/sci/ - Science & Math

This is a troll thread. Anyone posting below will be considered part of the problem.

Proof: Mentioning the word "Religion" in /sci/.

>>5376184
Most people do not simply choose a religion, they will be born into it.
Your religion is whatever your parents choose it to be, it depends whether they take you to Church, or Mosque, or Synagogue, or wherever.

When choosing one, I am not sure what logical basis you can do it by. What would make a religion more appealing? A more desirable belief in the afterlife, perhaps?

>>5376192
no, this isnt a typical, prove me wrong, christfags 1 atheist 0 post. its legit. im no mobile so this'll take a minute.

atheism

No religion is at all logical, if you go to eastern religions such as zen buddhism it gets less fucking retarded, generally the further removed you get from some priest spewing out bullshit stories and telling you what you have to do the better it is, so naturally christianity, judaism, islam, hinduism, sikhism, and I'm sure any other mainstream religion are so fucking retardedly illogical that asking which one is best is on par with asking which Greek deity you should worship.

>>5376196
no i was born into christian family, and i'm basicly the only muslim. not gonna lie, i was a skeptic alot, not of theology as a whole but of the little details that didnt make sense.

now i choose islam because it appealed to me as a challegen. it kinda dared me to prove it wrong.

the question now is do people find appeal in a religion that makes sense or as you said, afterlife appeal?

> mfw i'm afraid i might be homeless in the after life if i died right now. i haven't done extra prayers help build a mosque etc.

>>5376232
An unusual transition.
I am wondering why you rejected Christianity and decided to choose Islam instead?

It is not usually about how 'challenging' it is, it is usually based on whether you think it is true or not.

Why do you think that Islam is more likely to be true?

>>5376196
In my experience, those that do make the choice ALWAYS seem to make choice based on being included as member of some community.

>>5376216
tried it. it was depressing, i wanted to seek immortality, thought that nothing mattered in terms of moralaty because, why? i'm not accountable and humans are hardly interesting, let alone deserving of existance on the mass scale. and they fuck up the planet.
>>5376217
give me a good reason. or at least a logical one, as to how islam is retarded please.

also i met an olympian once, we played D&D together, but then i took a vorpal blade to the neck. dat nat 20, nothing natural about it at all.

>>5376243
>give me a good reason. or at least a logical one, as to how islam is retarded please.
you believe that a divine being that exists beyond our plane of existence, knows everything that has happened and will happen and is capable of anything. and loves every human being immeasurably.

will sentence men to an eternity of suffering if they do not cut off the tip of their penis.

not to mention that sharia law is the most hopelessly backwards legal system used on any appreciable scale in the world today.

im not gonna lie, i dont know that much about islam, but the very basics of what i do no are so fucking retarded that its not worth my time learning more. the same goes for other theistic religions aside from christianity and judaism. eastern religions that focus on spirituality are one thing. storybooks of ancient myths that are obviously untrue at every level are an utter waste of time and you are incredibly fucking retarded for trying to act like a rationalist. you are an edgy fucktarded kid and the "imma be muslim to piss off my christian parents" thing is really fucking retarded and nobody here except that faggot schaiffe is going to take you seriously if you cannot get past that level of immaturity.

>>5376239
well the convertion came in two major parts, firstly i was a baptist for the longest, but then
>why do you go tard when holy spirit?
and various serious questions as well. mainly about why rather than how, paganism is in christianity.
then while i was a conspericy theorist i found the arrivals series and took notes on the thoughts etc.
>sadly, i'm usually a skeptic about things, challenging everything to a qantum level to have an exact understanding where possible.
>>5376240
mostly jailed people is what your refering to. thank god i didnt convert in jail. they say Allah this and that and whats haram etc then next thing ya know the guy is getting a blow job from a total faggot. bah!

Mormonism

>>5376276
>mostly jailed people is what your referring to
No, this is definitely not what i'm referring to.
I'm talking about acquaintances, friends and family. People that are not criminals.

>>5376275
thats not who i am or what i'm about. you dont know anything about me to even make that statement and right now, you're the one being immature and childish.

