Blogs


Notices

Anything goes secular spirituality thread

Old 03-20-2009, 12:23 AM
  # 101 (permalink)  
Never settle.
 
gneiss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Under immense pressure
Posts: 1,505
I've read the teapot thing before. I love it. And I keep meaning to read the others mentioned, but... durn chemistry homework. Maybe over the summer or something. Of course, I've been saying that for a few years.

Maybe it's just a cop out. Like my agnosticism (no really, I can see why it looks like a cop out. And I even agree that there's a greater probability that there are no gods. I just don't see the evidence.)
gneiss is offline  
Old 03-20-2009, 01:24 AM
  # 102 (permalink)  
I got nothin'
Thread Starter
 
Bamboozle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: My house.
Posts: 4,889
Blog Entries: 14
I've read The God Delusion in the last couple of weeks and I wasn't impressed. One can find the same (or better) arguments/info for free while cruising the web. I would like to sell the book back but it’s too late. Dawkins makes many valid points, but he is an a$$ crack at times.

I don't think agnosticism is a cop out or a weak position. I think it's an honest position.

I've mentioned many a time that if I have to go by a label, technically I’m an "agnostic atheist".

In practice, I suppose you could simply call me an “atheist”.
Bamboozle is offline  
Old 03-20-2009, 01:31 AM
  # 103 (permalink)  
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: France
Posts: 783
Spark I agree, "mind-boggling", I like that, i didn't know how to express my reasons for being an atheist. It's just that I need to understand a little bit. I don't get all of quantum physics, nor all of relativity, but I can fathom just enough to believe. What I don't get at all is god on a cloud listening to my prayers. I have no proof that god doesn't exist, but I sure can't understand how it could be.
californiapoppy is offline  
Old 03-20-2009, 01:54 AM
  # 104 (permalink)  
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: France
Posts: 783
I think I'd need a really good definition of god too, because i just figure people invented god to answer the questions they couldn't understand. I'm going in circles here, I can't understand how a god could exist, so would I invent a god to answer the question I can't understand. No. Mind-boggling , that's what it is, excuse my rambling, that's another thread isn't it?
californiapoppy is offline  
Old 03-20-2009, 05:42 AM
  # 105 (permalink)  
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 26,407
Blog Entries: 1
Originally Posted by californiapoppy View Post
Spark I agree, "mind-boggling", I like that, i didn't know how to express my reasons for being an atheist. It's just that I need to understand a little bit. I don't get all of quantum physics, nor all of relativity, but I can fathom just enough to believe. What I don't get at all is god on a cloud listening to my prayers. I have no proof that god doesn't exist, but I sure can't understand how it could be.

BINGO!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thats exactly it.....maybe i'm the dunce of the class...but just because i don't understand something doesn't mean it isn't true!!!

I don't believe in god, but I find the same arragance in non-believers as believers...that somehow i I don't understand something then it cant be true...was the world flat before someone sailed around it or pinpointed stars or all that stuff? (see i get concepts but cant remember details lol)


Of course being rational isn't my forte (grin)

anyhow...I'm off to spend my day walking a spiritual path...It seems to work in my life as long as I don't include some guy on a cloud in my plans
Ananda is offline  
Old 03-20-2009, 06:36 AM
  # 106 (permalink)  
Member
 
Eroica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Htown, baby!
Posts: 384
Originally Posted by ananda View Post

I don't believe in god, but I find the same arragance in non-believers as believers...that somehow i I don't understand something then it cant be true...was the world flat before someone sailed around it or pinpointed stars or all that stuff? (see i get concepts but cant remember details lol)
After you posted that, I went on wiki to find out more about flat earth theory. lol I was surprised to find out that many people began believing in a round earth in BC times

"Around 330 BC, Aristotle provided observational evidence for the spherical Earth,[16] noting that travelers going south see southern constellations rise higher above the horizon. He argued that this was only possible if their horizon was at an angle to northerners' horizon and that the Earth's surface therefore could not be flat.[17]"

"The Earth's circumference was first determined around 240 BC by Eratosthenes. Eratosthenes knew that in Syene, in Egypt, the Sun was directly overhead at the summer solstice, while he estimated that angle formed by a shadow cast by the Sun at Alexandria was 1/50th of a circle. He estimated the distance from Syene to Alexandria as 5,000 stades, and estimated the Earth's circumference was 250,000 stades and a degree was 700 stades (implying a circumference of 252,000 stades).[21]
Eroica is offline  
Old 03-20-2009, 06:46 AM
  # 107 (permalink)  
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 26,407
Blog Entries: 1
Ah...so Aristotle made the world round....can we blame him for anything else???

sorry E...i'm feeing frisky today (in a nice way)

Ananda is offline  
Old 03-20-2009, 08:28 AM
  # 108 (permalink)  
sentient puddle
 
spark42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Essex, UK
Posts: 180
Originally Posted by gneiss View Post
I've read the teapot thing before. I love it. And I keep meaning to read the others mentioned, but... durn chemistry homework. Maybe over the summer or something. Of course, I've been saying that for a few years.

