/sci/ - Science & Math

File: 100 KB, 579x480, jesus4.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

INRI Sat May 21 03:52:14 2011 No.3095494 [Reply] [Original]

Hey guise! I thought I'd come to the board where the smartest people were. I just find it odd that such a large percentage of you don't believe in me.

Considering you guys follow the ethics of science, under what condition would I be able to present myself so that you would believe I am who I am?

Oh, and what is the difference between magic and science? I mean, at the very base of your beliefs, you still have an unprovable essence (givens) that you cannot sense physically... making it unknown -- and -- well, you know... magic.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 04:01:14 2011 No.3095510 >Oh, and what is the difference between magic and science? Not much.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 04:02:14 2011 No.3095512 >>3095510 If you know how it works, it's science. If you don't, it's magic.

>>	INRI Sat May 21 04:04:14 2011 No.3095516 >>3095512 Yes, but no one knows what something is to its full extent. What about my original question?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 04:05:14 2011 No.3095519 >under what condition would I be able to present myself so that you would believe I am who I am? Come in my room right now this instant and debate me.

>>	INRI Sat May 21 04:19:14 2011 No.3095569 >>3095519 I don't understand why I have to break the rules. More can be completed within the boundaries or else life is void of structure and meaning. This is how "Satan" thinks.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 04:22:14 2011 No.3095579 >>3095569 Explain why you're father existed before he "created" inb4 there's no explanation

INRI Sat May 21 04:24:14 2011 No.3095585

>>3095579
Before the universe there is no time. Time is equal to distance traveled. This sort of determination requires a starting point and an ending point.

If there is no universe, there is no time, nor any distance, and it would be illogical for God to have a creator.

>>	INRI Sat May 21 04:29:14 2011 No.3095599 >>3095579 I'm sorry... what were you saying?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 04:32:14 2011 No.3095605 >>3095585 I'm sold where do i sign up?

>>	INRI Sat May 21 04:32:14 2011 No.3095608 >>3095605 Really? I could teach you something cool if you wanted. Do you like math?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 04:33:14 2011 No.3095610 >implying magic isn't science. No seriously, it follows its own internal logic and system. Its based on observation and detailed experiments. The only difference between magic and science is that science actually works.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 04:34:14 2011 No.3095616 >>3095608 Yes i certainly do. To be honest you really put my mind in another place right now, ive heard, read, argued a lot about religion but i really felt something different right now..

INRI Sat May 21 04:37:14 2011 No.3095630

>>3095610
Explain the sensation of emotion then.
I don't want to hear "why", or "where", or "how" (neurochem), I want to hear the "what".

Explain the qualia of color? I'd like to hear a good one without using "waves" -- that's more of an explanation of color's assignment and order than its essence.

>>	INRI Sat May 21 04:38:14 2011 No.3095636 >>3095610 If all objects are magical, it would also follow that magic has order and logic.

INRI Sat May 21 04:43:14 2011 No.3095654

>>3095616
I think you might have misunderstood... this isn't about a religion. I don't think God really cares for those much.

Consider that before time existed, you are God and that you are all that exists. You know everything that is and is not, you construct all things or things that are not, and you have infinite emotion.

Do you feel alone?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 04:45:14 2011 No.3095664 File: 554 KB, 250x170, 128237779171[1].gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] I like too touch myself at night and nobody is going too stop me from doing so.

Anonymous Sat May 21 04:47:14 2011 No.3095672

>>3095654
If by infinite emotion you mean the entire spectrum of emotions all going off at once. Yes, it stands to reason that you feel alone, and not alone at the same time.

Tell us why God created the universe, if he knew everything in advance, and felt everything in advance.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 04:49:14 2011 No.3095683 >>3095654 No. because I see all that ever was and will be so how could i feel alone?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 05:02:14 2011 No.3095711 >>3095494 Goodnight, better luck next time

INRI Sat May 21 05:06:14 2011 No.3095722

>>3095672
If you have all the power in the universe, you can easily create anything you desire. This is easy to imagine.

You can have any technology -- any lover -- any amount of money... but what does it mean when all you see is yourself? Even if you were to create other beings... they would be predictable robots to which you have logical access to. Boredom and loneliness are a hell if they are eternal.

The point is, the only thing you could not honestly create directly is freewill. It is the only commodity to a God. People you could actually love and communicate with. People who could thank you for existence. This is a logical reason why we have a truly random and vast universe as it would be a requirement.

This subject sort of touches on...

"Could God create a rock so heavy that not even he could lift it?"

Can you create an environment, rest it on your mind, and create an object you cannot lift? You do so in your dreams.

Saying he cannot do so would mean you have more abilities than him. So, he either created you to be greater than he is; or, you are created in his image through the division of his body, like you do for yourself in your dreams.

In the end... you have to ask yourself what is more useful. Do you want to be alone without reason? Or not?

>>	INRI Sat May 21 05:10:14 2011 No.3095729 >>3095722 You can kill death with faith in God. The same faith you have in the color of the sky being blue or the grass being green even though I could prove that isn't true.

>>	INRI Sat May 21 05:11:14 2011 No.3095732 >>3095722 The kind of faith that doesn't dissociate when things don't go your way. You don't stop believing in the sky because it changes color, do you? Those who abandon God never had faith in the first place.

Anonymous Sat May 21 05:11:14 2011 No.3095733
File: 60 KB, 600x600, youre-fucking-retarded.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

ITT: OP realised religion is a load of hocus pocus and tries to bring science down to it's level to justify his retarded behaviour

>>3095516
>no one knows what something is to its full extent.

Knowing something to the extent that we can conduct an experiment and get tangible feedback from the universe is infinitely superior to your nonsense.

(if I am being trolled I don't even care)

>Before the universe there is no time

hurrdurr then how does god do anything without time? It's all frozen still. Oh and no space either so how are you going to get the space with which to create the universe? Just pop it out of thin air I suppose? Much like god popped himself into existence infinity years ago? See how it doesn't make sense?

derp

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 05:15:14 2011 No.3095745 >>3095722 So are we here for the sole purpose of keeping "God" entertained? Or is there a more elaborate reasoning as to why we were put here on earth?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 05:16:14 2011 No.3095749 >>3095732 Atheism: Because everyone rebels against God, and some rebel so strongly that they actually deny his existence.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 05:20:14 2011 No.3095760 >>3095749 Religion: because everyone needs a sense of purpose, and the brain is happy to oblige by inventing one.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 05:21:14 2011 No.3095764 >>3095760 U agnostic?

INRI Sat May 21 05:26:14 2011 No.3095773

>>3095745
Its supposed to be mutual. You use him for your entertainment all the time. If he IS the universe, not only can you not test him as he lacks contrast, he constrains his own freewill so that you may have some.

He rarely gets thanks either. Most of it, if he gets any at all, is just repetitious, robotic, and done on a schedule.