>your mother loves you, even when you do wrong. she loves the small details you can't imagen, and i'm sure that god loves you just as much and even more, even though you hate him.
and yes, hell will be waiting for those that deserve it.

now then, did you play any pokemon game? or have a chao? if so then imagen if those things had conciousness

>following old power hungry men in drag instead of seeking spiritual fulfillment during intense study of the hard sciences that reveal the non intuitive nature that is our reality

You're looking at it the wrong way. Nobody chooses a religion based on how logical it is. If people looking to join religions wanted to be logical, they wouldn't be looking to join religions in the first place.

>>5376306
Non intuitiveness??

Take a look at this chart, every injunction of form has an equal surplus to balancing the next form

>>5376278
southpark:dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb. etc etc
>>5376291
hmm. they must not have been clapping hard enough
>in case that was overhead, peter pan reference, ya gotta believe.

>>5376293
>and yes, hell will be waiting for those that deserve it.
so youre telling me i deserve to go to hell for not cutting off the tip of my dick.

i deserve an ETERNITY OF FUCKING SUFFERING. SUFFERING FOREVER. NO ESCAPE, NO END, NO HOPE. ETERNAL FUCKING SUFFERING.
for not mutilating my fucking penis.

and then you have the balls to expect me to treat you with fucking respect?

fuck off your brainless fucking sheep. organized religion is morality for fucking retards. your definition of what someone does do "deserve" ETERNAL. FUCKING. SUFFERING. is a bunch of bullshit written in a book by a desert nomad. you are literally giving up on making any effort to think for yourself, use logic or reason or critical thinking, and just accepting a massive load of bullshit, not even convincing bullshit, obviously fucking retarded bullshit. not because you think it is morally right. not because people you respect have spent time thinking to reach that conclusion. because a fucking barbaric desert nomad said so.

>>5376293

>>5376232
>it kinda dared me to prove it wrong.
So you apparently gave up immediately. Because that's literally the easiest fucking thing anyone could do.

>>5376330
on mobile...
>>5376329
i did. religion is pretty logical.

>i/we are unique sentients on this planet.
>no clue what happens when we die
> if nothing happens no big deal
> if God does exist, oh shi! prove or disprove his existance now. can't do either, well fuck. take up theological insurance policy.

>>5376362
what if god does exist but is one of the thousands of other religions' gods and not allah and you still end up suffering forever? and you had to miss out on pork, alcohol, following a civilized legal system and having an intact penis because of it?

>>5376343
>>5376357
drown in your rage.

>>5376361
didn't give up, i just couldn't prove it wrong, great points obviously muhammed (PBUH) existed, accomplished all he set out to do, and has had a beautiful impact on the world ever since, i wont say who is and who isn't going to hell. i love scientist and generally intellegent people. what others choose to do is up to them.

>its not the tip of your dick that matters its doing what you were designed to do, and thats worship the one and only God, who has no partners in association with him.

> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>
:::that said may we please get back on topic, are you all saying that all religions are illogical? and if so, please give intellegent responses as to why.

>>5376192
This is probably true.

Nevertheless, the answer to OP's question is "Tibetan Buddhism"

>>5376362
>take up theological insurance policy.

In my religion, God only lets atheists into heaven. So if my God happens to be the correct on, you're going to fucking hell.

You're also going to hell if the following are right:
-Christians
-Jews
-Hindus
-Mormons
-Jains
-Ancient Greeks
-Ancient Egyptians
-Celtics
-Swahilis
-Haidas
-Mayans
-Aztecs
-Zoroastrians

>>5376371
uncut dicks are horrible hedious. i wouldn't wish that on my most hated enemy. its just ugly, i'd rather have a dick that always curls like gonzo's nose than that.

as for if i'm wrong, oh well, i tried. kinda would suck though. if anything any other diety would have to do that, because if i could become a deity, i would go highlander, and remain unchallenged afterwards. start over with a fresh universe and do things as i please.

>>5376374
>drown in your rage.
great way to respond to all criticism of your religion, keep it up and youll be a religious leader in no time!

>>5376377
>Buddhism

Back to reddit.

>>5376377
how is it logical?

>>5376387
>God only lets atheist into heaven.


