How Much of a Theist or Atheist are You?

[viole]

A what???



Huh?



Educate the savage.

I don't understand what you mean and how it relates to my post?

My reply was motivated by your claim: energy does not disappear.

What brought you to that conclusion? Did you mean physical energy, as it is measured in calories and electronvolts, or a spiritual variant thereof?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Unveiled Artist]

My reply was motivated by your claim: energy does not disappear.

What brought you to that conclusion? Did you mean physical energy, as it is measured in calories and electronvolts, or a spiritual variant thereof?

Ciao

- viole

Whatever energy causes our neurons to fire, hearts to pump, plants grow, and planets move and so forth. Heat.

I think they tried to freeze atoms to minimize its movement to milliseconds. Trying to control life.

As Malcom in Jasasic Park would put it

"Broadly speaking, the ability of the park is to control the spread of life forms. Because the history of evolution is that life escapes all barriers. Life breaks free. Life expands to new territories. Painfully, perhaps even dangerously. But life finds a way." Malcolm shook his head. "I don't mean to be philosophical, but there it is."

 

[viole]

Whatever energy causes our neurons to fire, hearts to pump, plants grow, and planets move and so forth. Heat.

I think they tried to freeze atoms to minimize its movement to milliseconds. Trying to control life.

As Malcom in Jasasic Park would put it

"Broadly speaking, the ability of the park is to control the spread of life forms. Because the history of evolution is that life escapes all barriers. Life breaks free. Life expands to new territories. Painfully, perhaps even dangerously. But life finds a way." Malcolm shook his head. "I don't mean to be philosophical, but there it is."

Yes, but that is my point. Energy alone does not do anything. Energy seems so cool, especially in spiritual circles, that people forget that energy alone is quite useless. A sysem in thermal equlibrium can have a lot of energy, while being physical unable to provide anything useful.

So, what is important is to know how much a certain amount of energy deviates from thermodynamical equilibrium. Ergo, how low its entropy is.

Living beings, like humans, keep the entropy low by constantly consuming energy with low entropy. We call that "eating food". If we do not do that, our brains would simply die like a candle without supply. Even if their energy is still there.

Do you think souls do the same?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Yes, but that is my point. Energy alone does not do anything. A sysem in thermal equlibrium can have a lot of energy, while being physical unable to provide anything useful.

So, what is a important is to know how much a certain amount of energy deviates from thermodynamical equilibrium. Ergo, how low its entropy is.

Living beings, like humans, keep the entropy low by constantly consuming energy with low entropy. We call that eating food. If we do not do that, our brains would simply die like a candle without supply.

Do you think souls do the same?

Ciao

- viole

I tried about a year ago to put definitions to the abstract terms.

Spirit is energy of a person that in combination with other things keeps him living and growing.

Soul is the personality and character of a person. When you say a young person is an "ol' soul" it means he is wiser than people three times his age. Wise rather than smarts.

Energy doesnt die it forms, creates, moves, and so forth. So our spirits exist after death. Our loved ones experience our spirits and people open to it can experience spirits or energies, if one likes, of others and living enviornment.

Souls die with the body. I was trying to figure a good word. Cant think of many metaphysical words. Even consciousness bugs me.

 

[viole]

I tried about a year ago to put definitions to the abstract terms.

Spirit is energy of a person that in combination with other things keeps him living and growing.

Soul is the personality and character of a person. When you say a young person is an "ol' soul" it means he is wiser than people three times his age. Wise rather than smarts.

Energy doesnt die it forms, creates, moves, and so forth. So our spirits exist after death. Our loved ones experience our spirits and people open to it can experience spirits or energies, if one likes, of others and living enviornment.

Souls die with the body. I was trying to figure a good word. Cant think of many metaphysical words. Even consciousness bugs me.

Fine. But I strongly reccomend to keep these concepts in the spiritual sphere. Whatever that is. And to not mix them with science.

But If you look for physical justifications for souls and stuff, ergo in a world where energy is measured in electronvolts, and the capacity to provide work in calories per Celsius degree, you will very fast find yourself in a self defeating position.

Especially if you ignore the basics of thermodynamics.

Ciao

- viole

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Yet, atheist scientists claim we will find aliens within the next ten to fifteen years with zero evidence.