Do you feel the love from people who worship you out of fear? Do you feel love from people who do it simply because its Sunday?

He has rewarded my prayer before to say thank you because I actually have faith. Sudden mathematical epiphanies after prayer.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 05:27:14 2011 No.3095777 Reality is perception. Thats all there is to it.

Anonymous Sat May 21 05:28:14 2011 No.3095778

>>3095764
Oh, let's play the word game.

I do not know if there is a god (nobody does). Not knowing = not believing. Not believing = atheism.

Natural selection + evolution + the brain's ability to to invent a simulacrum god = high probability that a god does not exist

All we need is to explain the existence of the universe and that will kill religion permanently. I believe this will happen at some point in the future.

>>	INRI Sat May 21 05:28:14 2011 No.3095780 >>3095733 I understand that you have misunderstood. Arrogance is funny at first but is daunting over time.

>>	INRI Sat May 21 05:29:14 2011 No.3095781 >>3095777 Reality is where your perception is? Wouldn't that be better?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 05:30:19 2011 No.3095785 >>3095778 You cannot be an atheist because you said "Religion: because everyone needs a sense of purpose, and the brain is happy to oblige by inventing one." Since atheism is a religion, you must therefore be an agnostic.

INRI Sat May 21 05:37:14 2011 No.3095800

>>3095778
Not knowing and not believing are not connected. You do not know what you do and yet you believe you do. This is a prime example as you have no concept of the consequences of your actions.

This is actually why your ignorance is a gift. If you knew every death your innocent actions would cause, a moral individual could do nothing.

>>	INRI Sat May 21 05:38:14 2011 No.3095803 >>3095800 I'm sorry, I meant they are not wholly connected. They are obviously tangential in some ways.

Anonymous Sat May 21 05:51:14 2011 No.3095823

>>3095780
And yet you didn't rebut any of the points I made, because you can't.

You have NIL explanation and NIL justification for the existence of your imaginary god, therefore you cannot claim that one exists.

What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. Don't you see?

Just keep on believing shit without evidence and see where it gets you. hint: it gets you nowhere.

>This is a prime example as you have no concept of the consequences of your actions.

lol and what are your consequences of your actions? Going to heaven where it's North Korea forever? God's having a party and you're not allowed to leave?

Your religion is a joke and your ideas of ultimate morals/truths are childish and appeal to father figure issues.

Difference between you and I is can survive on my own, you need your father figure to guide you every step of the way YOU FUCKING BABY GROW UP lol

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 05:54:14 2011 No.3095830 >>3095800 >Not knowing and not believing are not connected Right then, explain how to believe in a god without even knowing if one exists. You can't. That's why you are retarded.

>>	INRI Sat May 21 05:56:14 2011 No.3095832 >>3095823 We will see how you do when confronted with death. You will leave alone.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 06:02:14 2011 No.3095838 File: 129 KB, 576x768, StrawMan.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>3095823

Anonymous Sat May 21 06:05:14 2011 No.3095846

>>3095832
You'll be just as terrified as I on your death bed, but at least I won't be clinging to false beliefs.

If you are so sure you are going to heaven, then what value is anything on earth considering it's just a precursor to an eternity in heaven?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 06:07:14 2011 No.3095850 Why hatred of unbelievers and of enemies for a God of Love? Believe or Be Damned. Why is faith more important than reason? Common sense less important than faith? Why anti-intellectual? -- Is this a power trip?

>>	INRI Sat May 21 06:07:14 2011 No.3095851 >>3095846 I want to help God be more loved. Free love man... isn't that what you nerds want?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 06:07:14 2011 No.3095853 File: 49 KB, 500x331, come-at-me-bro-hedgehog.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>3095832

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 06:09:14 2011 No.3095859 >>3095846 Since we only have the earth for the time being, there's nothing wrong with valuing it.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 06:09:14 2011 No.3095860 >>3095838 I couldn't care less if it's a straw man, my comments apply to anyone who follows a religion. Anyone who believes in a god may as well be religious because they endulge themselves in the same way of thinking.

INRI Sat May 21 06:15:14 2011 No.3095870

>>3095850
Faith isn't anti-intellectual. People are free to believe what they want to, I just want to save as many as I can. I may be forgiving and loving but I am not a pushover.

No one is damning you but yourself. A sin is only a sin if you know you are doing bad and continue to do so. If you understand that you can do no wrong, you cannot sin.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 06:15:14 2011 No.3095871 >>3095851 Oh, you sound so sweet and innocent. Problem is you can't be trusted; when I turn my back this is the kind of thing you get up to: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LACyLTsH4ac

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 06:17:14 2011 No.3095875 >>3095870 FUCK YEAR RAPE TIME!

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 06:18:14 2011 No.3095877 File: 64 KB, 366x365, 10-commandments.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>3095870 Not what your book says..

>>	INRI Sat May 21 06:18:14 2011 No.3095881 HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT I SUCK COCKS!!!

Anonymous Sat May 21 06:19:14 2011 No.3095883

>>3095859
>Since we only have the earth for the time being, there's nothing wrong with valuing it.

But value is a relative thing. In the presence of an eternal heaven the earth is practically worthless. The only reason you still put value in it is because you're not 100% sure there is a heaven. I'd say you're probably not even 50% sure. It's just a nice belief that you like to have. Which is fine if you want to believe in one.

INRI Sat May 21 06:21:14 2011 No.3095887

>>3095860
Science is no different. You rely on mathematics which is a ordered system of faith.

You also test information that is available based off a very small amount of time cosmically. It is statistically irrelevant. Functions are subject to permutation (mutation) when other functions are involved. This happens regularly in genetics and coding. It happens in games when previously, the x button which had made you jump, now makes you fly.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 06:21:14 2011 No.3095889 >>3095883 I like Earth because it is a nice place to live. At least in the UK right now.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 06:21:14 2011 No.3095890 >>3095881 You lose

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 06:24:14 2011 No.3095896 >>3095883 No, I meant because we can't yet enjoy heaven we have to make the most of the time we have on earth.

>>	INRI Sat May 21 06:27:14 2011 No.3095906 >>3095883 Heaven is often confused with paradiso. Heaven is not paradise. Heaven is here on Earth. Paradise is actually a trap.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 06:29:14 2011 No.3095910 So, INRI, why should I give a shit what you say?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 06:30:14 2011 No.3095911 >>3095906 >Paradise is actually a trap. I think you confused paradise with Mary, who was a trap.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 06:31:14 2011 No.3095913 >>3095911 Assraped?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 06:33:14 2011 No.3095916 >>3095913 Of course. That's why he stayed a virgin despite having had sex.

Anonymous Sat May 21 06:34:14 2011 No.3095918

>>3095887
>You rely on mathematics which is a ordered system of faith.

no its not you dumb shit. we conduct tests and the universe sends us back direct proof that something happened, such as a photon of light passing through a slit. you think its all just people in lab coats crunching numbers or something. you are narrow minded and you live in your own little world inside your head where things make sense to you.