>mfw reading that

>>5376377
>Tibetan
obvious troll is obvious

>has had a beautiful impact on the world ever since

>>5376400
A god who only lets atheists into heaven is just as likely as your stupid-ass Allah shit.

>>5376400
It is logical in the sense of involving coherent structure, developing more advanced statements from more primitive ones in a systematic way, and explicitly avoiding appeals to emotion/authority.

This makes it *syntactically* logical. Whether it is *semantically true* is a whole other question, but the two are not equivalent

>>5376395
there wasn't an argument stated to respond to idiot. he just went on a full rage rant because deep down he knows he's going to hell and has an empty meaningless life. he isn't getting anxw presents either. thats why he raged like that. if he made an argument i might counter but then he'd only be trolling and i'd lol if he caught a ban because of it, when i'm trying to remain on topic.

>>5376416
>deep down he knows he's going to hell
I lol'd.

You're such a faggot OP.
>Angsty teen who converted to Islam to rebel against his Christian conservative parents.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjoa3QazVy8

>>5376435
my parents aren't conservative.
>>5376408
should have barrel rolled. damn G-dafuser.
oddly convert rates rose, and things have been interesting ever since.
>>5376410
logical fallacy.
>conciously say he doesn't exist but keep saying it subconciourly to get into heaven.

>>5376435
i thought /sci/ had intellegent people here.
>stop being a faggot and get real.
you guys can't even troll, you just make yourself look stupid.

>>5376466
>i thought /sci/ had intellegent people here.

/sci/ was 100% intelligent people -- until you started posting.

>>5376466
>converted to Islam
>comes to board with notoriously high atheist population
>surprised when everyone calls him a retard

>>5376466
>infantile cartoon

>>5376216
Atheism isn't a religion.

>>5376243
>tried it. it was depressing, i wanted to seek immortality
So you're actually admitting that you're not after the truth, you just want what belief feels the best to you?

...why not make up your own religion then?

>>5376490
>breaking rule 3.

>>5376416
>there wasn't an argument stated to respond to idiot.
so then you truly believe people deserve ETERNAL. FUCKING. SUFFERING. for not cutting off the tip of our penis?

how can you possibly still believe you are a good or moral person with a belief like that?
what is it about not cutting off the tip of your penis that makes you as horrible a person as a rapist or murderer?
how can you not understand that with any sense of a just god, believing that others deserve ETERNAL. FUCKING. SUFFERING. for something as trivial as not cutting off the tip of their penis makes you a bad person and certainly worthy of eternal suffering, if the requirements are that ridiculously loose?

i capitalize ETERNAL. FUCKING. SUFFERING. because clearly you do not understand the idea of eternal suffering. if you did, you would not be able to be theistic. the idea of eternal suffering existing is utterly incompatible with the idea of a god that both loves humanity and created the universe. this is extremely basic logic, my christian friends in middle school were able to catch on to this, granted youre probably in 10th or 11th grade and clearly not very bright but you should be able to get this much.
>he isn't getting anxw presents either.
>implying i dont celebrate christmas, something islam doesnt actually give you
>i'd lol if he caught a ban because of it,
>implying you arent going to be banned and this thread deleted in 3 or 4 hours when a mod reads the 30 reports you have

>>5376520
Exactly. Infantile cartoons are breaking rule 3 because they are off-topic macro image replies used for trolling.

>>5376547
>used for trolling
[citation needed]

>>5376547
That's not what an image macro means.

>>5376493
Don't feel bad a lot of people believe this.
But yes it is.

>>5376582
It is not. Religions are defined by having doctrines and tenets. Atheism is merely one stance on one single position - the lack of a belief in at least one deity.

>>5376576
Nicer grammer m8

seeing an asshole who made it his life purpose to be an asshole suffer forever is just fine with me. on the other hand.

Prove that the Ethereal Horizon doesn't exist.

You can't.

do not make threads about magic on /sci/

>>5376631
>Trying to shift the burden of proof

>>5376651
>inappropriate kneejerk fallacy-name citation
Keep up the good work.

>>5376659
>Made some shit up to try to distract everyone from not showing proof of the Ethereal Horizon
Thanks man, I think I will.

>>5376631
I'll do that when you name an anime better than Madoka.

