Announcement

Collapse

Philosophy 201 Guidelines

Cogito ergo sum

Here in the Philosophy forum we will talk about all the "why" questions. We'll have conversations about the way in which philosophy and theology and religion interact with each other. Metaphysics, ontology, origins, truth? They're all fair game so jump right in and have some fun! But remember...play nice!

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

An infinite series of finite causes.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by seer View Post
    Like universal moral truths?
    You can do so if you wish.

    I see no reason to do so.
    The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

    I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

    Comment


    • Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
      You can do so if you wish.

      I see no reason to do so.
      But you have no reason to believe you are not a brain in a vat.
      Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

      Comment


      • Originally posted by seer View Post
        But you have no reason to believe you are not a brain in a vat.
        I have many reasons.

        I just cannot definitively prove it to you OR to myself.
        The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

        I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

        Comment


        • Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
          I have many reasons.
          Really? Name one experience that could not be reproduced in your brain, in the vat, by an evil genius?
          Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

          Comment


          • Originally posted by seer View Post
            Really? Name one experience that could not be reproduced in your brain, in the vat, by an evil genius?
            I cannot. My reasons are my experience of everyday life, and the seeming pointlessness of maintaining a "brain in a vat" with all of the attendant inputs required for the purpose of having these experiences. But every single one of them could be "fabricated" in an AI or a brain in a vat, so my belief is also partially (substantially?) based on faith.
            The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

            I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

            Comment


            • Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
              However, it is my experience that a significant number of theists find the atheist position inherently insulting. I guess that is to be expected. Belief in god is not an abstraction to most of the theists I know, and wasn't to me either (back in the day). So to hear someone say, "god doesn't exist" is to hear someone essentially claim that people who believe god exists are worshipping/relating to something unreal, a "figment of their imagination," if you will. I can easily see how that would be received as "inherently insulting."
              I think that the vast majority of theists being insulted is the automatic assumption by some that theists are dumb. As I have said before, when people learn that I am a scientist they accuse me of not being a real scientist (I don't have tenure at the moment so I try to remain anonymous), having cognitive dissonance, not thinking critically, etc. I think that this is a result of the "new atheist" type of movement. It isn't enough to disagree with the theists opinion, you also have to devalue them as well. Dawkins does this all of the time. He said that Francis Collins isn't a real scientist. I would argue that Dawkins isn't a real scientist.... when is the last time he published anything that was peer reviewed? Also, when he did publish peer reviewed papers...I don't recall them being very good (I believe this to be true but am not 100%).

              Example. They had an undergraduate come through my postdoc lab. She was all into Dawkins et al and loved science. But she really didn't know anything about science, she just knew that atheists were smart so they should do science. One day we started discussing science and philosophy...she was clearly ignorant of both and wasn't very smart either. Yet, this still did not stop her from assuming intellectual superiority over religious people. The reason that I knew this is that she assumed I was an atheist and I didn't correct her.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                I cannot. My reasons are my experience of everyday life, and the seeming pointlessness of maintaining a "brain in a vat" with all of the attendant inputs required for the purpose of having these experiences. But every single one of them could be "fabricated" in an AI or a brain in a vat, so my belief is also partially (substantially?) based on faith.
                Right, so you don't really have any good reasons for assuming that you are not a brain in a vat, or in the Matrix.
                Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                Comment


                • Originally posted by element771 View Post
                  I think that the vast majority of theists being insulted is the automatic assumption by some that theists are dumb. As I have said before, when people learn that I am a scientist they accuse me of not being a real scientist (I don't have tenure at the moment so I try to remain anonymous), having cognitive dissonance, not thinking critically, etc. I think that this is a result of the "new atheist" type of movement. It isn't enough to disagree with the theists opinion, you also have to devalue them as well. Dawkins does this all of the time. He said that Francis Collins isn't a real scientist. I would argue that Dawkins isn't a real scientist.... when is the last time he published anything that was peer reviewed? Also, when he did publish peer reviewed papers...I don't recall them being very good (I believe this to be true but am not 100%).