>>3095896
and why must we make the most of it? because god told you to (a protection mechanism to stop people from thinking rationally and sending themselves straight to heaven). don't pretend like you'd choose to stay on earth if you had the choice to go to heaven (assuming you are a religious nutter who actually wants to go to god's neverending north korea).

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 06:34:14 2011 No.3095919 Atheist status in this thread: Told [ ] Stone Told Steve Austin [X]

INRI Sat May 21 06:36:14 2011 No.3095921

>>3095910
You shouldn't if it makes you happy. I just think that if people changed their gears a little bit, this world would be a much better place.

If life is a rat race, we are better off eating cheese than running a maze. Everyone is running a maze, stepping on each other for no particular reason, making each others lives worse.

God rewards those who love him. He has given me 'knowledge' under the condition I understand it is a sacrifice.

Anonymous Sat May 21 06:39:14 2011 No.3095927

>>3095494
In order to believe in him, tonight at exactly 6pm I'd have to suddenly materialise in a bright white room with a bearded man infront of me.

Why do I get saved?? If god was real he'd have to be a pretty egotistical faggot if he automatically saved everyone who believed in him and preached some butchered form of his word from 1000's of years ago and condemmed to hell anyone who didn't believe in him, no matter how productive and good lives they'd lead.

If he really did exist and was omnipotent and omniscient he'd therefore know exactly why I don't believe in him exactly why I feel why I do through sound logical reasoning and seeing religion(s) of the world and he might even respect that people have had the intelligence to develop their own thoughts.

So yeah all that would have to happen to change my mind

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 06:40:14 2011 No.3095930 >>3095927 See >>3095838

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 06:40:14 2011 No.3095931 >>3095585 >and it would be illogical for God to have a creator. >Christians say shit like this then claim its stupid to say the same thing about the universe Huh?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 06:42:14 2011 No.3095932 >>3095916 Wow. What a slut.

Anonymous Sat May 21 06:42:14 2011 No.3095934

>>3095921
>He has given me 'knowledge' under the condition I understand it is a sacrifice.

No, that was you subconsciously simulating to yourself what it would be like if a god existed and spoke to you. You were hallucinating my friend, it's not a big deal.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 06:43:14 2011 No.3095937 >>3095934 Prove he was hallucinating.

INRI Sat May 21 06:45:14 2011 No.3095939

>>3095918
If you double the angles of a triangle and place them in a spherical hyperbolic graph -- you reduplicate the feynman diagram for a virtual photon.

If you treat the body as a particle, the hyperbolic triangle extends with infinite area and definite parameter.

Once this packet comes into contact with a nucleus, the frequency of which is dependent on its density (of course), the beams diverge and scatter. If the beam is projected through paper -- you will get the effects you are talking about.

More interestingly enough, if the packet contains an infinite amount of information (that is different types of EMR (or color)), most of it is absorbed into the neutron. The wavelength that is rejected is picked up by your eye as the color of the object.

The funny part is that the true color of an object is every color but the one you are seeing. You are seeing what's rejected, remember?

You should try opening your own mind.

Anonymous Sat May 21 06:46:14 2011 No.3095940

>>3095931
Just ignore him, he seems to think it's possible for a god to exist and go about doing things in a realm where time is frozen still and there is no space to build anything with.

He just sticks a label on his god which says "you cannot question the existence of this".

Anonymous Sat May 21 06:47:14 2011 No.3095943

>>3095921
Have you defined God in this thread? (Did a quick ctrl+f for “god is” and “define” and found nothing.) If not, what is God?

How could I possibly love God when I do not love myself? How could God possibly give a shit about me when I do not love myself?

Anyway, I guess I’ll go read the rest of the thread in the meantime.

(Damn, how can you give a reasonable response to my aggressive question? Now I have to be reasonable back, you bastard.)

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 06:48:14 2011 No.3095946 >>3095937 >he thinks the onus is on me http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot

>>	INRI Sat May 21 06:49:14 2011 No.3095949 >>3095927 He becomes egoless without intervention. You have a bigger ego by demanding he prove himself to you.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 06:49:14 2011 No.3095950 >>3095939 None of which supports your claim that a god exists.

>>	INRI Sat May 21 06:52:14 2011 No.3095961 >>3095943 You cannot define God. To define something is to put boundaries on it. You may describe qualities without defining 'it' especially if it's contradiction is also true.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 06:55:14 2011 No.3095974 >>3095961 If there are no boundaries to god, then it can be my shit?

>>	INRI Sat May 21 06:55:14 2011 No.3095975 >>3095950 That wasn't meant to. It was to show I don't have a closed uneducated mind.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 06:55:14 2011 No.3095976 >>3095961 Where atheistfags fail is assuming that God is some cartoony bearded dude that roams the countryside and strikes people with plagues for disobeying him.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 06:57:14 2011 No.3095986 >>3095961 >>3095961 Person you were replying to here. Read the thread now. Were my other questions (the ones you ignored) irrelevant?

>>	INRI Sat May 21 06:59:14 2011 No.3095988 >>3095974 God is your shit, that is correct. He is the girl you make love to. He is the cake you crave.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 06:59:14 2011 No.3095989 >>3095974 Another thing here. When atheists are cornered, they tend to randomly let out their sexual fantasies. In this case, we see a guy who's apparently into scat.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 06:59:14 2011 No.3095993 >>3095961 Something that holds across mathematics, logic and science: If you can't fucking DEFINE something without contradicting yourself, what you're trying to define can't possibly exist.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 07:01:14 2011 No.3095997 >>3095988 inb4flamingpoop

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 07:01:14 2011 No.3096000 So who are YOU, INRI? Tell /sci/ a bit about yourself. From the mundane to the important, please.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 07:02:14 2011 No.3096003 >>3095993 But what if God is not bound by the laws of science?

INRI Sat May 21 07:02:14 2011 No.3096005

>>3095950
You cannot prove God like I said before. That which has no contrast cannot be studied.

Humans learn through differentiation. They compare two objects and try to see the differences. There is nothing(as an object) to compare God to as he is literally EVERYTHING. Since you cannot observe nothing, you have nothing to compare him to.

Anonymous Sat May 21 07:03:14 2011 No.3096009

If God possesses all positive characteristics. Then why doesn't he have pity and understanding for those who find it hard to believe in his existence?

If he does have this pity and understanding, I don't have to be religious and I can still avoid being damned.

If he doesn't have this pity and understanding, then he contradicts himself and therefore in my eyes either doesn't exist or doesn't deserve my "love".

Also, Henry VIII

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 07:03:14 2011 No.3096011 >>3095993 >what you're trying to define can't possibly exist within the system. Fixed. Something can exist as external to a system and be impossible to define within that particular system. Not that it means God exists, but just correcting you.