Maybe it's just a cop out. Like my agnosticism (no really, I can see why it looks like a cop out. And I even agree that there's a greater probability that there are no gods. I just don't see the evidence.)
agnosticism is a perfectly valid rational position on propositions that cannot be proved either way. For example life on other planets. There are good arguments either way, and no evidence to settle it.

However just because there is no evidence for or against something, that does not mean it's equally likely to exist as to not exist.

This is where probability comes into it.

I'm technically agnostic about god, but only to the same extent that i am agnostic about fairies, pink unicorns, and spaghetti monsters. Which is about 99.999999999999999% against.

Last edited by spark42; 03-20-2009 at 08:46 AM.
spark42 is offline  
Old 03-20-2009, 08:39 AM
  # 109 (permalink)  
sentient puddle
 
spark42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Essex, UK
Posts: 180
Originally Posted by Phaleron View Post
Pascal's wager?
not an argument for believing in god - just an argument for pretending to believe...

Anyone taking up pascal's wager had better hope the god they're feigning belief in isn't omniscient...

Also, it's a wager - a bet - would you bet on god's valuing dishonestly faked belief over honest scepticism?
spark42 is offline  
Old 03-20-2009, 08:53 AM
  # 110 (permalink)  
sentient puddle
 
spark42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Essex, UK
Posts: 180
Originally Posted by californiapoppy View Post
I think I'd need a really good definition of god too, because i just figure people invented god to answer the questions they couldn't understand. I'm going in circles here, I can't understand how a god could exist, so would I invent a god to answer the question I can't understand. No. Mind-boggling , that's what it is, excuse my rambling, that's another thread isn't it?
exactly. People invented gods as a way of explaining things they couldn't understand.

Whereas as our knowledge and science and understanding of the universe progressed, gods no longer are an explanation for anything.

Instead gods are something that themselves need an insurmountable amount of explaining.

Why bother i say? We invented them in the first place!

There are gaps in our knowledge but there is no need to fill those gaps with gods. It's enough to say "we don't know, but we are trying to find out, and are sure that the only way to find out truth is through scientific methods".
spark42 is offline  
Old 03-20-2009, 09:07 AM
  # 111 (permalink)  
Never settle.
 
gneiss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Under immense pressure
Posts: 1,505
BAM!!!!!!!!!!!! Good to see you back, sweety. How are you doing?

I've always found it weird when Christians (maybe other groups do it, too, but I've only had this experience with Christians) use science (or more often, "science") to try to prove the Bible is true, or God exists. If they really have *faith* why try to prove it? The very idea of "proving" something that requires faith makes me wonder if they actually believe it. *Sigh*
gneiss is offline  
Old 03-20-2009, 09:26 AM
  # 112 (permalink)  
sentient puddle
 
spark42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Essex, UK
Posts: 180
To quote douglas adams - "i refuse to prove that i exist" says god, "because proof denies faith, and without faith i am nothing"...

He also said something along the lines of proof being found of god's existence would cause god to cease to exist "in a puff of logic"...
spark42 is offline  
Old 03-20-2009, 09:59 AM
  # 113 (permalink)  
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: France
Posts: 783
Ok thanks Spark, you cleared it up for me. God exists for those who have faith. So some people have one (or more) and some people don't. It's so simple, now. Can you explain quantum physics to me?
californiapoppy is offline  
Old 03-20-2009, 10:35 AM
  # 114 (permalink)  
Resident
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 4,150
You guys think and read too much. It will drive you crazy.
I say what it is is what it is and there is no advantage to figuring it out but then again it leaves little to discuss.
I guess that is why I am such a loner.
Fubarcdn is offline  
Old 03-20-2009, 10:46 AM
  # 115 (permalink)  
Member
 
PaperDolls's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Midwest
Posts: 8,539
Blog Entries: 10
PaperDolls is offline  
Old 03-20-2009, 10:53 AM
  # 116 (permalink)  
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: France
Posts: 783
Oh Fubar, it just got simple! And that leaves us with nothing to discuss...but I'm curious, how do you go without sweets? Are fruits obvious sweets? If not, is raisin bread acceptable, or dried apricots? Excuse me, I'm in awe is all...
californiapoppy is offline  
Old 03-20-2009, 10:53 AM
  # 117 (permalink)  
Member
 
Eroica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Htown, baby!
Posts: 384
Originally Posted by ananda View Post

sorry E...i'm feeing frisky today (in a nice way)

I'm always feeling frisky. Its the hippie in me :ghug3
Eroica is offline  
Old 03-20-2009, 11:31 AM
  # 118 (permalink)  
Knucklehead
 
doorknob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Davenport, WA
Posts: 4,005
Originally Posted by PaperDolls View Post
I might have to gaffle that from you for a while.
doorknob is offline  
Old 03-20-2009, 11:36 AM
  # 119 (permalink)  
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 26,407
Blog Entries: 1
Obvious sweets is a neat thing....you get to define it and revise it at any given moment It's alot like "higher power" snirkcle snirkle....and you thought you were off topic didn't youi
Ananda is offline  
Old 03-20-2009, 11:37 AM
  # 120 (permalink)  
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 26,407
Blog Entries: 1
OK dK what is gaffle????

would you all quit using big words!!!!!
Ananda is offline  

Currently Active Users Viewing this Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off




All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:50 PM.