>>5376668
>implying not having proof is a defect of a religion
Are you a p-zombie or a zealot?

your all idiots. i'll repost during the week when you kids aren't home.

>mfw you couldnt even disprove religion let alone validate your opinion of why god doesn't exist.

>>5376659
Actually it's very appropriate. >>5376631 made a positive claim about the existence of the Ethereal Horizon, abd said "well you can't prove that it doesn't exist!". That my friend is the textbook definition of attempting to shift the burden of proof.

>>5376674
Actually, that is a defect of any religion. It's what keeps religions from, you know, being established facts.

>>5376675
No one needs to disprove religion, because religions are the ones that have the burden of proof, making positive claims and all.

And before you accuse anyone of merely being kids, you probably should demonstrate your claims first.

see previous post.

delete this thread.

different muslimfag here
why is this on /sci/ and not /lit/ or /pol/?

>>5376676
> >>5376631 made a positive claim about the existence of the Ethereal Horizon
And this is why fallacy-citers aren't taken seriously.

>>5376681
>implying not being an established fact is a defect of a religion
You just reworded "not having proof."

Outside of theology, I think there should be a blanket ban on the 'proofs' of God's existence that you sometimes see people waving about on either side of the religion argument. Best known example is obviously Thomas Aquinas' three proofs of God.

Let's be clear here - the guy was never trying to 'prove' God. He already believed in God - he didn't need proof. Nor was he trying to produce some primer that would sway those who didn't belief in God, or to make logical arguments to convince those who were on the fence. It's purpose was just to support an already faithful believers belief in God. This was pretty standard knowledge for theology. Luther pretty much encapsulated the viewpoint - "Faith must trample underfoot reason". Believing in God because of 'logical' arguments is stupid, and trying to support your belief with logic is likewise pointless. Only faith can ever support your belief in God, and it doesn't matter how much you try to change a person's viewpoint, it's only through an internal discovery of faith that he or she will ever belief in God.

Also, before someone gets their panties in a twist over the Luther quote - there's the concept of magisterium in theology. Theologians state that reason cannot be applied to faith within the realm of what defines religious belief, but also conversely that faith should not applied to the realm of logic and reason.

>>5376689
See >>5376685, bitchtits.

>>5376691
You just repeated what I just said... are you that retarded?

>>5376691
It's not our fault if you don't take rational, reasonable fact citers seriously, brah. It's your own stupidity's fault.

>>5376706
There's no need to get mad. Calm down, reread the posts, and accept that you were wrong.

>>5376713
0/10

>>5376699
Continued because I must stress this last point.

This concept of magisterium isn't some sort of fence between the two realms of logic and faith, a wall where theologians guard the ramparts and prevent the two ever meeting. It's just an observable fact that throughout theology, there's been little point in applying logic and reason to faith at all, and vice versa.

To give a good example - Paley's watchmaker argument. It's argued that this is some sort of concrete proof of God that you must bu into in order to have faith, that it acts as a logical crutch for believers. As I've already said, believing in God purely based on logic is stupid, and can never be sustained. Therefore, it's an utterly redundant argument. Logic and reason, when applied to it, naturally show how fucking stupid it is.

But then you have people claiming that because logic and reason have destroyed these arguments, that somehow that should magically cause fith to disappear. Once again, it's important to say, faith is something that is not dependent on logic and reason, and getting is of 'logical' arguments is never going to reduce the number of people who belief.

Therefore, although you can try to apply reason and logic to the realm of faith, it's ultimately pointless because the arguments that you're refuting aren't the source of a person's faith.

>>5376631
Prove that the Aetherial Foliation doesn't exist.

You can't, no matter how much Copenhagenfags want you to think otherwise.

>>5376713
But there is no reason to accept that I'm wrong. You never gave one. You just want me to... for some reason or another. I however have reasons to consider myself right.

Care to explain why I'm wrong, rather than ignoring evidence to the contrary?

if i thought you atheist would honestly challenge me without reverting to childish respondses i'd have a debate with you all. look at this thread. see how i didnt try to entice any atheist to anything, but they've been unnesicarily nonreceptive, off topic and avoiding anything coherent at all. ETERNAL HAPPINESS is really something any human deserves on this planet? step it up sci your getting overran with idiots from pol and r9k

>>5376724
Why are you even here? You are a shitposter. Get out of /sci/.