Which atheist scientist? Please be specific.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Fine. But I strongly reccomend to keep these concepts in the spiritual sphere. Whatever that is. And to not mix them with science.

But If you look for physical justifications for souls and stuff, ergo in a world where energy is measured in electronvolts, and the capacity to provide work in calories per Celsius degree, you will very fast find yourself in a self defeating position.

Especially if you ignore the basics of thermodynamics.

Ciao

- viole

Actually, I was quite happy with spirit and soul cause we used that since I was a kid. On RF atheist seem to be more science minded so I switched it in a thread in itself to define spiritual terms "scientifically". Not everyone thinks in "spiritual terminology" or metaphysics. If spirituality is part of reality, which it is, it, like everything else, can be explained in multiple ways.

I dont know about science. Just basic things. Keep it simple.

 

[Derek500]

Interesting you call these "untruths" and gleefully attribute them to me. Are you saying what I posted in the OP is not from Dawkins' book The God Delusion?

Yes. You made it up. It's not from the book The God Delusion.

I got mine here -- Dawkins Belief Scale Images . I think they convey the point even if it's not "word for word" what Dawkins had.

Then don't pretend that those are the words Dawkins wrote.

 

[james bond]

Which atheist scientist? Please be specific.

You serious? This is too easy ha ha. Chief Scientist Ellen Stofan of NASA, for one.

One of the atheist scientists who said he believed in aliens was Carl Sagan. His successor Degrasse is even more a nut jobber. He thinks they live among us. He also believes in multiverses, dark matter, dark energy, GMO foods and likes to talk about no God. One of the most wrong things he said about science is "that it's true whether or not you believe in it." Science has always been a search for the truth and disagreement. I can start a separate thread on this if you want to discuss. Are you happy now?

 

[james bond]

Yes. You made it up. It's not from the book The God Delusion.

Then don't pretend that those are the words Dawkins wrote.

If I'm wrong, then I stand corrected but didn't make it up. Now, you're wrong ha ha. Dawkins said, "I'm 6.9 out 7 sure that God does not exist." That led me to search for his scale.

Yes. You made it up. It's not from the book The God Delusion.

Then don't pretend that those are the words Dawkins wrote.

I don't see your proof. I already showed you my source. Did you read it? Did you read my previous post? Did you read The God Delusion? I doubt you'll answer my questions. Anyway, you're silly to make such a big deal of it. If you can't think, then that's all folks!!!

 

[Equilibrium]

I picked "other." My interpretation of gods is more Jungian. I believe in many gods but as archetypes within our minds that we can align ourselves with. Call it silly or imaginary, but the fact that these archetypes have a positive psychological impact (which can lead into a physiological effect e.g. calming down when anxious, angry, or down) on me is very much real to me. They are a part of my subjective universe.

I don't think gods exist in the external world/objective universe, though.

 

[Derek500]

If I'm wrong, then I stand corrected but didn't make it up. Now, you're wrong ha ha. Dawkins said, "I'm 6.9 out 7 sure that God does not exist." That led me to search for his scale.

I don't see your proof. I already showed you my source. Did you read it? Did you read my previous post? Did you read The God Delusion? I doubt you'll answer my questions. Anyway, you're silly to make such a big deal of it. If you can't think, then that's all folks!!!

Again that's not what Dawkins wrote in his book The God Delusion. You made it up.

I've got a copy of the God Delusion on my desk right in front of me. You told untruths about what was written in there.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

You serious? This is too easy ha ha. Chief Scientist Ellen Stofan of NASA, for one.

Is this the quote you're talking about?

"I think we're going to have strong indications of life beyond Earth within a decade, and I think we're going to have definitive evidence within 20 to 30 years," NASA chief scientist Ellen Stofan said Tuesday (April 7) during a panel discussion that focused on the space agency's efforts to search for habitable worlds and alien life.

Signs of Alien Life Will Be Found by 2025, NASA's Chief Scientist Predicts

If so, you're mischaracterizing what she said.

One of the atheist scientists who said he believed in aliens was Carl Sagan. His successor Degrasse is even more a nut jobber. He thinks they live among us.

Exact quote, please. Your paraphrasing skills are in doubt.

He also believes in multiverses, dark matter, dark energy, GMO foods and likes to talk about no God.

What's wrong with any of that?

