[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 61 KB, 1280x720, XRA.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15918893 No.15918893 [Reply] [Original]

Do you believe in God?

>> No.15918896

>>15918893
Y-yes

>> No.15918931
File: 841 KB, 1307x596, bang .png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15918931

>>15918896

>> No.15918932
File: 689 KB, 1268x602, believe.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15918932

Do you believe in God?

>> No.15919061
File: 25 KB, 128x128, 1691552305864998.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15919061

vgh.. i gvess so

>> No.15919070

>>15918893
I don't see anything that would make it impossible. for me it's possible just that not very probable. nothing much about it in human religions tho. may be at most scattered bits and pieces, wrongly interpreted, at the very most.

>> No.15919077

>>15918893
I believe in that one piece of graffiti supposedly found in a concentration camp or something: "If god exists, he will have to beg for my forgiveness."

>> No.15919078
File: 773 KB, 1361x587, bang2 .png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15919078

>>15919061
>>15919070

>> No.15919082

OP, I'm aware that you have questionable sexual preferences, but now is the moment to challenge deductive reasoning conclusively. Two anons affirmed their belief, and you shot them both. So, here I am: No, I don't believe in God.

Wut now?

>> No.15919174

Nothing happened.

>> No.15919181

>>15919174
nothing ever happens

>> No.15919187

>>15918893
I believe in what I know, but I don't know what I believe in. Now shoot me faggot.

>> No.15919213
File: 445 KB, 1080x1920, talking-ben-20431-3.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15919213

>>15918893
No.

>> No.15919237

>>15919077
Ay tone

>> No.15919518
File: 379 KB, 893x986, file.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15919518

>>15918893
it depends on what you mean by "God"

>> No.15919756
File: 141 KB, 640x986, d8804932d167ec587443e9dea6a6abd724058c148eb14a37d36d4a59bfb20ece_1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15919756

>>15918893
>Do you believe in God?
I personally don't. Agnostic atheist.

>> No.15919768

>>15919756
why would the burden of proof fall on you to disprove someone else's unhinged claim?

>> No.15919775

>>15919756
The laws of physics are not real, they are illusions. This illusion is created by tiny imperceptible gnomes pushing subatomic particles around at arbitrary speeds according to a set of rules that mimic laws of physics. You can't disprove this, therefore you are now tiny gnome agnostic. You're welcome, agnostics.

>> No.15919782

>>15919768
If you positively say that it is false, then you are making a claim.

Assuming every statement to be false by default is incoherent.

>> No.15919783
File: 98 KB, 1280x608, CSB.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15919783

>>15919775

>> No.15919784

>>15919782
>If you positively say that it is false, then you are making a claim.
Dismissing an absurd unfalsifiable claim is not the same as making a claim you literal fucking sophist.

>> No.15919786

isn't God the creator of the universe?

>> No.15919788

>>15919784
>absurd
Your requirement is then to prove that it is absurd.
>unfalsifiable
If it is unfalsifiable then by definition you can't claim that it is false. It's just useless to discuss.

>> No.15919792

>>15919782
>"hey everybody, this guys a child molester!"
>"what? no i'm not"
>"prove it!"

the world would be a much more interesting place if retards like you were given power.

>> No.15919795

>>15919775
I knew it... gnomes.....

>> No.15919801

>>15919792
here is a teachable moment. Why would you not believe that the man is a child molester?

>> No.15919803

>>15919801
because no evidence was provided to support that he is.

>> No.15919804

>>15919803
And if no evidence is provided to support that he is not a child molester either, why would you assume that he isn't?

>> No.15919807

>>15918893
No, and theism is something holding the human race back, a stage of a civilization's development that it needs to grow out of and move past

>> No.15919819

>>15919788
I already know you're a sophist, you don't have to respond with more sophistry.
>Verification not required.

>> No.15919827

>>15919819
You're genuinely too retarded to understand what I'm saying. Here's something:

The claim that there is no God is equally unfalsifiable to the claim that there is a God. Why, then, do you and I assume that there is no God?

>> No.15919832
File: 78 KB, 850x529, 133f73a80cad4d0c48b653df18103b3eeb7b50f5d31860c40b9a4daba081c0c6_1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15919832

>> No.15919833

>>15919827
see >>15919775
If you don't understand the relevance, please continue calling other people too retarded to understand. It's hilarious.

