yossarian22
Resident Schizophrenic
And the evidence which suggests we are the center is?
Belief without evidence is blind belief.
There is nothing wrong with it, its just that it rarely has any useful purpose.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
An appeal for the logic of religious belief
- Thread starter Popeyesays
- Start date
There is nothing wrong with it, its just that it rarely has any useful purpose.
Rolling_Stone
Well-Known Member
With the same saw can you show the intelligence and awareness? Can you show that they even exist?Give me a saw and I can show you a brain.
wa:do
yossarian22
Resident Schizophrenic
A Turing test would work, though you would need many many tests.
Rolling_Stone
Well-Known Member
No. At best, all that shows is complex electrochemical interactions.
yossarian22
Resident Schizophrenic
No, a Turing Test tells us if someone is human-like. Inferences can be made from there.
Rolling_Stone
Well-Known Member
Who is "us"? What is "human-like"? What is making inferences if not the electrochemical processes?
yossarian22
Resident Schizophrenic
Ugh. Do you really need to do this
Do you know what a Turing test is?
It means a person cannot distinguish between a human or whoever is being tested. Making them effectively human. Whatever that definition may be.
Electrochemical processes have little to do with this. A Turing test does not care how you become human, just that you are human. Any assumptions about humans fitting under such topics as consciousness will naturally apply to the whatever passes the test.
It never hurts.
Here we are.
Belief in a centre apart form us would require adopting an imagined perspective apart from us.
Rolling_Stone
Well-Known Member
Think a little deeper.
Believe in God.
Rolling_Stone
Well-Known Member
Didn't say that at all, or even imply it. Just looking for some consistency of thought.
The consistency here is in the inappropriateness of the imperative.
"Think a little deeper." "Believe in God." Like either could just happen.
You are twisting what I say and not responding to my points.
I'm sure most people that study their own belief are experts in the matter regardless of their education and I am such a person that is considered an expert in the field of my particular belief which is separate from my formal education as is D.T. Suzuki.
Understand Buddhism comes in many different flavors just like Christianity and Islam the core teaching of the 4 Noble Truths and the 8 Fold Path is what we all have in common as the Christians all have Jesus in common and the Muslims all have Mohamed in common but the practices as a whole differ.
As far as all forms of Buddhism go we are all atheists it's that plain and simple there is no God, god, gods or goddesses in Buddhism however there are "beings" for a lack of a translatable word in English in some forms of Buddhism it is not part of my practice which is the point I am speaking from.
In laboratories around the world scientists are trying to create life from nothing kind of like the primordial soup we crawled out of if they succeed does that make them gods?
I'm more than happy to have this conversation with you but please don't read into what I'm saying I have done my best to make it plain and simple to understand and believe me I have no ego and I'm not trying to make a name for myself I could care less I am very unemotional and very unattached to anything that is the way of my practice.
Rolling_Stone
Well-Known Member
Sorry, guy. I simply can't take you seriously. You're a lousy philosopher and a lousy Buddhist.
Don Penguinoini
Modi.
Hummm... then why do I get paid for it? Any idea how hard it is to get a job as a philosophy professor? How is it possible that the monks in Thailand respect my ideas enough to seek my guidance? I'm happy to provide you with proof and a copy of my latest text book on Zen philosophy. Am I "orthodox" no, because that wouldn't be me it would be the sum of what I have learned, I like to think and discuss untried options as I am a nonconformist. Name calling is the last resort of a desperate man.
rojse
RF Addict
There is quite a world of difference between gravity and God.
Gravity, although it cannot be seen directly, can be measured through it's influences on other objects. We have built a gravity wave detector, and it is hoped it will detect gravitational waves before 2010.
Gravity is a physical force that is required to explain many different phenomena, such as why we stay on a spheroidal earth, the orbit of satellites, the motion of moving objects, and so forth. We cannot explain these phenomena in any other manner that answers all of the facts so easily.
Gravity does not depend on how you feel, or what you had for breakfast, or whether you believe in it or not.
On the other hand, God has no supporting physical evidence. It is not required to explain any physical aspect of the universe, except in addition to any laws of physics or chemisty that you need to explain anything. God's effects depend on very nebulous concepts such as God's will, and so forth.
Super Universe
Defender of God
In order for you to have any supporting evidence that there is quite a world of difference between gravity and God shouldn't you know what gravity is? And shouldn't you know what God is as well?
Gravity does not depend on how you feel, what you had for breakfast, or whether you believe in it or not? Are you suggesting that God does?
God's effects depend on God's will? Uh, no, God's effects are the laws of physics, they are unchanging and inviolate.
Gravity does not depend on how you feel, what you had for breakfast, or whether you believe in it or not? Are you suggesting that God does?
God's effects depend on God's will? Uh, no, God's effects are the laws of physics, they are unchanging and inviolate.
rojse
RF Addict
I just gave a few reasons why there is a difference between gravity and God. Gravity can be measured, for one.
Everyone here always says that God chooses what He wishes to do. Not my words. When you pray to God, you don't get exactly what you prayed for, do you? Sometimes you do, sometimes you do not, sometimes you get something else. If I were religious, I would call that God's will, and I would call the results the effects. Please tell me if you think that is wrong.
And I am saying that God depends on whether you believe or not - he only works for those that believe.
You cannot say God's effects are the laws of physics, or have you dismissed God so that He is merely the Grand Unified Theory in physics? It seems quite a step down for the omniprescent Creator of the Universe.