[ 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: 18 KB, 605x434, Untitled.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2876337 No.2876337 [Reply] [Original]

Deal with it.

>> No.2876340

>Religion does not make falsifiable claims, and thus cannot be true under any circumstance.

More like it.

>> No.2876339

What's your point?

>> No.2876345

>>2876339
Learn to sage.
>>2876337
>Religion does not make any useful claims, and thus science prevails.
Deal with it.

>> No.2876347

>>2876340

That's like psychology, which also makes unfalsifiable claims.

>> No.2876354

>>2876345
>>2876340

You'd fail Logic 101. One does not argue against something by saying "I don't like it, so it can't be true."

>> No.2876358

>>2876340
actually
>Religion does not make falsifiable claims, and thus cannot make any claim to truth.

>> No.2876359

>>2876354
Really? I fail basic logic by saying that everything isn't true?

>> No.2876361

Isn't "god answers your prayers" a falsifiable claim?

>> No.2876362

>>2876357

And to top it off, you flunk Theology 101.

>> No.2876365

Some religions DO make falsifiable claims though.
For example, Christianity says that if you have true faith in God, you will be able to raise someone from the dead.
Testing Christianity would be as simple as finding a bunch of christians and having them pray over a corpse.

Now, deism is unfalsifiable, but deism is just for atheists who don't want to get into arguments about the big bang with people who don't know what Protons, Neutrons, or Electrons are.

>> No.2876373

The main issue is that people are using different metaphors to explain the same thing.

>> No.2876369

>>2876362
I can't flunk a course I have no interest in taking. You probably don't know how to play the Kazoo, that doesn't make you stupid.

>> No.2876368

>>2876347
uhm no.
A subject falls either inside or outside a certain spectrum of a trait.
If inside, it gets diagnosed with condition X via the DSM. If outside, it doesnt.
Then treatments are applied to get the subject to move outside that trait-spectrum.
Thats all that psychology claims.

>> No.2876376

>>2876365
>Now, deism is unfalsifiable, but deism is just for atheists who don't want to get into arguments about the big bang with people who don't know what Protons, Neutrons, or Electrons are.

COULDN'T HAVE SAID IT BETTER

>> No.2876378
File: 28 KB, 328x316, 1288670964740.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2876378

>>2876361
>>2876361

>> No.2876380

>>2876369
not the guy, but take logic 101. That is actually the most useful (some evil people say the only) thing that philosophy has to contribute to all the sciences.

>> No.2876385

>>2876359

Lemme put it this way. When you say "Santa Claus doesn't exist.", it's just that. You believe he doesn't exist. When you say "God doesn't exist.", it's also a matter of disliking religion.

One has a personal bias attached to it, the other does not.

>> No.2876389

>>2876380
Oh I intend to, I'm referring to theology.

Absolutely fucking useless study. It's all parts of religious history that don't matter + all the parts of philosophy that don't matter.

>> No.2876394

>>2876365
that happens every day; you're just not there to witness it.

now explain to me, genius, how positively charged protons pack together in an atom's nucleus, when they should repel each other, and negatively charged electrons keep their distance, when they should be attracted to them.

i'll wait.

>> No.2876395

>>2876385
>it's also a matter of disliking religion.
Nope. It's a matter of belief. when I say "I don't believe in God." all I'm saying is I don't believe in God, there is nothing else said there.

>> No.2876396

>>2876369

If you know nothing of Christianity beyond the cartoon version you learned from Richard Dawkins, you're not qualified to discuss it.

And incidentally, Dawkins fails both logic and theology 101 in TGD big-time.

>> No.2876409

>>2876394
http://www.ndt-ed.org/EducationResources/HighSchool/Radiography/stableunstableatoms.htm

>> No.2876408

>>2876395
and are you prepared to pay the consequences for saying that there is no God?

>> No.2876404

>>2876396
I went to a christian school for four years, and didn't know who Dawkins even was until after I became an atheist. I've read the bible, cover to cover, (ok I skimmed the genealogies and shit), come at me bro.

>> No.2876406

>>2876385
If there were people who believed Santa made the all toys in the world in spite of overwhelming evidence, and made numerous attempts to create legislature that dictated morality based on Santa's naught/nice list, and purposely tried to insert kringology into toymaking classes.....

Then that would be a good analogy. But it is not.

>> No.2876410

>>2876396
>implying theology is even a subject

By the way, you're a moron for not believing in Greek mythology if you're not an Ancient Greece scholar.