Anonymous Sat May 21 07:03:14 2011 No.3096012

>>3095975
But with the same stroke you discredit all science as being no more valid than the supernatural. You are using logic, i.e the very core of science, to argue against itself as being paramount.

>>3095976
As opposed to what? Magical supernatural being who's been around forever who made everything with no explanation as for his existence?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 07:04:14 2011 No.3096014 >>3096003 So let me get this straight. On one hand, you have logic. On the other hand, you have a hypothetical, impossible entity. And you are going to say that it's REALITY ITSELF that has got it wrong? Epistemic fail.

Anonymous Sat May 21 07:05:14 2011 No.3096018

>>3096011

So gods are not empirical, nor logical.

They can't be dealt with by thoughts, detected in any way through their activities or interacted with.

Logic deals with the first, science with the latter two.

Sounds an awful lot like a hazy cloud of nonexistence to me.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 07:05:14 2011 No.3096020 >>3095989 Another thing here, when creationists are cornered, they tend to randomly let out ad hominems.

Anonymous Sat May 21 07:06:14 2011 No.3096023

>>3096009

>If God possesses all positive characteristics. Then why doesn't he have pity and understanding for those who find it hard to believe in his existence?

Perhaps he does.

>If he does have this pity and understanding, I don't have to be religious and I can still avoid being damned.

Possibly. But insulting those who believe won't get you anywhere.

>Also, Henry VIII

Some guy who had a lot of wives.

Anonymous Sat May 21 07:09:14 2011 No.3096029

>>3096003

WHAT IF WHAT IF WHAT IF WHAT IFWHAT IF WHAT IF WHAT IF WHAT IFWHAT IF WHAT IF WHAT IF WHAT IFWHAT IF WHAT IF WHAT IF WHAT IFWHAT IF WHAT IF WHAT IF WHAT IFWHAT IF WHAT IF WHAT IF WHAT IFWHAT IF WHAT IF WHAT IF WHAT IFWHAT IF WHAT IF WHAT IF WHAT IFWHAT IF WHAT IF WHAT IF WHAT IFWHAT IF WHAT IF WHAT IF WHAT IF

>>3096005
More smoke and mirrors nonsense to try and deflect anyone seeking an explanation for a god. Again, all you are doing is sticking a label on your god saying "you may not question the existence of this". You're not fooling anyone.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 07:09:14 2011 No.3096030 >>3096012 >As opposed to what? Magical supernatural being who's been around forever who made everything with no explanation as for his existence? When we die, I believe it will all be explained to us.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 07:10:14 2011 No.3096031 >>3096018 … irrelevant to what I was saying.

Anonymous Sat May 21 07:10:14 2011 No.3096032

>>3096023

Any sufficiently advanced religion is indistinguishable from a confidence trick.

That's the reason no evidence of deities is forthcoming. It's plain to see. The gods of holy books intervene all the time and make it fucking known that it's them to instill fear and control. Reality deviates significantly.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 07:11:14 2011 No.3096036 >>3096030 Hell is still overburdened I must stand and wait in line I may never know for certain When will be my time How was I considered evil? Pleasures taken in this life Someone granted me reprieval Decades spent in strife

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 07:11:14 2011 No.3096037 Shit's sake! Stop bumping this fucking thread!

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 07:12:14 2011 No.3096039 >>3096031 Well what you were saying was irrelevant to my point. Thanks for clarifying nonetheless.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 07:12:14 2011 No.3096041 >>3096032 Exactly. God is in reality more subtle than the Bible lends you to believe, keeping in mind that most of the latter was exaggerated a bit to teach a moral lesson.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 07:13:14 2011 No.3096046 >>3096023 unlike theists, I do not have an external locus of identity. Henry VIII dismanteled catholisism in Britian on similar sentiments. My argument still stands.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 07:15:14 2011 No.3096049 >>3096046 He broke away from the Church to get divorced. That was it.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 07:15:14 2011 No.3096050 >>3096030 I'm sorry to inform you but your belief is hollow. Your brain requires an explanation for its own existence and so it has created a simulcrum god.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 07:15:14 2011 No.3096051 File: 4 KB, 126x103, trollface.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>3096041 >>god in reality >>in reality

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 07:15:14 2011 No.3096052 >>3095494 OP confirmed for sinner, pretending to be jesus is a sin and I wil report you to god. enjoy your endless totures in hell OP

INRI Sat May 21 07:15:14 2011 No.3096053

>>3095993
That is incorrect.

>>3095989
Not that there is anything wrong with that.
I just prefer he keep it to himself.

>>3095986
Sorry, that wasn't intentional.
>> Have you defined God in this thread? (Did a quick ctrl+f for “god is” and “define” and found nothing.) If not, what is God?

I have not defined him. You are God, and in the same way that any object in your own dreams are constructed of you and your own energy, so are the objects in this 'shared dream'. I understand there is a strange connotation with the word 'dream', but if you define reality as where you perceive, it loses most of its meaning and becomes more appropriate for what I am trying to get across to you. I like to use the word "superreal" when describing It.

>>How could I possibly love God when I do not love >>myself? How could God possibly give a shit about >>me when I do not love myself?
As per my previous answer, God cannot love you in the sense that you will feel it. If you have tried to rehabilitate any traumatized/depressed individual before, you will most likely notice that they will not interpret your actions correctly and receive your intention. Without a meeting of the mind there is misfiring and miscommunication. In Western society, arrogance and presumption causes these minor miscommunications to later become something far more damaging.

Why don't you love yourself?

>>(Damn, how can you give a reasonable response to >>my aggressive question? Now I have to be >>reasonable back, you bastard.)
The power of forgiveness is that it inflicts guilt which is a strong motivator for servitude. It is more powerful than anger.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 07:17:14 2011 No.3096055 >>3096051 Well, do you see evidence of a loud angry god that goes and zaps people with plagues? I don't.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 07:19:14 2011 No.3096062 >>3096055 >>implying there is evidence for any type of god at all

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 07:19:14 2011 No.3096065 >>3096050 Unless you've died and come back, you cannot say anything with certainty about whether God exists or not.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 07:20:14 2011 No.3096072 >>3096062 Eh, mebbe a deist god.

Anonymous Sat May 21 07:22:14 2011 No.3096078

>>3096053

>>(Damn, how can you give a reasonable response to >>>my aggressive question? Now I have to be >>reasonable back, you bastard.)
>The power of forgiveness is that it inflicts guilt which is a strong motivator for servitude. It is more powerful than anger.

Strong motivator for servitude?
typical divinerightfags. I thought we'd gotten rid of this bullshit in the american and french revolutions.

INRI Sat May 21 07:23:14 2011 No.3096083

>>3096000
Just think of me as an opportunity to feel better about yourself and your life.

I've gone to jail before and I spent most of my time educating prisoners and helping them philosophically (although it was a short stay as the charges were dropped). It's a sad place.