>> No.15919842

>>15919833
I'm not arguing for the existence of god you fucking tard. I'm trying to tell you something, but you're not bright enough to deduce that.

>> No.15919843
File: 235 KB, 528x438, 1661569948674586.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15919843

>>15918893
It's one thing to believe this universe and all it's physical "laws" might possibly created by an outter being like a video game.
It's another thing to believe this creator tells you how you should play said video game.

>> No.15919844

>>15919842
Ok, mr tiny gnome agnostic. Suit yourself

>> No.15919848

>>15919844
Answer this question: What makes you believe that tiny gnomes do not exist? If your answer is "there is no evidence" is that alone enough to claim positively that there exist no gnomes? Or do you have some other inductive evidence?

>> No.15919853

>>15919832
appeal to authority fallacy

>> No.15919869

>>15919848
>What makes you believe that tiny gnomes do not exist?
because it's stupid, you moron

>> No.15919875

>>15919869
you are a nigger

>> No.15919876

>>15919843
Why not? Developers have manuals most of the time for the players. Do you really think the Creator of Our Reality would leave us without that manual?

>> No.15919881

>>15919843
Although what would this manual even.. look like? What would it focus on as the basics? I mean, seriously..

>> No.15920285

>>15918893
i don't fiscally care either way

>> No.15920289

>>15920285
>fiscally
who asked?

>> No.15920295

>>15919804
kill yourself

>> No.15920455

>>15920295
I'm not genuinely arguing that you assume he's a child molester, retard. I'm asking you to investigate your own logic.

>> No.15920461

>>15920455
You're the only one here who's willfully ignorant of the idea that anything which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. Stop intentionally being a fag on the internet

>> No.15920464

>>15920289
OP

>> No.15920497

>>15920461
>anything which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

anything asserted without evidence is not worthy of further discussion, but it cannot be positively rejected until further evidence supplies the claim.

There is no evidence that "green matter" exists. There is also no evidence that "green matter" doesn't exist. Why, then, should dismiss the existence of the green matter? Since you're obviously too mentally handicapped to figure it out yourself, I'll tell you that it is because of ockham's razor, that the explanation which requires the fewest extraneous beings relative to the evidence is naturally to be preferred. This is logically equivalent to "that which is asserted without evidence is dismissed without evidence". For this reason, God is dismissed because reality can be explained without God.

Ockham's Razor is NOT a method of proving the falsity of the extraneous assumption. If it was, then it would be contradicted time and time again by the development of physical science. It is only a method of abductive reasoning; Epistemically, we do not know whether or not God exists. Abductively, we know that the explanation without God is to be preferred until some contradiction is found in it.

>> No.15920505

>>15918893
Which God? Zeus helped me before so I think I believe in him

>> No.15920512

God is an intellectual property of forerunner technology, use liberal caution.

>the soul god hypothesis reunites careful Ark

>> No.15920513

>>15920497
That was a very aggressive and long winded way to agree with me. Was the degree in philosophy worth the time and money?

>> No.15920523

>>15920513
Look at the beginning of the thread you were replying to.

>> No.15920550
File: 261 KB, 1002x961, TIMESAND___ManOfLawlessness.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15920550

That's supposed to be this guy I guess: Joseph George Tooker.

>> No.15920551
File: 1.25 MB, 952x754, TIMESAND___pseuds3x.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15920551

>>15920550

>> No.15920553
File: 1.78 MB, 1815x677, TIMESAND___911mural+faces2.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15920553

>>15920550
>>15920551

>> No.15920556

>>15920550
They made this guy into the scientist on the first season of Stranger Things too.

>> No.15920567
File: 24 KB, 375x500, TIMESAND___UTLIdf02jDFiQG8g7k6fJskFxUdRUy13wj9M9fP9k10melikedat0128jajf77Pik0wjGg.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15920567

>>15918893
When my father, who may be this shithead's brother, was doing his interviews on HBO, he said he regretted one time giving someone a few minutes before killing them to give God a chance to save them. I guess that's pretty similar to this, "Do you believe in God?," thing.