>> No.2876416

>>2876385

You're confusing apathetic atheism (I don't believe, but I don't care if you do) with anti-theism (I don't believe and also oppose religion as harmful to society)

>> No.2876417

>>2876408
insofar as there are no consequences, other than getting trolled on the internet, yes.

Now if you're talking about Hell, I ask, are you prepared to pay the consequences for denying that there is no God but Allah and Mohammed is his profit?

>> No.2876421

>>2876409
yup, thought so. "glue"

lolol

this is what scientists actually believe

>> No.2876424

I can't think of that many religions that *don't* make at least some falsifiable claims, to be honest.

Either way, thread is dildos.

>> No.2876427
File: 200 KB, 885x2260, fucking magnets.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2876427

>>2876421
Actually, a much more trolly response would be "Magic" or "Lying scientific bullshit."

so 9/10

>> No.2876429

>>2876417
absolutely. mohammad's minions can cut my head off and i'll die singing Jesus' praises

>> No.2876431

That this thread is even alive means you aren't dealing with it.

>> No.2876435

>>2876410

Most ancient peoples had no theology to speak of, just the simplistic notion of performing sacrifices and appeasing and/or not angering the gods. The Greeks developed their great philosophical tradition because Zeus and friends did not satisfy them intellectually or spiritually.

>> No.2876437

>>2876427
i'll give you a clue about what is really happening

when Jesus lets go, the universe will end in fire, and all of the elements will melt with a fervent heat.

all at once. complete universal detonation.

glue. lol

>> No.2876443

>>2876429
Actually you'll probably die with blood spurting from your neck and mouth holes, as it takes several seconds after beheading for you to actually "die".

But what about Hell? Aren't you afraid you're going to go to Muslim Hell? or what about Norse Hel?
And if the sins on your heart aren't lighter than a feather, Rah will have you eaten by an alligator (or something like that)

Why aren't you afraid of these punishments?
It's the same reason I'm not afraid of yours, I simply don't believe in them.

>> No.2876450

>>2876435
so the Greeks, who made up Zeus and his family, and built temples to them, sacrificed to them, and made an endless number of really shitty plays about them, weren't really all that into them

got it

>> No.2876451

Perhaps it turns out that there isn't a hell. Not all religions have the belief in one.

>> No.2876453

>the world was created in 6 days
>gives order in which things were created

>There is a barrier between freshwater and saltwater
>All flying insects that walk on all fours are to be detestable to you


Oh it makes falsifiable claims, just on accident.

>> No.2876455

>>2876437
Not if Jupiter or Shiva gets there first!
And if Jesus burns Yggdrasil, will where the last two humans hide during Ragnarok?

>> No.2876459

>>2876443
i believe in one more Hell than you do

and unfortunately for you, i'm right

>> No.2876463

>>2876450

By the Hellenistic Period, many Greeks were skeptical about the gods. Socrates had been one of the first to dismiss the notion of polytheism.

>> No.2876468

>>2876463
i'll give you a hint why

greek gods don't real

>> No.2876477

>>2876459
And a Muslim, or an Asatru could say the exact same thing to me, and would be equally wrong.

>> No.2876484

I would say that any religion could be theoretically correct, but that the Christian god is more probable than Zeus or Quetzacoatl.

Disclaimer: I'm an agnostic

>> No.2876493

>>2876484
>but that the Christian god is more probable than Zeus or Quetzacoatl.

Why?

>> No.2876505

>>2876453
>the world was created in 6 days
yup
>gives order in which things were created
yup, by the God that created them
>There is a barrier between freshwater and saltwater
back then, sure
>All flying insects that walk on all fours are to be detestable to you
dunno lol

>> No.2876519

>>2876493

See >>2876463. By the Hellenistic period, most educated men were dismissive of the idea of there being multiple gods.

Later on, St. Augustine and others also refuted the idea of polytheism.

>> No.2876516

>>2876477
no, they would be wrong, and i would be right

this whole idea of an absolute truth seems foreign to you

>> No.2876533

ITT: /sci/fags who won't bother looking at basic Theology/Philosophy have a discussion on religion.

inb4 Old Testament God is a douche but New Testament God is alright

>> No.2876532

>>2876459

Atheism: Reject the idea of God or a heaven, but remain convinced that hell exists

>> No.2876545

>>2876453
>Implying it's a Literal 'six days'

Not all Christians are Baptists bro

>> No.2876553

except it does, like 'bible is true'

>> No.2876565

>>2876493

One point is that those gods are not believed in or worshiped anymore. If Zeus or Odin are real, wouldn't they find some way to inspire men to continue worship of them?

