as valid to call a particular human-based "neural" network the central nervous system of one or more gods. And back in the days of the Old Testament, there would be a single, distinct unit that would be composed exclusively of the minds of those people, which might be posited to be the same unit that was explicit about keeping those people seperate from the minds in the area... self preservation.

Analyzing a higher order of existence than the one we are aware of, though, is difficult at best... ineffability.

I'm just saying that you're making an artificial distinction that the people who follow early-stage religions probably don't make. Insofar as any god interacts with this world, that is physics, because it is impossible for two systems to interact without being causally related in both directions. Whether we are aware of all the physics there is to know, however, is a different matter. It is also an irrelevant matter, as the majority of gods throughout the ages have had their principal role in actually interacting with their followers, not in causing miracles. If you were a god, it is unlikely that there would be any motive for you to exert miraculous powers in this world on a frequent basis, regardless of how you felt about its inhabitants. Synchronicity? Sure thing. Earthquakes, plagues, floods, splitting the sea, and so forth? Not usually, no.

To anyone who isn't just looking for someone whose superiority they can acknowledge and bow to in worship without causing dissonance, they derive harm from excessive intervention and benefit from inspiration, comfort and so forth, as well as the occasional synchronicity event, not a shitload of things that just mess up the world. Any god that admits free will must allow humans to act, and most of what we want in this world depends on other people's wills. And any god that wants us to learn and evolve, must allow this world to remain causal and temporally unidirectional with a small random element. Hence, there isn't much that any god that cares about humans can do to help without harming us in the long term. Give a man a fish and all that...

If someone is just looking to submit to in worship, adoration and unrequited love, I'll make room in my closet. If they're just looking for miracles, then it's on the top shelf in the handouts cupboard, right next to the free lunch. Those gods we should view in a positive light, are the ones that are flesh and the ones that are the silent movers that teach enduring lessons and only occasionally lend a small hand by arranging coincidences just so (yes, I'm aware of the statistical mechanics side to this, and you are just as aware that aggregation is an irreversible transform that precludes the argument you probably want to make, though it takes too long to explain the fallacy that would be implicit if it isn't obvious).

quote:

ANd what I said (I thought) was that god cannot be proved with Scientific Method. That patterns and miracles are not proof of god. Perhaps I miswrote?


Pretty sure you miswrote, since that's exactly what I was arguing, too.

Health,
al-Aswad.


_____________________________

"If God saw what any of us did that night, he didn't seem to mind.
From then on I knew: God doesn't make the world this way.
We do.
" -- Rorschack, Watchmen.


(in reply to Lostkitten3)
Profile   Post #: 485
RE: Is Atheism a religion? - 9/16/2009 3:22:47 PM   
Rule


Posts: 10479
Joined: 12/5/2005
Status: offline

(in reply to Aswad)
Profile   Post #: 486
RE: Is Atheism a religion? - 9/16/2009 7:26:28 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kittinSol

Putain de bordel de merde.

The wonderful world of language translation online....

Fucking crying out loud
Whore of bloody hell
Whore of brothel of shit
Fucking brothel of shit

K.

(in reply to kittinSol)
Profile   Post #: 487
RE: Is Atheism a religion? - 9/16/2009 8:30:14 PM   
Lostkitten3


Posts: 179
Joined: 10/17/2008
Status: offline
Aswad,
I knew I meant that science couldn't prove god. I was sure that is what I said. Did we argue the same point then? I tend to skip over much of yours, so I'm not sure. It sounded initially like you did not agree. But I found my original and to me, it still says that Knowledge is proved by scientific method, not miracles or patterns in nature.
It is still my opinion that people need religion who are less mature. My kids don't need or have a god to behave well. They were taught the golden rule. as pretty much every prophet has taught. SImple, and no gods necessary.
Ok, I found it :
quote:

Knowledge is something that can be proved scientifically, over and over again, by anyone following the same procedures.

Given that most people's belief in god is via miracles, these would be anomalies that happen once in a blue moon, and no one (at the time) can explain why, so they call it something greater than themselves i.e. god.

I once saw a show that said the proof of god is the patterns we see in the world, that they can't explain, like ripples in the sand, or concentric circles in dirt, but realistically, it is far easier to make a pattern, by humans and any other thing in nature than it is to be random. Many artists work many many years to try to create truly random pieces. I think Pollack got the closest, not that anyone understands his work outside the Art world.

Honestly, to say that proof of god is in patterns then to say proof of god is in anomalies, is to say god exists because there is existence...which is pretty silly. And proves nothing.

God is a story earlier humans made up to explain things like floods and death. We should have outgrown it by now.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aswad

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lostkitten3

al-Aswad, I don't see worshipping people for their supposed talents as god worship.


Nowadays, it's not all that common. Used to be, though.

quote:

Your speech reminded me of down the rabbit hole. I get that I exist in many realms at once, with infinite possibilities, until I make a choice and appear in this reality, right now, but that has very little to do with god and more with physics.


Not so much in many realms. Though valid, that's not what I was getting at.