>> No.15920569
File: 544 KB, 1384x1154, TIMESAND___+FamilyTree.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15920569

>>15920567

>> No.15920576

>>15919082
>Wut now?
Now they get tortured and the guy doesn't feel like his little trap was too jewish, and like he thinks someone's panicked word uttered to him under duress is more significant that a psychological coin flip, which it certainly isn't. It's too jewish, and the haha-i-tricked-you thing when someone who does believe in God says, "No!," is the most jewish part. Abraham and Isaac both lied about their wives being their sisters to avoid being murdered, and neither of them were vilified for doing so. It's ok to bullshit people if you think not bullshitting them is going to get you murdered. It's totally normal, and saying you don't believe in God when you see three people getting killed for saying yes is just the same. That's way too much judaism there.

>> No.15920578

>>15920550
>>15920551
>>15920553
>>15920556
stop filling this board up with your faggot nonsense and go bother /x/

>> No.15920580

>>15919786
Who is the creator of garloids?
>nice line of scientific inquiry you have there, Shit Cunt

>> No.15920583
File: 16 KB, 474x255, TIMESAND___NOOOOOO.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15920583

>>15920578

>> No.15920589
File: 2.80 MB, 600x338, TIMESAND___PrettyMuch.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15920589

If someone comes up to you on the street and asks if you have any change, you're not really obligated to answer truthfully. If you just want to tell them whatever to get them to fuck off, that's fine. That's the same with guy's question about God.

>> No.15920590
File: 27 KB, 475x407, IMG_6535.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15920590

>>15918893
I BELIEVE IN SCIENCE
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ipsrj1jJ1eM

>> No.15920597

I think the stuff with Abraham and Isaac and their wives makes a clear distinction between bullshitting someone and bearing false witness, which is a sin. Bullshitting isn't a sin; it's a conversational device.
>do you want to go do stupid thing later
>no, I can't because I'm busy
It's ok to tell that guy you don't have any spare change even if you have like almost a dollar in coins jingling in your pocket.

>> No.15920607

>>15919832
This but unironically. No one has refuted Montano's "steelmanned" argument for the existence of God.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxYbA1pt8LA
https://vitrifyher.wordpress.com/2018/11/22/the-case-for-the-physical-existence-of-god/

>> No.15920615

It's a mathematical fact, no matter how much it upsets me

>> No.15920616
File: 18 KB, 676x384, TIMESAND___UTLncwMjg3t9jouU3gfQtfEhPyt8Jfiu9mc4G0fM9Lng08tiuBqXgef.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15920616

>> No.15920623

>it doesn't matter if you believe in God or not
>the important thing is what you tell some randoid asshole when he's aggressively harassing you

>> No.15920711
File: 861 KB, 887x721, TIMESAND___4G0fM9LndVy678ltyHycKbMmD6v9Ez9inqkhn95fKoVg39g8f.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15920711

I think more than a passing fascination with question like, "What is the meaning of life?," or, "Dude, what if solipsism?," pretty much bars someone from the realm of high-IQ. Let's suppose these questions are well-defined at all (they aren't). If solipsism is real, what implication exists to make the proposition of interest?
>suppose solipsism
>then what...?
Let's say you found out what "the meaning of life" was. Then what? And before we ask, "Then what?," let's note well that "meaning" isn't really an attribute class of life at all and the question is ill-defined.
>what doth life
>how many am there?
These questions like, "What is the meaning of life?," or, "Dude, what if solipsism?," are masturbatory because you just shoot your load if you can get answer (which you can't), and then there's nothing to do with the answer once you have it. I know people usually mean, "What is something good to do with your life?," when they ask, "What is the meaning of life?," but this guy's stupid phrase, "What doth life?," suggests someone else besides me also sees his fascination with this ill-defined question as masturbatory. Before we ask, "What is the meaning of life?," let's answer the more fundamental question, "Is meaning an characteristic of life?" I think the answer is NO. That's like asking, "What is the color of a dozen?," or, "What time is an idea?" On the other hand, if you ask something like, "What if a time-varying electric field induces a magnetic field?," then there's a lot of obvious implications that follow from the proposition, meaning it's not a masturbatory pursuit that just dead-ends with a pseudo-intellectual load shoot. The OP cartoon should be called "Mental Midget: Narcissist Murderer."