>> No.2876569

>>2876532
nope, born again evangelical christian, sure there is a heaven, and sure there is a hell, and sure your beliefs don't influence any of those facts

>> No.2876577

Well, the bible is absolutely riddled with falsifiable claims, events that never happened, people that never existed, etc.

Because these claims are falsifiable and because the bible says it is the word of god, there is reasonable doubt with which to say that it is not the word of god. For example.

>> No.2876578

>>2876545
more's the pity

>> No.2876592

>>2876577
dude, you don't have one example. not one. and saying that the bible says there are purple flying hippogryphs, when there clearly aren't, isn't an example of the bible being wrong, just you.

every single skeptic's point about the bible boils down to nothing. just hot air.

>> No.2876594

>>2876577

Fact: Many Christians believe that the Bible was inspired by God, but not that he personally wrote down every word.

>> No.2876596

>>2876519
Wait, so because ancient philosophers dismissed polytheism, the pseudo-monotheist Christ is more likely to exist? What about other monotheistic gods? There have been plenty.

>>2876545
It's more than just baptists, but that's a fair point.

>>2876565
So what about the time before Judaism? Various gods will always go out of favor.. and I'm sure there are a handful of worshippers for many ancient gods still around.

>>2876532
What are you talking about? The guy you are replying to is the biblical literalist in this thread.

>> No.2876609

>>2876533
>won't bother looking at basic Theology/Philosophy
>implying theology is not bullshit

>> No.2876610

>>2876594
Fact. That is true.

Islam, on the other hand, believes that the koran is actually written by the goat god, as though he dipped mohammad's head into ink and wrote it down on big pieces of parchment.

instead of what really happened, where mohammad plagarized the old testament and stole a bit from the new testament and made himself equal with Christ

>> No.2876611

>>2876596
It just distrubs me to see /sci/ basically view Christianity as comprising of the Southern Bible Belt and being comprised of a bunch of Creationist Biblical Literalists. Now I understand that's the popular view in America but Catholics/Orthodox have *always* had a nuanced approach to the Bible I mean hell Augustine ripped into the Genesis story as did Origen. You don't get this incredibly rigid literalistic interpretation until the Reformation with folks like Luther but to a greater extent Zwingli and Calvin. Why does /sci/ attack the lowest common denominator and not folks like the Jesuit George Coyne?

>> No.2876619

>>2876596

>So what about the time before Judaism?

Judaism as we know it today appears to have developed during the Babylonian exile. The pre-exile Israelites were not exceptionally different in their religious views (aside from monotheism) than most other peoples.

>> No.2876623

>>2876592

It's verifiably true that the flood in the bible never happened.

The plagues never happened.

Jesus has not been shown to have existed or crucified.

Samson never killed a thousand men with a donkey's jawbone.

Jona did not live inside a whale.

Blah blah etc.

>> No.2876626

>>2876611
I think, for American /sci/ posters anyway, it's because the bible belt makes up a significant proportion of the religious conservative population, and they are the ones who are trying to shoehorn creationism into schools and are making films like Expelled, the ones who are anti science.

It's not fair, and there are, as you say, plenty of intelligent theologians.

>> No.2876634

>>2876611

It's because atheists are mentally lazy and find it easy to attack Christian groups who fit their strawman image of religion.

>> No.2876640

>>2876619
Sooo what about before that?

I'm trying to figure out why the Christian god is somehow more likely to exist just because he's still worshipped.

>> No.2876651

>>2876640

It isn't. End of story.

It's not like religions are any better than hyped up fan fiction anyways.

>> No.2876653

>>2876623
>Jesus has not been shown to have existed or crucified

I'm sorry but the 'Jesus Myth Hypothesis' is in pretty much the academic outskirts. The majority of Classical Historians/Scholars accept that Jesus *did* exist. It's a pretty debunked theory. We run into serious historical issues if we view Jesus as a myth but someone like say Aristotle as being an *actual* historical figure or Hannibal etc.

>> No.2876657

it does

and then we disprove them

and then they make different ones

>> No.2876658

>>2876640

No one knows what happened before that. The Biblical narrative seems to suggest that God always had a few followers before the Exodus and the Mosaic Law.

>> No.2876661

>>2876640
The Christian god has a much more solid theological (note: I didn't say scientific) basis than any pre-Judaic gods. If one accepts that a first mover was a god, it's more theologically sound that this god is all-powerful than being merely the god of grass and boobs. Consider what sort of thing makes something "likely" from a religious perspective. You're starting from a standard of evidence (science) which religious people clearly do not share with you.

>> No.2876667

>>2876653

Undoubtedly 'someone' was used as the frame for the jesus character.