I'm pretty educated... been through hell and back. Everything I'm sure you guys can relate to.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 07:23:14 2011 No.3096086 >>3096072 deist god is indistinguishable from no god at all. You can never have evidence for it.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 07:24:14 2011 No.3096088 >106 posts and 6 image replies omitted. Really guys? we havent learned not to feed trolls yet?

tinycat !!qoWPGZQ4oQc Sat May 21 07:24:14 2011 No.3096089

you /sci/tards are such hypocrites with your empirical 'soft skepticism'. When its not convenient to your world view you demand hard proof, when its something you think sounds nifty you let it slide by with just reason based evidence because it seems to 'work'.

Either you MUST have a way to allow god to prove himself through reason alone, or you must never present something as true with out actually seeing it yourself. No in-between. Your system of understanding the world is a a joke otherwise.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 07:27:14 2011 No.3096097 >>3096089 They have such a colossal ego that they find the very idea of a force in the universe greater than them to be terrifying.

>>	INRI Sat May 21 07:27:14 2011 No.3096098 Just so you know, I suck cocks because I'm not using a trip.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 07:30:14 2011 No.3096102 >>3096089 >confusing lack of evidence with existence of evidence gtfo

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 07:33:14 2011 No.3096111 Apatheism wins again.

INRI Sat May 21 07:35:14 2011 No.3096119

>>3096009
True God is all positive and negative qualities -- he created them. Since he is all positive and negative infinities -- they essentially cancel each other out and force him to do nothing.

'Evil' has a place in the world in contrast to 'Good'. These constructs are opinions, and as such, would be treated as factions and given equal treatment especially due to them both being necessary for evolution to happen.

>>	tinycat !!qoWPGZQ4oQc Sat May 21 07:35:14 2011 No.3096120 >>3096102 >Has no idea what I was even saying

>>	INRI Sat May 21 07:37:14 2011 No.3096126 >>3096018 Which is what should open your eyes to things not being any one way. I'm pretty sure you already have this ability.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 07:38:14 2011 No.3096128 >>3096102 >thinks he can claim anything as true due to lack of contradictory evidence HUUUUUUUURP! (you fail at life)

Anonymous Sat May 21 07:39:14 2011 No.3096130

>>3096053
>Sorry, that wasn't intentional.
Oh OK. Thank you!

>I have not defined him. You are God, and in the same way that any object in your own dreams are constructed of you and your own energy, so are the objects in this 'shared dream'. I understand there is a strange connotation with the word 'dream', but if you define reality as where you perceive, it loses most of its meaning and becomes more appropriate for what I am trying to get across to you. I like to use the word "superreal" when describing It.
Actually, that makes perfect sense.

>As per my previous answer, God cannot love you in the sense that you will feel it. If you have tried to rehabilitate any traumatized/depressed individual before, you will most likely notice that they will not interpret your actions correctly and receive your intention. Without a meeting of the mind there is misfiring and miscommunication. In Western society, arrogance and presumption causes these minor miscommunications to later become something far more damaging.
OK. Thanks. So I’m on my own in that sense.

>Why don't you love yourself?
Subjectively, because I am a horrible person who deserves nothing good. Objectively, it probably has something to do with internalising the bullying and emotional abuse I got a lot of when I was younger. (It wasn’t as bad as a lot of people get, you understand, but I have a tendency to internalise things.)

>The power of forgiveness is that it inflicts guilt which is a strong motivator for servitude. It is more powerful than anger.
Grr. :P

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 07:40:14 2011 No.3096131 >>3096119 >thinks he has it all figured out >doesn't realise he's just babbling incoherently

INRI Sat May 21 07:41:14 2011 No.3096134

>>3096086
Which is why its a choice. Statistical evidence leans towards multiple cause(sources/entanglement) and effect in every situation, while logic leans towards it being thought of in response for justification or as a given as in creation (used widely in mathematics).

The best part is that mathematics is useful! So much so we generally do not comprehend it for decades.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 07:41:14 2011 No.3096135 >>3096089 Because true philosophical skepticism gets you nowhere.

INRI Sat May 21 07:45:14 2011 No.3096140

>>3096012
I know its offensive to hear such a thing, but it comes down to opinion and utility. Science has led us by the nose to enslavement -- it has driven me to speak to you through the clouds. It has made our lives easier, but at what cost? The arrogance and sloth it brings is awful -- not to mention it usually has unintended consequences. "Science" for the sake of science has led to a careless and dangerous mindset.

As with most things, science and faith should have a healthy balance instead of bickering like republicans and democrats.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 07:46:14 2011 No.3096141 >>3096135 But Pyrrhonism is still awesome.

INRI Sat May 21 07:48:14 2011 No.3096150

>>3096029
I'm not trying to put up smoke and mirrors. I'm just saying its logically impossible to prove God because, functionally, if an object has no comparison, it cannot be compared.

n/0 is a good example in math.

Having only one's eyes, if everything was the exact same color white; how could you observe or know anything?

I just can't imagine how to prove something that is a given other than faith. You can correct me if you come up with an answer... I'd be stoked

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 07:48:14 2011 No.3096151 Confirmed for boring argument that goes nowhere.. Stay classy /sci/

tinycat !!qoWPGZQ4oQc Sat May 21 07:51:14 2011 No.3096154

>>3096135
By using reason to fill in those uncertainties you are tricking yourself into being more sure than you actually have right to be, leading to arrogance and more resistance to re-examining things.

A skeptic ends up having a more open mind because they are more capable of dealing with probabilities in places that modern empiricists are accustomed to truth. This allows for a system of understanding with the minimal amount of dogma.

>>	INRI Sat May 21 07:51:14 2011 No.3096155 >>3096014 No, logic is hypothetical in nature. Its self affirming like the bible many scientists hate so much (with good reason... what a horrible book.)

INRI Sat May 21 07:54:14 2011 No.3096164

>>3096012

>>As opposed to what? Magical supernatural being who's been around forever who made everything with no explanation as for his existence?

I'm not sure that any of you have standards for what would be reasonable proof of God. Even if you did and could accept his presence without having a panic attack, him telling you what to do would remove your freewill and your ability to claim ignorance.

It is actually to our advantage that we are ignorant.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 07:54:14 2011 No.3096165 >>3096151 Confirmed for butthurt /x/tard

INRI Sat May 21 07:58:14 2011 No.3096178

>>3096052
I'm not Jesus buddy. How would I possibly know that?

I was born on 777 (in silly numerology) and had a temporary star around my arrival while being conceived on the celestial convergence near 9/11 though.

Not that it matters since we are all 'Children of God' as he supposedly put it.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 07:58:14 2011 No.3096179 >>3096165 Never been on /x/.. >Implying /sci/ isnt full of the same idiots showing off/getting butthurt

>>	INRI Sat May 21 07:59:14 2011 No.3096181 >>3096050 I don't need an explanation for my own brain... I am fine with unknowns. Curiosity is a pass time.