One of the most wrong things he said about science is "that it's true whether or not you believe in it." Science has always been a search for the truth and disagreement.

You have a rather warped view of science.

I can start a separate thread on this if you want to discuss. Are you happy now?

I'm now satisfied that your position is based more on prejudice than fact. Does that count as happy?

 

[james bond]

Again that's not what Dawkins wrote in his book The God Delusion. You made it up.

I've got a copy of the God Delusion on my desk right in front of me. You told untruths about what was written in there.

Ok, I stand corrected but I didn't make mine up. Are you going to admit that I didn't make it up?

The OP should have read, "The text on my images differs slightly from Dawkins’ but, I think, maintains the meaning." -- Christopher Sisk

Dawkins Belief Scale Images
Dawkins Belief Scale Images

 

[james bond]

Is this the quote you're talking about?


Signs of Alien Life Will Be Found by 2025, NASA's Chief Scientist Predicts

If so, you're mischaracterizing what she said.


Exact quote, please. Your paraphrasing skills are in doubt.


What's wrong with any of that?



You have a rather warped view of science.


I'm now satisfied that your position is based more on prejudice than fact. Does that count as happy?

Mischaracterization? Paraphrasing skills? All I did was answer your question. My original statement said atheist scientists plural. You wanted one name, so I gave you a big one.

Originally, I got it from an UK news article which I can't find again. It stated that these scientists were claiming this due to their multi-million dollar equipment and vastness of space. Here's another one that states 10 years. NASA has also made up videos of the kind of alien they think they'll find. One's a little fish that darts across the screen on Mars. Just before The Martian movie came out in 2015, they quickly pulled it. NASA, i.e. atheist scientists, are the ones who seem to be pulling off a fast one in order to get government funding. It's highly political. Finding life elsewhere is a big deal since Clinton made his statement.

NASA: We'll find alien life in 10 to 20 years

These scientists are the ones who should be questioned. They say they're not referring to little green men, but look up LGM and NASA. They have named their missiles LGM for little green men.

Go start a thread on this and we can talk some more. My view of science is not warped, but more rational than NASA's chief scientist.

EDIT: It seems you're the one mischaracterizing me. That's part of the liberal playbook. The libbies can not back up their statements, so they mischaraterize their opponent. I'll just claim victory here since this isn't the appropriate thread for this. This will be my last reply here on this.

 

[Indian Iconoclast]

I like what you're saying except the first paragraph. Are you equating the second and third with personal values which we share or could it be due to religion? Many believers think humans are the highest order of animals and that we are the caretakers of those on earth.

My dear brother (James Bond or the person using that identity in this forum), I thank you for having gone through my answer with interest and I am happy that you like what I have said, barring the first paragraph.

What I have wanted to say and may not have been able to word it properly (I am not fluent in and weak in grammar and syntax in English) is that we humans being the most developed and developing (so far as our brain's size and abilities go (whales, I have heard have equally sized or comparable brains) mammals have since our Neanderthal and Cro-magnon stages, feared and worshipped or wished to be helped by animals, stars, the sun and the moon, the water and rivers and seas, the air and all forces of the nature that we till such time as we had been able to control or cope with, and have made that worship or mental subjugation collective and social. We have also made followings in large numbers of such worshippers and their leaders and propagators and proselytisers and created classified and sectoral congregations that we call religions. In fact, we have eulogised and deified many an influential guru and worshipped them.

My brother and all members of my human fraternity that read these lines must have also heard and learned of an entity referred to in all scriptures (science too? I doubt) as the soul or the spirit. I am an ignorant who is willing to accept its very existence if proved. The concept of spirituality has its origins to spirits of human beings that could have an extended existence after death. My question and contention are very rational and that is if humans have this spirit, then why whales, elephants or for that matter all mammals and extensively all living creatures should also possess spirits. The religions call and talk about a supreme spirit that governs and controls the flow of nature, whose existence is being contended in your thread.