Of course, that doesn't mean he existed.

>> No.2876669

>>2876661

Like a giant cultural pissing contest.

My gods better than yours.

>> No.2876676

>>2876669
No, actually it's not anything like that. There are specific criteria which appeal to a religious mindset. Modern conceptions of gods appeal to these mindsets better. Why do you think people in Africa and Asia started becoming Christians?

>> No.2876680
File: 42 KB, 400x400, trolldance.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2876680

>mfw Theology/Religions are social constructs
>mfw when social constructs evolve to conform the social climate
>mfw religion will constantly plague humanity

>> No.2876682

>>2876667
Once again, you run into historical issues if we just chock it up to myth. It's very possible that their was a messianic figure (There were dozens) in Judea who was named Jesuha.

>>2876661
Exactly, you have two different world views. You have a view where Meta-Physics plays an important role versus a very Nominialistic/Empirical world view (Science post 18th Century)

The interesting thing is that during the 11th-14th Centuries Christianity was *intensely* logical in part due to the massive influence of Aristotle. You have folks like Albert, Aquinas, Dsume, Bacon (Roger) etc laying the seedbed for what would go on to become the Scientific Revolution of the 17th Century. It's funny how the much vaunted Renaissance Humanists tried to pretty much torch all the work done in 'Natural Philosophy' (Science) over the middle ages.

>> No.2876684

>>2876623
lol all wrong

you must love /sci/; they love being wrong all the time too

>> No.2876691

>>2876676

Why do you think people the world over abandon christianity?

>> No.2876690
File: 26 KB, 605x434, religion is a lie.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2876690

>>2876337
Deal with it.

>> No.2876687

>>2876658
Biblical history is shaky at best, and there are several major events that have no archaeological evidence. Assuming the bible is not absolutely true in terms of historicity, there has to have been a point where the judaeochristian god was not worshiped by anyone.

>>2876661
:V

I don't know what to say, then.

>> No.2876686

>>2876661

The problem is atheists using mathematical probability (all gods have the same likelihood of existing) rather than logical probability (some gods are less plausible than others)

>> No.2876695

>>2876691
Because Secularism is easy?

>> No.2876700

>>2876611
why not just read the bible? why rely on what someone else says that the bible says?

and wtf is "nuanced"? either God created Adam on day 6, the morning and evening denoting a day, not an eon, or He did not.

and if He did not, but told Moses that He did, wtf kind of God would that be? why would He lie to Moses?

either all scripture is inspired, including creation, or it is not. it is hardly "baptist" to say that all of the scripture is inspired by God. it's actually a verse in the bible. which you would know, if you read it.

>> No.2876701

>>2876695

I know; all that double think must get tiresome.

>> No.2876703

>>2876686
Just because something is more plausible than something else doesn't mean it's likely to exist at all.

>> No.2876705

>>2876687
Depends what book of the Bible. One of the 'downfalls' of the Printing Press was making the Bible appear as if it's one continuous volume instead of a collection of books of varying genres, authors and cultural contexts.

I think the academic consensus is that the Jews were originally Caninites who gradually morphed into a type of Monotheism and that by 700 BCE you have what we would be able to identify as Judaism. At the very least by the Babylonian Captivity.

>> No.2876706

>>2876676
>Why do you think people in Africa and Asia started becoming Christians?

Because people went there and said "Hey, read this book and believe what I tell you and you can have a school for your kids." ?

>> No.2876712

>>2876700
Because that's not the way it's supposed to be 'viewed'

See it goes Church -> Bible. The Bible is a product of the Catholic/Orthodox tradition and it isn't *technically* finalized in the west until the Council of Trent. It's nuanced because it assumes the reader has an understanding of Jewish Symbolism. No one viewed the Book of Revelation as literal until the 16th Century. Hell they even debated whether it should be included in the Canon at all.

I mean would you read something by James Joyce at only a superficial level and then bitch about how it doesn't make any sense? You should at the very least appreciate the context/times the various *books* of the bible were written in as they are of vastly different genres.

>> No.2876713

  ▲
▲ ▲

>> No.2876711

>>2876626
christians aren't anti-science; that is, until science sets itself up as a false god, and pretends to know how the universe was created, and pretends to know how long ago it was created, and pretends to know there is no real God.

then, Christians are anti-science, because science then is just another false religion and, like Highlander, THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE.

>> No.2876714

>>2876705

As I said, the early Israelites were much like any other people of their time except for being monotheistic. Then during the exile, modern Judaism formed, but how it came about is anyone's guess.