>>	INRI Sat May 21 08:00:14 2011 No.3096185 >>3096078 It isn't a bad thing. People are really selfish these days.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 08:01:14 2011 No.3096188 >>3096179 /sci/ is /fit/ meets /x/ meets /lit/ meets /prog/ meets /g/.

INRI Sat May 21 08:03:14 2011 No.3096193

>>3096078
Oh, and its not like forgiveness is an easy thing to do. It also encourages others to spread forgiveness, to not be dishonest as to deserve guilt by being brought upon one's self, and generally improves communication and trust between strangers.

You know... good faith in others? Instead of assuming ill intention? Its really beneficial especially when most people are so presumptuous and lack high levels of communication and life experience.

I mean... just think about the consequences of anger or rejecting.

Anonymous Sat May 21 08:07:14 2011 No.3096207

>>3096185

You know, I can't say I'm surprised. For centuries religion has acted as a supporter to the status quo, to kings and emperors, to abusive capitalists, to nazis and conservative coups d'etat.

And all the time, no matter what era of history, they together bemoan 'the decline of moral standards', and the inability of mankind to get pissed off when asked to take the proverbial cock up the ass.

Such beliefs were and are the cause of shitloads of suffering worldwide. We humanists do not think that 'because I can' is an excuse for abhorrent behaviour.

Remember, asshole, sic semper tyranis.

>>	tinycat !!qoWPGZQ4oQc Sat May 21 08:09:14 2011 No.3096217 >>3096207 >nazis >doesnt know how fascism works >hitler tried to convert religion for his purposes but then gave up realizing it was a waste of time

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 08:11:14 2011 No.3096225 >>3096217 the catholic church supported hitler because he was anti-communist. The pope signed a concordat with hitler. He claimed his mission was divinely inspired.

INRI Sat May 21 08:11:14 2011 No.3096226

>>3096130
You just need to remember that people often have unreasonable expectations of others without considering to their environment or knowledge. Some on your part, most likely more on their part as I doubt the people you interact with are as knowledgeable about the world or are as introverted and curious.

It goes for a lot of people on here.

The worst part is when you get stereotyped or have 'truth' somehow obfuscated because everyone automatically assumes embellishment or lies. Not that you would be guilty of that, right? ;)

Just be yourself and learn other peoples interests. Try to keep to yourself and make simple comments. Smile at others and try to make them seem smarter.

Not saying all this will apply to you... but I'm pretty sure I'm hitting people around here.

>>	tinycat !!qoWPGZQ4oQc Sat May 21 08:13:14 2011 No.3096232 >>3096225 The pope has an ipod, is religion supporting apple?

Anonymous Sat May 21 08:14:14 2011 No.3096236

>>3096154
>A skeptic ends up having a more open mind because they are more capable of dealing with probabilities in places that modern empiricists are accustomed to truth. This allows for a system of understanding with the minimal amount of dogma.
Yes, and that's called science.

Anonymous Sat May 21 08:16:14 2011 No.3096242

>>3096217
"I believe today that my conduct is in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator."
- Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Vol. 1 Chapter 2

He has many other similar quotes. There was one about how killing Jews was "god's work". It doesn't matter if he actually believed in god or not. He still used religious ideals as leverage to gain support.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 08:16:14 2011 No.3096244 >>3096232 If the pope made a policy for every Catholic to own an iPod, then yes.

tinycat !!qoWPGZQ4oQc Sat May 21 08:21:14 2011 No.3096255

>>3096236
No. Science is full of dogma caused by its insistence on using reason as evidence to augment empiricism to allow it to work with truths even when it does not have hard evidence.

This leads to people naturally and gradually assuming what they know is more solidly true than it is, preventing a resistance to reexamination or change.

A skeptic will work with the same things and come to the same practical conclusions and applications while ever mindful that there are no truths but only degrees of probability.

Anonymous Sat May 21 08:21:14 2011 No.3096257

>>3096089
When something seems to "work" it's because it already logically fits into what we have accepted to be probable and truthful. Shitty analogy incoming, but consider it;

Yesterday an apple was on the ground at the base of a tree. So it follows that gravity knocked it down.

We accept this because it is reasonable and probable, and fits into what we already consider to be reasonable and probable.

But what if he had said, "I saw an apple levitating, gravity is false."

I would demand hard evidence because his claim is so improbable.

Yes, there is a bit of personal involvement and judgement here because the person must consider what is probable, and define it for himself. But there is no other way to do it, so we just have to deal with it.

>>	INRI Sat May 21 08:22:14 2011 No.3096261 Wow... lots of responses. I like you people. Math time: You can divide any number by 5 inside your head by multiplying by 2 and carrying to your left. There are only 81 of these to remember before there is no more calculating required for math.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 08:23:14 2011 No.3096263 >>3096255 You don't understand what science is then.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 08:23:14 2011 No.3096270 >>3096255 >A skeptic will work with the same things and come to the same practical conclusions and applications while ever mindful that there are no truths but only degrees of probability. That's pretty much the definition of science.

>>	INRI Sat May 21 08:24:14 2011 No.3096271 >>3096217 I assume you are an Angel in disguise among the sheep. It's nice to meet ya. ;)

>>	INRI Sat May 21 08:25:14 2011 No.3096275 >>3096261 Oops, I meant working from left to right. I'm a bit tired.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 08:26:14 2011 No.3096280 >>3096261 but multiplying by 2 is still "calculating"

tinycat !!qoWPGZQ4oQc Sat May 21 08:26:14 2011 No.3096282

>>3096242
Dont confuse religion and spirituality, and dont confuse either with propaganda. And he did not like jews because jews consider their 'jewness' a more important identity than their nation. Both of the above are not compatible with fascism which requires state affiliation to be the most important.

INRI Sat May 21 08:27:14 2011 No.3096283

>>3096257
It also doesn't consider the fact that maybe like a 'car', gravity is an illusion of many simultaneous parts working together.

I'm just saying... there's no particle for it and gravity functions non-linearly depending on the magnitude being observed.

tinycat !!qoWPGZQ4oQc Sat May 21 08:31:14 2011 No.3096294

>>3096270
>>3096263
You can go on with ideals all you want. Im talking about the prolonged effect of actual people being exposed to a way of thinking that commonly presents certain things as true when they are only probable. Over time this makes people resistant to change because they lose the mental malleability that uncertainly allows.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 08:32:14 2011 No.3096296 >>3096283 >It also doesn't consider the fact that maybe like a 'car', gravity is an illusion of many simultaneous parts working together. another brilliant example of scientific truth found in religion /sarcasm

Anonymous Sat May 21 08:37:14 2011 No.3096302

>>3096294
>You can go on with ideals all you want. Im talking about the prolonged effect of actual people being exposed to a way of thinking that commonly presents certain things as true when they are only probable. Over time this makes people resistant to change because they lose the mental malleability that uncertainly allows.
That's because as I said, true philosophical skepticism gets you nowhere, you couldn't even have a conversation with another person.
Most people do know what scientists mean by "truth" and "fact".