>>5376724
calm down man
why are you getting so butthurt?
4chan doesn't owe you anything

>>5376724
>ETERNAL HAPPINESS is really something any human deserves on this planet?
The thing is, it's irrelevant if we deserve it or not. It's what's real and what we can demonstrate that is what should count in our beliefs. Not wishful thinking.

You want a challenge? Try not ignoring them for once and you might.

>>5376184
>implying folks choose one religion over the other because it is logical

>>5376730
>It's what's real
>real
shit will get really 7deep8us here if we go down that road

>>5376723
>But there is no reason to accept that I'm wrong. You never gave one.
Look, kid, I don't know who "you" are, but if you are the person who posted >>5376676 then what you said was directly against the observable facts. The evidence is rereading the thread.

Fucking zealots.

>>5376724
Case in point of >>5376721
Look son, I think it's fairly apparent that no one is ever going to change your viewpoint except yourself. Hence, why no one is arguing with you. Why bother? Logically, it's very hard to factor God into anything. In terms of science, the concept of a divine being becomes harder to justify. All these points have been debated endlessly over the internet for years - see that cesspool /r/atheism for example. There's no point in reiterating them because most people now realize that faith is an internal factor that cannot be influenced by logical arguments.

There's no need to feel self righteous about it. You're not on some culture war here. If you're happy, congratulations. But feeling the need to justify your faith constantly would suggest to me that you're not really.

The most faithful and devout person would probably be the one who would care very little for the arguments against God that are said daily here and in other areas. It would affect him little, and would not shake his resolve or plague him with doubt, nor fill him with a need to get angry with atheists.

>>5376739
Give us your best shot.

>>5376546
>mfw i got trolled into writing up an actual response explaining why the troll is stupid and he didnt even respons

thread getting better

>>5376744
I am the samefag who posted >>5376676. And I'm not a 'kid'. But since you're emotional enough to assume that, you're probably in no shape to give reasonable responses, but I'll humor you.

"Observable facts" isn't what's posted in a thread. I'm sorry, but that don't count in the real world. You must demonstrate your claims.

Things that are in the real world CAN be falsified. So if your claim can't, your claim has no weight at all.

'Zealots' indeed.

>>5376768
>"Observable facts" isn't what's posted in a thread.
They are when you make a claim about the contents of the thread. You made a positive claim about positive claims, and therefore when you ask anyone to prove you wrong you are committing your own favorite fallacy.

>>5376788
And what exactly was the claim about the contents of this thread that I'm so wrong about...?

but im not here to argue with any of you. read the OP just here to discuss.

pol and int are shit boards, you bitch on /q/ everyday so i,m not going there for shit.

>>5376805
> >>5376631 made a positive claim about the existence of the Ethereal Horizon

And this is why fallacy-citers aren't taken seriously. I hope we've learned something today.

>>5376817
...but >>5376631 did make a positive claim. "You can't." is indeed a positive claim.

...or am I wrong?

can we please get back on track? no one is trolling anyone. i just want honest opinions

>>5376834
>"You can't." is indeed a positive claim.
Well, now I'm not sure what you mean by "positive claim," but for that to be an example of the fallacy, the challenge would have had to be "Prove that you can prove it."

>>5376848
Religion is fine as long as you don't believe in it.

>>5376374
>I just couldn't prove it wrong

So you just choose to throw in your lot with whatever is unproveable and has a good impact(debatable, I think the world would be much better without islam and almost all other religions)? Can you not see that this thinking is directly wishful?

I wish I could delude myself like you OP, I wish I could believe that there is someone out there who cares about me and who wants to stop suffering. But to believe in these things I would have to throw away what I know about reality.

Most logical? Probably one of those agnostic hindu buddhist or jain sects. I find the Dalai Llamas remark that "the moment science proves something wrong about Buddhism false, Buddhism must change immediately", that's probably the most logical statement made by a religious leader ever. I mean, just look how long the jews, Christians, and muslims are holding on to the myth that adam and eve actually existed.