                  Example. They had an undergraduate come through my postdoc lab. She was all into Dawkins et al and loved science. But she really didn't know anything about science, she just knew that atheists were smart so they should do science. One day we started discussing science and philosophy...she was clearly ignorant of both and wasn't very smart either. Yet, this still did not stop her from assuming intellectual superiority over religious people. The reason that I knew this is that she assumed I was an atheist and I didn't correct her.
                  I have never been impressed by Dawkins. I find that atheists fall into two camps: 1) atheists who simply hold the belief that "god" is a creation of the human mind and does not have an independent reality, and 2) atheists who are against any form of religion. I refer to the latter as "anti-theists," not "a-theists." Dawkins has always seemed to me to be one of the latter. I can hold that god does not exist without taking the position that everyone who believes in a god is an idiot.

                  Yes, I disagree with the evidence they accept, and I disagree with their interpretation of that evidence. But idiocy in theistic circles does not appear to have any greater or less incidence rate than idiocy in atheistic circles. And I have known some amazingly brilliant, kind, and generous people who are theists. I'm married to one of them.

                  I do have to admit that I struggle with theists who reject the conclusions of science if they run counter to their interpretation of their religion. The fact that the U.S. is second only to Turkey in the rejection of evolution as a valid scientific explanation for how life progresses is something I think we should all be embarrassed about.
                  The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                  I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                    I have known some amazingly brilliant, kind, and generous people who are theists.
                    Aw shucks, you didn't have to say that about me!
                    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by seer View Post
                      Aw shucks, you didn't have to say that about me!
                      So tempting...
                      The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                      I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by seer View Post
                        Aw shucks, you didn't have to say that about me!
                        Sorry... can't resist....


                        I didn't
                        The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                        I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                          Sorry... can't resist....


                          I didn't
                          Way to ruin a guy's day!
                          Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by seer View Post
                            Right, so you don't really have any good reasons for assuming that you are not a brain in a vat, or in the Matrix.
                            Depends on your definition of "good." I have reasons, and I think they are "good." I see no reasonable purpose for anything to maintain a "brain in a vat" with all of the input required to maintain the illusion of reality I experience each day.

                            You may or may not find that a "good" reason. I do.

                            Ergo - I have more important things to spend my vat-induced brain power on.
                            The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                            I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by seer View Post
                              Way to ruin a guy's day!
                              Yeah... I know...


                              In all seriousness, Seer, I think you got more "build up" than your arguments deserve. You're certainly not a stupid person by any stretch of the imagination. But I have to admit that I do not find your arguments all that well structured or compelling. And your inability to see that you essentially have no position against moral relativism/subjectivism is somewhat amazing to me. I understand the visceral need to have an "anchor" for your moral framework. I have noted that need in many people. Even many atheists seem to keep coming back to "their has to be an objective basis" and look for one in evolution or social dynamics.

                              But every since instance of the argument that I have ever encountered boils down to the same basic argument: it can't be relative/subjective because then it isn't absolute/objective. As I noted before, that's like arguing, "but it can't be blue, because then it isn't green." We all know subjective/relative is not objective/absolute. Likewise, we all know blue isn't green. But noting that is not an argument for why the things ISN'T that. It's just a reaffirmation that subjective/relative isn't objective/absolute and blue isn't green. We already knew that. Nothing is being said...
                              Last edited by carpedm9587; 04-19-2018, 03:40 PM.
                              The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                              I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by element771 View Post
                                I’m not trying to do anything. They are separate since one is how we come to a conclusion and one is the conclusion.

                                And you are right, the conclusion is neutral which means it can be used by atheists and theists alike when formulating an argument.

                                I’m sure you don’t agree so please continue to lecture me about how you know more than people who actually do science for a living. That never gets old.

                                It’s like I am living in that commercial where people pretend they are experts because they stayed at a holiday inn.
                                You are. Enjoy your stay in the Holiday Inn.
                                Turkeys of a feather
                                Flock together

                                I do science for a living, and it is unethical to misuse science to support a theological/philosophical argument that is not grounded in objective verifiable evidence either from a theist or atheist perspective despite the fact that scientific findings are neutral to either belief.

                                Still waiting for examples of 'scientific findings' that may be used to support theological/philosophical question.
                                Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                                Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                                But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                                go with the flow the river knows . . .

                                Frank

                                I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by shunyadragon, 03-01-2024, 09:40 AM
                                160 responses
                                507 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post JimL
                                by JimL
                                 
                                Started by seer, 02-15-2024, 11:24 AM
                                88 responses
                                354 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Started by Diogenes, 01-22-2024, 07:37 PM
                                21 responses
                                133 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Working...
                                X