Anonymous Sat May 21 08:39:14 2011 No.3096305

>>3096236
Right... which is why science led us to global warming. Radiant energy from energy generation is more of a culprit than CO2, I mean, if you calculate the volume of the atmosphere in terms of PURE water and integrate generously conservative calculations, you can easily determine that there is enough radiant energy to turn the atmosphere (if it were pure water) up almost 10 degrees.

Yea, crazy right? I mean its not like the ocean could heat up as a consequence and all that pressurized CO2 at the bottom could be released.

Its not like those waves are amplified in power by the Earth's core or anything. Concept gained here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piezoelectricity

Science is an excuse to sham people who want to seem like they are intelligent (*cough* eugenics *cough*)

Just an alternative view on the subject. Its hard to say that this radiant energy doesn't heat the earth when HAARP uses some of the same frequencies as *gasp* the TV used.

Anonymous Sat May 21 08:39:14 2011 No.3096307

>>3096226
I’m not knowledgeable. Not at all.

>The worst part is when you get stereotyped or have 'truth' somehow obfuscated because everyone automatically assumes embellishment or lies. Not that you would be guilty of that, right? ;)
I’ve been on both sides. That one guy whose side I was against deserved it, though. He was delusional that he was a time traveler who was deeply in love with me. Fucking prick. I still miss him, even though I’m talking shit about him. I was hoping that he’d show up last night or last weekend, because I contacted him. He didn’t. He may tonight. Probably won’t. Douche. (Him, not you. Unless you are him. But I don’t think you are him because you can type much betetr than he can.)

>Just be yourself and learn other peoples interests. Try to keep to yourself and make simple comments. Smile at others and try to make them seem smarter.
I’m doing everything except the last one. That last one seems like a nice thing to do. It’d help with other people’s confidence… but this reminds me of one anon on /adv/ whose girlfriend was getting bullied, and decided to hit anon to see how strong she was. She didn’t hurt him because she wasn’t strong at all, but anon pretended she was really strong. This gave her confidence and she went to sort out her bullies on her own. They beat the shit out of her and put her in hospital, and anon felt so bad because of his making her out to be strong when she wasn’t is what ultimately caused her to go fight on her own (shoutout to that anon: you’re an OK dude and I hope you and your girlfriend are happy!). I don’t want to do that to someone… maybe there is a balance to be found in making others seem intelligent.

>>	tinycat !!qoWPGZQ4oQc Sat May 21 08:39:14 2011 No.3096308 >>3096302 >you couldn't even have a conversation with another person And why's that?

INRI Sat May 21 08:41:14 2011 No.3096310

>>3096242
The man is right. Not that it means much.
I think Hitler was fighting the banks anyways? Its about when the Federal Government in the USA decided to limit the size of congress unconstitutionally (George Washington forbade it) and started forcing a change in currency standards which would have screwed everyone but Britain and US.

I'm not sure though.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 08:42:14 2011 No.3096311 This thread dropped /sci/'s IQ by 10 points.

>>	INRI Sat May 21 08:44:14 2011 No.3096314 >>3096280 Multiplying by 2 is a lot easier than dividing by 5. It really becomes a memory game where you just shift values without really doing any work.

>>	INRI Sat May 21 08:46:14 2011 No.3096317 >>3096307 Well.. your body is a machine and it DOES travel through time. ;)

>>	INRI Sat May 21 08:47:14 2011 No.3096319 >>3096311 You don't speak for others... you just give more information about yourself.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 08:47:14 2011 No.3096321 >>3096308 You couldn't prove the other person existed.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 08:49:14 2011 No.3096325 >>3095494 >/sci/ the smartest board on 4chan >constantly getting trolled by regilous threads

>>	INRI Sat May 21 08:49:14 2011 No.3096326 >>3096307 There is a difference between recognizing good qualities that are correct and giving out false information. Your story was a pretty good illustration that you understood that already though. ;)

>>	INRI Sat May 21 08:51:14 2011 No.3096333 >>3096325 Not really a religious thread -- but thanks for not paying attention.

>>	tinycat !!qoWPGZQ4oQc Sat May 21 08:53:14 2011 No.3096335 >>3096321 How would that prevent you from talking to them?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 08:53:14 2011 No.3096337 >>3096317 … >>3096326 I guess. Well, this is kind of unsatisfying. Any advice on nootropics?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 08:55:14 2011 No.3096341 File: 139 KB, 601x401, tfj_col.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >I just find it odd that such a large percentage of you don't believe in me. >zero evidence

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 08:56:14 2011 No.3096343 >>3096164 They expect him to appear in their living room in a white robe. Unless you're Jimmy Carter and you drank strychnine, it doesn't work like that.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 08:57:14 2011 No.3096348 >>3096335 How could you have a conversation with someone you don't believe exists?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 09:05:14 2011 No.3096364 >>3096348 They slap you round the back of the head and say, “Oi, I’m talking to you”. I’d listen then…

INRI Sat May 21 09:05:14 2011 No.3096366

>>3096337
Cardio based exercise is actually very effective for increasing oxygen supplies to your brain. Good nutrition is a duh but it generally takes months for a good result.

Yerba Mate can be taken over time which will increase extracellular ATP resources over a few weeks. It will also increase neurological plasticity and cardiovascular repair/improvements. (not to be mixed with the lower drugs... a little dangerous)

Amphetamine is very effective if you can get a medicinal amount from a practitioner. It is far more effective at increasing your ability to understand abstract concepts, math, and logic as opposed to some norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor. It also increases your resistance to radiation. Street amp is a no-no. You need to study the issue and discuss it with caretakers first as it can be addictive.

Eating enough fat, amino acids, and sleep should be a primary concern. Studying mathematics (Why and How) will increase your ability to think in general.

Hope this helps!

>>	tinycat !!qoWPGZQ4oQc Sat May 21 09:06:14 2011 No.3096369 >>3096348 >you don't believe exists? This here is an illustration of the problem i was talking about earlier. You naturally go for either 'does' or 'does not' exist, with out allowing for uncertainty.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 09:11:14 2011 No.3096380 >>3096366 I guess. (I’d check with my doctor before doing anything anyway.) Who are you, anyway?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 09:14:14 2011 No.3096388 >>3096369 >You naturally go for either 'does' or 'does not' exist, with out allowing for uncertainty. Science don't, which is the beauty of it.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 09:15:14 2011 No.3096394 >>3096388 Science takes the agnostic approach but scientists do not.

>>	INRI Sat May 21 09:21:14 2011 No.3096400 >>3096380 You'll know who I am if you ever meet me.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 09:22:14 2011 No.3096403 >>3096400 Can’t you just answer my question straightly?