More like on many levels of abstraction. That is what I was getting at. Consider.

Up and down quarks on one level, baryons on the next, then atoms, then molecules, then organelles and such, then cells, then organs etc, then an organism, and on the final level, which is the one your mind interacts with, we have the person. Consider, then, that human social networks organize in the same way as a neural network: in a small-world topology, with folding. Consider further that a human exchanges messages with other humans, initiating processes in their minds by way of these messages, with many of these processes being subconscious, and many being stateful. I wouldn't want to go through all the details (too much to type, even for me), but in short, it would be as valid to call a particular human-based "neural" network the central nervous system of one or more gods. And back in the days of the Old Testament, there would be a single, distinct unit that would be composed exclusively of the minds of those people, which might be posited to be the same unit that was explicit about keeping those people seperate from the minds in the area... self preservation.

Analyzing a higher order of existence than the one we are aware of, though, is difficult at best... ineffability.

I'm just saying that you're making an artificial distinction that the people who follow early-stage religions probably don't make. Insofar as any god interacts with this world, that is physics, because it is impossible for two systems to interact without being causally related in both directions. Whether we are aware of all the physics there is to know, however, is a different matter. It is also an irrelevant matter, as the majority of gods throughout the ages have had their principal role in actually interacting with their followers, not in causing miracles. If you were a god, it is unlikely that there would be any motive for you to exert miraculous powers in this world on a frequent basis, regardless of how you felt about its inhabitants. Synchronicity? Sure thing. Earthquakes, plagues, floods, splitting the sea, and so forth? Not usually, no.

To anyone who isn't just looking for someone whose superiority they can acknowledge and bow to in worship without causing dissonance, they derive harm from excessive intervention and benefit from inspiration, comfort and so forth, as well as the occasional synchronicity event, not a shitload of things that just mess up the world. Any god that admits free will must allow humans to act, and most of what we want in this world depends on other people's wills. And any god that wants us to learn and evolve, must allow this world to remain causal and temporally unidirectional with a small random element. Hence, there isn't much that any god that cares about humans can do to help without harming us in the long term. Give a man a fish and all that...

If someone is just looking to submit to in worship, adoration and unrequited love, I'll make room in my closet. If they're just looking for miracles, then it's on the top shelf in the handouts cupboard, right next to the free lunch. Those gods we should view in a positive light, are the ones that are flesh and the ones that are the silent movers that teach enduring lessons and only occasionally lend a small hand by arranging coincidences just so (yes, I'm aware of the statistical mechanics side to this, and you are just as aware that aggregation is an irreversible transform that precludes the argument you probably want to make, though it takes too long to explain the fallacy that would be implicit if it isn't obvious).

quote:

ANd what I said (I thought) was that god cannot be proved with Scientific Method. That patterns and miracles are not proof of god. Perhaps I miswrote?


Pretty sure you miswrote, since that's exactly what I was arguing, too.

Health,
al-Aswad.


(in reply to Aswad)
Profile   Post #: 488
RE: Is Atheism a religion? - 9/17/2009 12:14:54 AM   
Aswad


Posts: 9374
Joined: 4/4/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lostkitten3

Did we argue the same point then? I tend to skip over much of yours, so I'm not sure.


If you're skipping much of it, it doesn't really matter what we were arguing, does it?

This devil's advocate gives this summary judgment: science, scientists and scientific method are too readily conflated in people's minds to be debated in the absence of two parties. I won't waste time making points that will just be skipped. Partial and conditional agreement on need for religion being inversely correlated with maturity. Lack of scientific rigor among scientists is not uncommon, but I still maintain that affirming a consequent in the general case qualifies as a fallacy and that the exceptions tend to be botched due to the prevalence of the aforementioned lack of rigor.

Health,
al-Aswad.


_____________________________

"If God saw what any of us did that night, he didn't seem to mind.
From then on I knew: God doesn't make the world this way.
We do.
" -- Rorschack, Watchmen.


(in reply to Lostkitten3)
Profile   Post #: 489
RE: Is Atheism a religion? - 9/18/2009 6:12:54 AM   
Rule


Posts: 10479
Joined: 12/5/2005
Status: offline
Having presented my unicorn = dromedary conclusion to a number of friends, one of them presented arguments that my conclusion was wrong. The Hebrew word for camel is gimel.

The Greek monokeros (translated into English as unicorn) first turns up in the third century BC Greek translation of the Hebrew word re'em in the Septuagint. Similar words in related semitic languages refer to a (wild) bovine. It is not known why the Greeks chose to translate re'em with monokeros - and neither what they meant by the word monokeros.

I do not know the first thing about Hebrew, so I have no idea what motivated the greeks in their translation.

What did convince me that my conclusion was wrong, was that I googled that dromedaries can be used to plow.

< Message edited by Rule -- 9/18/2009 6:22:23 AM >

(in reply to Rule)
Profile   Post #: 490
Page:   <<   < prev  21 22 23 24 [25]
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Is Atheism a religion? Page: <<   < prev  21 22 23 24 [25]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2024
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.031