Its more accurate to say that the Big Bang was *caused* by something. However, its far more likely that it was the result of a physical process as opposed to the actions of a sentient being.If that doesn't sit well with you, perhaps you should consider what sort of "creator" would have created your god, since he must surely have had a beginning if your proverb is to be believed.
UltraJoe,It's not that faith doesn't require proof, it's that it exists completely outside the realm of things that can be proven. Faith relies SOLELY on the opinions of the individual. Faith is taught and inherited. Science is also taught and inherited, but additionally, it can be proven through experiments that can be recreated by anyone who calls it's legitimacy into question. Science is the gradual accumulation of human experiences, while Faith is the gradual accumulation of human ideas.You can't create an experiment to test the existence of a higher power, because it's something that doesn't exist anywhere else other than the minds of people.Assuming that a chair is strong enough to support your body before you sit in it is not faith, it's the knowledge you've gained from all the times you've sat in chairs, and from the learned understanding of what kinds of chairs will support your weight. You don't have "faith" that a chair won't collapse... you make an assumption based on previous experiences with chairs. If it collapses, then you take a mental note, "this chair cannot support my weight", and in the future you avoid sitting in those kinds of chairs.
I think you did a great job with your comment. I also think you should be commended for your bravery, as unless you are new to digg, you must know they are going to try everything they can to discredit you and your beliefs. I wish you well and it's nice to know everyone on digg is not a fanatical atheist.
"To bad his point's moot because it would be his responsibility to prove it for making the claim in the first place. "No. The problem with the demon guy is that he's getting angry for no good reason, even if he disagrees with the non-demon guy he doesn't need to get angry.Convention itself stands on widely accepted, yet unproven, and worse, fundamentally unprovable, assumptions. So to say that new claims must prove their assumptions against the conventionally established assumptions is not a good or fair thing to do, from a philosophical point of view. This merely perpetuates established convention without allowing to explore some ideas outside convention. It also gives undue weight to convention.So, digging one's heels in and crying "prove it" is really not a great way to converse or to debate. It's not insightful. It doesn't bring any light to the subject. It's just a defensive cop out.
@Spaz... you're argument STARTS with the very thing that is in dispute! To say that existence is proof of a god and that said god is exempt from having a creator is poor logic. If all things have a creator except my creator, doesn't that disprove its own argument? "All things"... "Except"... they don't go together. It's either ALL THINGS or MOST THINGS. Your lack of understanding of this one point is EXACTLY why you are so certain of your belief in a god and is exactly why people argue with you. It's false logic.
pretty intense debate over a humorous little sketch. I think it's funny regardless of the validity of the argument/logic. I also can see the humor in the logic and still believe in God. Maybe I am the odd-ball out here, but it seems like this shouldn't be taken so seriously.
According to quantum physics everyone is right. check out Lynne McTaggart and "The Field" or "The Intention Experiment" just for starters.
Closed AccountSep 10, 2008
Alister McGrath kicked Richard Dawkins ass in that debate? That is quite a distorted interpretation of that video.
atomic05Sep 10, 2008
Its more accurate to say that the Big Bang was *caused* by something. However, its far more likely that it was the result of a physical process as opposed to the actions of a sentient being.If that doesn't sit well with you, perhaps you should consider what sort of "creator" would have created your god, since he must surely have had a beginning if your proverb is to be believed.
Closed AccountSep 10, 2008
Quantum mechanics is accepted because it works. We can not fully understand why until someone comes up with a working unified field theory.
strangefamousSep 10, 2008
UltraJoe,It's not that faith doesn't require proof, it's that it exists completely outside the realm of things that can be proven. Faith relies SOLELY on the opinions of the individual. Faith is taught and inherited. Science is also taught and inherited, but additionally, it can be proven through experiments that can be recreated by anyone who calls it's legitimacy into question. Science is the gradual accumulation of human experiences, while Faith is the gradual accumulation of human ideas.You can't create an experiment to test the existence of a higher power, because it's something that doesn't exist anywhere else other than the minds of people.Assuming that a chair is strong enough to support your body before you sit in it is not faith, it's the knowledge you've gained from all the times you've sat in chairs, and from the learned understanding of what kinds of chairs will support your weight. You don't have "faith" that a chair won't collapse... you make an assumption based on previous experiences with chairs. If it collapses, then you take a mental note, "this chair cannot support my weight", and in the future you avoid sitting in those kinds of chairs.
Closed AccountSep 10, 2008
I think you did a great job with your comment. I also think you should be commended for your bravery, as unless you are new to digg, you must know they are going to try everything they can to discredit you and your beliefs. I wish you well and it's nice to know everyone on digg is not a fanatical atheist.
aeooSep 11, 2008
"To bad his point's moot because it would be his responsibility to prove it for making the claim in the first place. "No. The problem with the demon guy is that he's getting angry for no good reason, even if he disagrees with the non-demon guy he doesn't need to get angry.Convention itself stands on widely accepted, yet unproven, and worse, fundamentally unprovable, assumptions. So to say that new claims must prove their assumptions against the conventionally established assumptions is not a good or fair thing to do, from a philosophical point of view. This merely perpetuates established convention without allowing to explore some ideas outside convention. It also gives undue weight to convention.So, digging one's heels in and crying "prove it" is really not a great way to converse or to debate. It's not insightful. It doesn't bring any light to the subject. It's just a defensive cop out.
ceeayySep 11, 2008
@Spaz... you're argument STARTS with the very thing that is in dispute! To say that existence is proof of a god and that said god is exempt from having a creator is poor logic. If all things have a creator except my creator, doesn't that disprove its own argument? "All things"... "Except"... they don't go together. It's either ALL THINGS or MOST THINGS. Your lack of understanding of this one point is EXACTLY why you are so certain of your belief in a god and is exactly why people argue with you. It's false logic.
pinc1Sep 11, 2008
pretty intense debate over a humorous little sketch. I think it's funny regardless of the validity of the argument/logic. I also can see the humor in the logic and still believe in God. Maybe I am the odd-ball out here, but it seems like this shouldn't be taken so seriously.
ghostfacedxSep 11, 2008
You need to believe in a religion to give meaning to your life? I live life because guess what, I'm alive.
donna1234Oct 23, 2008
Fun stuff:<a class="user" href="http://www.e-uuu.com">http://www.e-uuu.com</a><a class="user" href="http://www.mad4.info">http://www.mad4.info</a><a class="user" href="http://www.webthe.info">http://www.webthe.info</a>
Closed AccountDec 2, 2008
Kinda funny, but buried for:ad hominemappeal to ridiculebiased samplestraw manAnd possibly other fallacies.
bioelectricOct 27, 2009
According to quantum physics everyone is right. check out Lynne McTaggart and "The Field" or "The Intention Experiment" just for starters.
colin102Nov 18, 2009
Deleted?! :(