>>	North! !/RC/Wj9Ve. Sat May 21 09:23:14 2011 No.3096404 File: 175 KB, 500x375, trolling.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >thread

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 09:24:14 2011 No.3096405 >>3096394 No, science definitely doesn't take the agnostic approach, you couldn't do science if you didn't believe that something is explainable. And yes, of course there are bad scientists - as in all fields, what's your point?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 09:25:14 2011 No.3096414 File: 84 KB, 755x1255, trolling.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>3096404 No.

>>	tinycat !!qoWPGZQ4oQc Sat May 21 09:29:14 2011 No.3096427 >>3096405 Not being able to explain things does not mean things do not have an explanation. And being able to explain something does not mean you are right about it.

Anonymous Sat May 21 09:31:14 2011 No.3096434

>>3096405
Agnostics don't necessarily believe the existence of God is unexplainable? Admittedly, that IS one of the accepted definitions, but there is a different one that expresses doubt and skepticism as opposed to that rigid nonsense.

>Doubt & Skepticism = SCIENCE

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 09:38:14 2011 No.3096452 >>3096427 Yes, that is what I've been saying. I don't even understand what you're arguing for here.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 09:39:14 2011 No.3096454 >>3095494 Get away from me, OP. You reek of the irrational

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 09:43:14 2011 No.3096460 >>3096434 But science does deal with knowledge and understanding things, so it has nothing at all to do with agnosticism.

>>	tinycat !!qoWPGZQ4oQc Sat May 21 09:44:14 2011 No.3096463 >>3096452 Im arguing for pyrrhonism over empiricism.

Anonymous Sat May 21 09:55:14 2011 No.3096489

>>3096463
What the hell are you talking about, there is no dichotomy between pyrrhonism and empiricism, they are different things.
Empiricism deals with how you can get knowledge (epistemology).
Pyrrhonism (or skepticism) deals with what constitutes knowledge or facts.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 09:55:14 2011 No.3096491 >>3096463 you're making prryhonists look like morons they can do without you

Anonymous Sat May 21 09:58:14 2011 No.3096499

>>3096460
No. That's what I just finished saying. Agnosticism isn't just your NOTHING IS KNOWABLE idea that you have in your head about it. I already admitted (if you'll read my damn post) that IS one of the accepted definitions, BUT

Agnosticism can be about approaching questions cautiously until any doubt about the answer is removed. At which point, you are no longer agnostic about the question. Instead, you know the answer. Is this really so hard?

Anonymous Sat May 21 10:02:14 2011 No.3096509

>>3096499
>Instead, you know the answer. Is this really so hard?
Yes, because you're contradicting yourself.
You can't be agnostic AND know the answer, science DOES claim to know the answer - thus it can be in know way described as agnostic (and I haven't even pointed out that agnosticism only deals with the existence of deities)

tinycat !!qoWPGZQ4oQc Sat May 21 10:03:14 2011 No.3096513

>>3096489
You are confusing academic empiricism with philisophical empiricism.

Pyrrhonism and empiricism are actually very similar, the main difference being that empiricism is willing to extrapolate a little further, and more importantly for my point, does not reinforce the idea fallibility as vigorously.

Anonymous Sat May 21 10:06:14 2011 No.3096520

>>3096509
but science is always evolving, isn't it? Science used to to claim the Copernican model of the solar system was The Truth, but our technology changed. New facts came to the surface and all of a sudden, The Truth changed. Same thing happened with models of the atom and now we know about subatomic particles. If science knew things, absolutely KNEW things, it would stop looking and we'd be mired in the dark ages.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 10:08:14 2011 No.3096527 >>3096509 No, you're absolutely right. I AM contradicting myself, but I think I've just inadvertently shown that science is agnostic

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 10:09:14 2011 No.3096529 >>3096527 In the everything-is-unknowable defenition, anyway.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 10:10:14 2011 No.3096534 >200 posts and 9 image replies omitted. Click Reply to view. Fucking sage.

Anonymous Sat May 21 10:14:14 2011 No.3096547

>>3096509
> I haven't even pointed out that agnosticism only deals with the existence of deities

Also, wrong. Just flat out wrong.

ag·nos·ti·cism
[ag-nos-tuh-siz-uhm]
–noun
1.
the doctrine or belief of an agnostic.
2.
an intellectual doctrine or attitude affirming the uncertainty of all claims to ultimate knowledge.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 10:14:14 2011 No.3096549 >>3096520 Yes, scientific understand is indeed evolving all the time, but trying to label it as "agnostic" makes absolutely no sense - which is what I pointed out.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 10:16:14 2011 No.3096555 >>3096547 Look up Thomas Henry Huxley.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 10:17:14 2011 No.3096559 >>3096527 >but I think I've just inadvertently shown that science is agnostic No, you haven't shown anything except some illogical statements.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 10:19:14 2011 No.3096566 >>3096555 Okay? The meaning of the word has obviously changed ever so slightly. Words do that sometimes.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 10:21:14 2011 No.3096569 >>3096566 Except no one ever talks about being agnostic about fairies, dragons and voodoo.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 10:24:14 2011 No.3096575 >>3096569 Your point? It's part of the definition of the word. Just because it's not the most popular definition doesn't make it any less the case.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 10:28:14 2011 No.3096581 >>3096575 Word's meaning are defined in how people use it. Nigger might technically be defined as referring to the color black, but that's not how anyone uses it.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 10:30:14 2011 No.3096584 >>3096581 As crude and unfair as that example was, it doesn't make my statement less valid.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 10:38:14 2011 No.3096606 >>3096581 Phew, thanks for the argument anon. Well done! Got my heart rate up because I was mad for a bit there, feels good. I'ma go about my day now. Have fun!

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 10:54:14 2011 No.3096642 Thanks OP. I often wonder about god and try to apply logic to god's existence. Your discussions have opened my eyes further to the logic of a god.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 11:04:14 2011 No.3096667 File: 160 KB, 800x800, 1272197179242.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >Post a picture of Jesus on /sci/ >advicetroll.jpg >more than 200 replies

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 11:19:14 2011 No.3096720 Atheist can give better explanations for God existence and motivations than the actual bible + christians together. /thread

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 13:08:14 2011 No.3097191 Did anyone notice how this thread looks like its one person arguing with himself?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 13:14:14 2011 No.3097221 >>3097191 Not really. I samefagged a little, but that was partially because I had valid points that I forgot to bring up whilst composing previous posts. Also, epiphanies. ~10 of these are mine.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 21 13:16:14 2011 No.3097224 The more and more I read about theoretical physics the closer I come to completely believing in Brahman.

Hopeless Necromantic Sat May 21 13:24:14 2011 No.3097250

>under what condition would I be able to present myself so that you would believe I am who I am?
Just, like, show up at my door and throw down a miracle. Like, turn my dog into a cat. Or do something in a public place.

Or, next time a christian prays for something miraculous, let it happen. Make it so christians can heal the sick or something. Or maybe next time a plane crashes, have all the christians survive and everyone else die, so at least it appears as though they're special in any way.

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]