 |
|
You are not logged in! F.A.Q Log in Register |
 |
|
 |
 Now online (1)big ...and 169 guests Last 5 registered Oplandisks nothingstar N_loop yipe foxtrotromeo Browse members... |
 |
Members 8025Messages 2614124 Today 3 Topics 127542 |
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I understand that you deny the Judeo-Christian concept of God. But more generaly, what are your thoughts about the nature of conciousness/intelligence? Do you think it's a product of matter? Or do you think there is some fundamental diffrence separating it from what it observes? What about the act of observation itself? Not trying to start any debates or flame wars, just curious. Thanks. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Is this a poll? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
atheist from greek a theis (or something like that) = no god. No god doesn't necessarily exclude the soul IMO... I'm not really an atheist though... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I don't beleive in the existense of a 'soul' and I beleive that God is an explination of science. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
My understanding is that atheism is the lack of belief, so asking atheists what they believe in is barking up a dead tree thats been cut down and eaten by various bugs. But then again I'm wrong. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I'd be quite happy to accept that some intelligent being that we couldn't possibly comprehend created life, the universe and everything, but there's no way it's the same thing that is worshipped by theistic religions. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
do yalls peoples eat oatmeal? I don't know much 'bout yalls peoples except I know yalls peoples hate jesus, I know that. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
that's nihilism... atheism is justabout no god. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
explanation of science? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i am a Christian, but i think denominations are stupid. i read whatever bible is closest to me. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i'd say i was an apathist if i hadn't posted in this thread. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
scup, i'm simply trying to compare two viewpoints. I have to understand first so I ask questions. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
The explination of the unknown, in that what was considered magic/acts of god can now be explained through science. Example A: The creation story, "and god created" etc. Is now rationally explained as a massive chemical reaction, "Big Bang" |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
It seems to me that most people who say they are atheists are actually agnostic. Stating that there is definitely no god seems to be a result of overestimating the abilities of the extremely limited and subjective human mind. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
can an atheist still be called an atheist if they give presents at Christmas, or celebrate it in any way? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I was just nitpicking.. your words implied that science existed prior to religion. also, science is about as reliable as spam-mail... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
in that case you're just acting according to tradition. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
It is ever evolving, unlike most religious theory. Which is a good thing |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
aha that sentence is pure "stupid" gold! no offence but did you ever took a plane? how reliable was it? nucelar plants: reliable? and what about spaceships...? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
hes right, spaceships are completely unreliable |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Ken Russell / did somebody see this film? it's terrific. IMO religion is the worst plague which ever existed, they should all be removed. the belief. I do not know what that means, really. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
you have to look at larger lines, not just your own period. and the ohmygodhedoesntthinksciencehasalltheanswerssohesstupid thing is the #1 sign of a total and utter prick with no mind of his own. there - i was just about as to the point as you were. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
and just to be clear. this: and the ohmygodhedoesntthinksciencehasalltheanswerssohesstupid thing is the #1 sign of a total and utter prick with no mind of his own. was irony. you've probably got a mind of your own and stuff, but that is the #1 reply of the opposite. Science has temporary answers, but so do religion. They are opposite fields. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
that's the type of answer I like in discussions like these! now, we'll probably end the discussion and get back to the atheists. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I religion changes almost on a weekly basis. I believe in what-ever gets me by without having my head xxplode. Sometimes I feel athiest, sometimes I believe in a God. hard to put into words |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Anything we can't explain can be excused by saying God did it. Of course science provides explanations for some things that were previously mysterious, so that chips away at God's reputation. However, there will always be more ignorance about the universe than knowledge, so there will always be room for God. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
that's a half-truth at best. religion has "definite answers" with nothing to back them up - they ask you to take a leap of faith. science has theories that strive to help people find the correct/true answers. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
well-said. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
there is nothing more than what there is... there is no speritual existence... its all physics and chemics |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Read the Dawkins article, it's great! I love when he gets all fired up - he's as angry as I am but far more articulate. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i don't have to think about shit like this, because i live in america. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
存在者 , うん 諧調然 又 可憐 |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
ops |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
dismissing god as an "excuse" is too easy... he may as well be the cause.. the scientists of "the scientific revolution" (it never happened, but you'll know which people I speak of, hopefully) believed that they were honoring god by performing experiments and looking at nature through magnifying glasses.. the book of nature, which was written directly by god as opposed to the bible which was subject to interpretation. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
yes, you're right... it's very similar to religion, actually, and I said that before, but someone started flaming and qrter said he got the feeling he was talking to the books I've read. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
oh, and I'm not putting words into your mouth there... if you disagree with the stuff after "..." speak up! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
dismissing god as an "excuse" is too easy... he may as well be the cause.. Nonsense. An infinite number of invisible leprechauns hauling subatomic particles about on fishing twine is the cause. Your god-talk is the result of years of antileprechaunist propaganda. WAKE UP! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I appreciate your posts but my intent for this wasn't religion vs. science. I want to know how athiests explain the nature of their own existance. BTW, I know that certian observations like lighting can be described without resorting to intelligence but is that true for all things? Can nature unaided create microchips as well as snowflakes? Is our own intelligence sufficent but not nessasary for our own inventions? BTW2, science doesn't explain anything. It provides discriptions for what we observe, the HOW of things not the WHY. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
once again it turns to shit. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I wouldn't think athiests have to explain anything. They're an organism just living out their life. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Uh-oh. Sorry. I read your question and remembered I am agnostic. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
That would be the pragmatic approach. Thanks alot elusive, you've just killed the thread. :-) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
the fact is that we disagree - what i pointed out is that science and religion are fundamentally different. my contention was that they are very dissimilar. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
It's really too hard to discuss in words. Good luck to the rest of yall, I'll read up for interesting thoughts. Cheers, |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i didnt bother to read this but conciousness is just an illusion |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
BTW, I know that certian observations like lighting can be described without resorting to intelligence but is that true for all things? Can nature unaided create microchips as well as snowflakes? Is our own intelligence sufficent but not nessasary for our own inventions? these are not questions to ask a group of people who believe a certain thing or don't believe a certain thing. they are questions you can find the answers to in an encyclopedia and thinking for about five seconds. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
prove it. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Even better, prove it without displaying evidence of consciousness. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
well, you're still also pointing out their similarities. none have "real" answers, but both try to give them, and no matter what people say, science often portrays its theories with as much dogmatism as religion. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
What is a real answer, and how can we know that it is real? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Messageboard index
|
|||||||||