I have no religion or classified faith. I have shunned the faith on the community that I was born in and I do not subscribe to the belief that I shall have a series of births and deaths which shall give me spiritual improvements and attain a knowledge or status that shall free my come and go in this world. Also I do not see any logic in lying at an ethereal plane in slumber while my carcass bio-degrades itself beyond recognition in this earth or gets turned to ashes on a pyre, to wait for a reunion on a doomsday when my actions in a very short life lived millions of years ago, become the subject matter of a final court where I get sentenced to live forever in eating, drinking and merrymaking and indulgence in sexual orgies after having lived a hard and struggled life in poverty and never having to see such excesses in that short life and also being burnt for eternity for my excesses and crimes in that short life. The rewards and punishments of my deeds are experienced in my living mind that is able to feel ashamed and repent for bad deeds and enjoy and love the happiness and satisfaction for good acts. There is no heaven and hell to experience after death and no God to face!

Thanks.

 

[MrMrdevincamus]

Oh Gawd.....Dawkins! I labeled myself as a de-facto theist........Everyone has read this exchange haven't they?

from the web ~

" When Selfish Gene author Richard Dawkins challenged physicist John Barrow on his formulation of the constants of nature at last summers Templeton-Cambridge Journalism Fellowship lectures, Barrow laughed and said, “You have a problem with these ideas, Richard, because you're not really a scientist. You are a biologist!

(((((((((((man hug for Barrow))))))))))))))))))

: {>

 

[Oktay]

The first time I heard of a scale being around was through Richard Dawkins, one of the founders of the New Atheism group. Since I do not have a differing widely known scale, I use his. He's eliminating other beliefs and the like for those whose beliefs lie elsewhere, so I include "Other" in my poll.

1. Strong Theist: I do not question the existence of God, I KNOW he exists.
2. De-facto Theist: I cannot know for certain but I strongly believe in God and I live my life on the assumption that he is there.
3. Weak Theist: I am very uncertain, but I am inclined to believe in God.
4. Pure Agnostic: God’s existence and non-existence are exactly equiprobable.
5. Weak Atheist: I do not know whether God exists but I’m inclined to be skeptical.
6. De-facto Atheist: I cannot know for certain but I think God is very improbable and I live my life under the assumption that he is not there.
7. Strong Atheist: I am 100% sure that there is no God.

If this has been posted before, then please forgive. I did a search and did not find.

 

[Oktay]

The first time I heard of a scale being around was through Richard Dawkins, one of the founders of the New Atheism group. Since I do not have a differing widely known scale, I use his. He's eliminating other beliefs and the like for those whose beliefs lie elsewhere, so I include "Other" in my poll.

1. Strong Theist: I do not question the existence of God, I KNOW he exists.
2. De-facto Theist: I cannot know for certain but I strongly believe in God and I live my life on the assumption that he is there.
3. Weak Theist: I am very uncertain, but I am inclined to believe in God.
4. Pure Agnostic: God’s existence and non-existence are exactly equiprobable.
5. Weak Atheist: I do not know whether God exists but I’m inclined to be skeptical.
6. De-facto Atheist: I cannot know for certain but I think God is very improbable and I live my life under the assumption that he is not there.
7. Strong Atheist: I am 100% sure that there is no God.

If this has been posted before, then please forgive. I did a search and did not find.

Every village must have its headman; every needle must have its manufacturer and craftsman. And, as you know, every letter must be written by someone. How, then, can it be that so extremely well-ordered a kingdom should have no ruler? And how can so much wealth have no owner, when every hour a train

1 arrives filled with precious and artful gifts, as if coming from the realm of the unseen? And all the announcements and proclamations, all the seals and stamps, found on all those goods, all the coins and the flags waving in every corner of the kingdom — can they be without an owner? It seems you have studied foreign languages a little, and are unable to read this Islamic script. In addition, you refuse to ask those who are able to read it..”

 

[viole]

I doubt the atheist scientists would believe the FSM, but who knows. The atheists tell me the FSM is similar to God existing. The FSM and unicorns exist in the imagination like aliens. There has been no evidence of aliens even though we have people looking for signs with multi-million dollar equipment even as we speak. Then, there is the fine tuning theory. Yet, atheist scientists claim we will find aliens within the next ten to fifteen years with zero evidence. They'll believe any science fairy tale. That's based on pure faith just like you're being held captive. Stockholm Syndrome?

I did not ask the atheist scientists. I asked you. And you make the assumption that your God is definetely not the product of imagination. I wonder how you can support that.

So, Are you 100% sure that the FSM does not exist?

Ciao

- viole