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

Can Atheism Account For Rationality

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

  • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
    Well that makes no sense. We have no idea of the “supernatural” existing other than unsubstantiated claims of a supernatural deity creating it. In short, made up stuff.. OTOH we have empirically verified evidence of the material world and its phenomena existing.
    I think it can be demonstrated with rational certainty that God exists, and exists in a way worthy of being called "supernatural", that is not subsisting inside the natural world.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by seer View Post
      Right Tass, there is evidence for the material world, but why call it natural? You can't with out begging the question. You are working on a computer - would you call that computer "natural?" Doubtful. To call this universe natural you would have to assume that natural forces created it and uphold it. But there is no evidence to support that claim. And if this universe really is a simulation they we can not call it natural any more than you would call your computer natural.
      We call it natural seer, because if there were another existence which created it, it would be that existence which we would call supernatural. We coin the terms seer, they mean what we say they mean. Supernatural simply denotes "other than" this world, this world which we call the natural world.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Leonhard View Post
        I think it can be demonstrated with rational certainty that God exists, and exists in a way worthy of being called "supernatural", that is not subsisting inside the natural world.
        If god exists, then he/she/it would be distinct from this world. Ergo, the one would be supernatural, the other natural. If the world is supernatural, ala seer's argument, then there would be no such thing as natural and therefore no reason for the term supernatural.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Leonhard View Post
          I think it can be demonstrated with rational certainty that God exists, and exists in a way worthy of being called "supernatural", that is not subsisting inside the natural world.
          THAT would be an interesting argument...
          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 JimL View Post
            We call it natural seer, because if there were another existence which created it, it would be that existence which we would call supernatural. We coin the terms seer, they mean what we say they mean. Supernatural simply denotes "other than" this world, this world which we call the natural world.
            He doesn't see the problem with his argument. I don't think he's going to.
            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
              Right Tass, there is evidence for the material world, but why call it natural? You can't with out begging the question. You are working on a computer - would you call that computer "natural?" Doubtful.
              There is no “begging the question”. The ‘natural world’ consists of the material universe which can be studied and has the potential for empirical verification. And this includes my computer.

              The same cannot be said regarding the hypothesis of a supernatural world. Or are you the proud owner of a supernatural computer?

              To call this universe natural you would have to assume that natural forces created it and uphold it.
              We can reasonably assume this universe exists; we are part of it and we know we exist. How it originated is a matter of scientific investigation not nonscientific, unverifiable speculation about supernatural origins.

              But there is no evidence to support that claim. And if this universe really is a simulation they we can not call it natural any more than you would call your computer natural.
              Of course we "can call it natural", what else would it be? ALL technology, including the advanced technology of a simulated universe, is grounded in the Laws of Nature as understood by science.
              “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                There is no “begging the question”. The ‘natural world’ consists of the material universe which can be studied and has the potential for empirical verification. And this includes my computer..
                Well.. if the definition of "natural" is "can be investigated by science." Another definition is "not made by human hands," and your computer would not qualify for that one. Again, context is everything.

                Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                The same cannot be said regarding the hypothesis of a supernatural world. Or are you the proud owner of a supernatural computer?

                We can reasonably assume this universe exists; we are part of it and we know we exist. How it originated is a matter of scientific investigation not nonscientific, unverifiable speculation about supernatural origins.

                Of course we "can call it natural", what else would it be? ALL technology, including the advanced technology of a simulated universe, is grounded in the Laws of Nature as understood by science.
                I think Seer is leaping to the conclusion that calling the universe "natural" implies it arose from "natural causes." He's misapplying the definition and, presumably because the results conflict with his worldview, objecting. In the process, his objection has him complaining about the nature of language itself.

                The whole thing is rather odd...
                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
                  Well.. if the definition of "natural" is "can be investigated by science." Another definition is "not made by human hands," and your computer would not qualify for that one.
                  The material universe can be investigated by science, which is the point I was making. Science studies the natural world which includes the components of the physical, material universe and this would include my computer.

                  I think Seer is leaping to the conclusion that calling the universe "natural" implies it arose from "natural causes." He's misapplying the definition and, presumably because the results conflict with his worldview, objecting.
                  Yes. Seer wants to separate the “natural, material world” from the supernatural and immaterial so as to claim that the natural, material universe came into existence at the instigation of a supernatural, immaterial entity, i.e. a deity.

                  In the process, his objection has him complaining about the nature of language itself
                  Exactly.

                  The whole thing is rather odd...
                  No surprise there.
                  “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                    There is no “begging the question”. The ‘natural world’ consists of the material universe which can be studied and has the potential for empirical verification. And this includes my computer.

                    The same cannot be said regarding the hypothesis of a supernatural world. Or are you the proud owner of a supernatural computer?
                    Of course you are begging the question. Why call a material universe that can be studied natural? That is no more and an arbitrary assertion. And I certainly would call my computer, at least, extra natural. In that the non-rational forces of nature could not create a computer under its own steam. It take intelligence.

                    We can reasonably assume this universe exists; we are part of it and we know we exist. How it originated is a matter of scientific investigation not nonscientific, unverifiable speculation about supernatural origins.
                    Again you have zero evidence that previous natural forces created this universe or could.

                    Of course we "can call it natural", what else would it be? ALL technology, including the advanced technology of a simulated universe, is grounded in the Laws of Nature as understood by science.
                    Why call the laws of nature "natural." What is natural about them?
                    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
                      Of course you are begging the question. Why call a material universe that can be studied natural? That is no more and an arbitrary assertion. And I certainly would call my computer, at least, extra natural. In that the non-rational forces of nature could not create a computer under its own steam. It take intelligence.



                      Again you have zero evidence that previous natural forces created this universe or could.



                      Why call the laws of nature "natural." What is natural about them?
                      Sheesh, seer, again, we call this world natural because that is what we decided to call it. If there is another kind of existence then that is what we would refer to as supernatural. This world doesn't become supernatural just because there might be something about it beyond our ability to observe. We get it, you have an agenda, but this debate isn't helpful to it.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by JimL View Post
                        Sheesh, seer, again, we call this world natural because that is what we decided to call it. If there is another kind of existence then that is what we would refer to as supernatural. This world doesn't become supernatural just because there might be something about it beyond our ability to observe. We get it, you have an agenda, but this debate isn't helpful to it.
                        You call it natural without rational justification. It is a mere assertion.
                        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
                          You call it natural without rational justification. It is a mere assertion.
                          The supernatural is anything that may exist that can't be defined by the laws of nature. The key word there is nature. The possible existence of the supernatural means beyond nature, distinct from nature.

                          Comment


                          • Nvm
                            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 JimL View Post
                              The supernatural is anything that may exist that can't be defined by the laws of nature. The key word there is nature. The possible existence of the supernatural means beyond nature, distinct from nature.
                              That is my point Jim, these are arbitrary definitions. Let me ask you - if this universe was created by God in what sense could you call it natural? What would be natural about it?
                              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
                                That is my point Jim, these are arbitrary definitions. Let me ask you - if this universe was created by God in what sense could you call it natural? What would be natural about it?
                                OK...I have to admit I am curious as hell. Seer, all definitions are "arbitrary" as has been shown multiple times. So I have to ask, why is it so important to you that we redefine the words "natural" and "supernatural" and what would you like the definitions of those terms to be?
                                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

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by shunyadragon, 03-01-2024, 09:40 AM
                                160 responses
                                505 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post JimL
                                by JimL
                                 
                                Started by seer, 02-15-2024, 11:24 AM
                                88 responses
                                353 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