Let's Present Some Evidence ...

[PureX]

There are several threads on which people have been arguing about the "evidence" or lack thereof of the existence of "God". These threads were not started with this subject in mind, so I'm starting a new thread to keep them from being sidetracked.

Keep in mind that evidence is not proof. For example, the fact that Bob could have left work unnoticed and killed his wife, and then returned to work, resulting in his fellow workers claiming that he was on the job all day is not proof that Bob killed his wife. It is evidence, however, in that it provides a reasonable possibility.

Also, let's keep this a polite and civil discussion/debate. Your posts will be ignored, otherwise.

I will begin the discussion with a few posts from these other threads:

Perhaps we can gain some ground here by simplifying. PureX, could you provide your top 3 pieces of evidence for the existence of God?

Sure ...

1. The idea of God works for most people most of the time. Ideas that work for us on a regular basis tend to be taken as accurate.

2. The ordered nature of existence forces us to consider the reality of a "God". Existence is not random. How do we explain this? What is responsible for the order? And why? The answers to these questions are a mystery, and we have named this mystery "God".

3. Energy can express itself as consciousness (take ourselves as an example), again, forcing us to consider that a consciousness could in turn express itself as energy (in much the same way as matter and energy are interchangeable). If so, all of existence could well be the "mind of God, expressed", just as the ancients claimed.

 

[MSizer]

3. Energy can express itself as consciousness (take ourselves as an example), again, forcing us to consider that a consciousness could in turn express itself as energy (in much the same way as matter and energy are interchangeable). If so, all of existence could well be the "mind of God, expressed", just as the ancients claimed.

Energy does not express itself in any way. Conciousness, as best we can tell so far, is an experience. Therefore, it is not correct to say that conciousness can express itself as energy. That's tantamount to saying sadness can express itself and tears. They are connected in the sens that they are human trait that often occur in tandem, but it's not correct to say that one is the other.

 

[Bloomdido]

1. Less so as we become more enlightened. It tends to be the less well educated who believe.
2. Evolution is not random but the 'breathing forth of life' may well have been. No purpose, no plan, just primordeal soup and lots of time.
3. And it could well not be. I'll go with the big bang. Where everything came from, I don't know but it doesn't make me want to invent a god who roasts babies in hell.

 

[PureX]

Sure ...

1. The idea of God works for most people most of the time. Ideas that work for us on a regular basis tend to be taken as accurate.

Beaudreaux writes: I do not believe this is evidence for God and I'll tell you why. Astrology "works" for most people most of the time as well. The reason it "works" is that it provides sufficiently vague predictions and believers actively seek confirmation of those predictions. People consider it accurate because they want to, not because it's true. Chris Angel did a great bit that illustrates this where he cut parts of astrology columns together to form a "reading". He had a line of 100 people who, one-by-one came in to be read. He used the exact same script on them all and TO A PERSON they were amazed at how accurate the reading was. Many started crying. To summarize:
works for most people most of the time != evidence of truth

2. The ordered nature of existence forces us to consider the reality of a "God". Existence is not random. How do we explain this? What is responsible for the order? And why? The answers to these questions are a mystery, and we have named this mystery "God".

Beaudreaux writes: The "order" does not come from nature, but in how our minds understand the world around us. Consider the taxonomy of life:
Kingdom
Phyllum
Class
Order
Family
Genus
Species
Variety
WE created that ordering mechanism. Order comes from our minds, not creation.
(And a special "thank you" to my High School Biology teach Mr. Edwards for the mnemonic that helped me keep that info in my head. )

But lets say that you do not agree with this (as I anticipate). Let's say that the order actually exists in the physical world itself. Why does that order necessitate a creator? That's just the way things are. Why would you think that an uncreated world would not have order? Do you have any examples of this to show?

3. Energy can express itself as consciousness (take ourselves as an example), again, forcing us to consider that a consciousness could in turn express itself as energy (in much the same way as matter and energy are interchangeable). If so, all of existence could well be the "mind of God, expressed", just as the ancients claimed.

Beaudreaux writes: "Could well be" is supposition, not evidence.

 

[PureX]

I do not believe this is evidence for God and I'll tell you why. Astrology "works" for most people most of the time as well. The reason it "works" is that it provides sufficiently vague predictions and believers actively seek confirmation of those predictions.

Actually, astrology doesn't work for most people most of the time. The number of people who use astrology because they find that it "works" for them is really very small.

Also, you are comparing a simple idea that has been pretty thoroughly explained away to a very complex idea that has not been explained away at all.
Quote:

People consider it accurate because they want to, not because it's true. Chris Angel did a great bit that illustrates this where he cut parts of astrology columns together to form a "reading". He had a line of 100 people who, one-by-one came in to be read. He used the exact same script on them all and TO A PERSON they were amazed at how accurate the reading was.

People can be fooled. People can fool themselves. People could be fooling themselves about the existence of "God". But you have offered nothing here to suggest that they are; only that they could be. My evidence still stands.

The "order" does not come from nature, but in how our minds understand the world around us. Consider the taxonomy of life:
Kingdom
Phyllum
Class
Order
Family
Genus
Species
Variety
WE created that ordering mechanism. Order comes from our minds, not creation.
(And a special "thank you" to my High School Biology teach Mr. Edwards for the mnemonic that helped me keep that info in my head. )

I agree with you, but that wasn't the kind of "order" I was referring to.

But lets say that you do not agree with this (as I anticipate). Let's say that the order actually exists in the physical world itself. Why does that order necessitate a creator? That's just the way things are. Why would you think that an uncreated world would not have order? Do you have any examples of this to show?

The order I was referring to is inherent to existence. As I understand it, all that exists is energy. We don't know where all this energy comes from, and we don't know why it's limited in it's behavior, but it came from somewhere and it's behavior is limited. And because energy can express itself in some ways, but not in others, our universe is what it is. So those limitations are the "orders" from which all that exists, exists as it does.

That this order exists, inextricably leads us to contemplate it's origin, and it's possible purpose. It is not logical that a pointless existence would express order. But then it's not logical that a pointless existence would be logical, either. So we can't rule that out, but most humans find this highly unlikely. And I do too.

"Could well be" is supposition, not evidence.

It is another open door to the supposition that God exists. That's still evidence because it's a revealed possibility. (Example: Bob could have slipped away from his job unnoticed and killed his wife. The possibility is not proof that Bob did this, but it stands as evidence that he could have, nevertheless.) Also, most folks would agree that it's extremely difficult to imagine that a meaningless expression of energy could achieve a complex form, let alone consciousness.

 

[CarlinKnew]

1. The idea of God works for most people most of the time. Ideas that work for us on a regular basis tend to be taken as accurate.

comfort =/= truth

2. The ordered nature of existence forces us to consider the reality of a "God". Existence is not random. How do we explain this? What is responsible for the order? And why? The answers to these questions are a mystery, and we have named this mystery "God".

infinite regress

3. Energy can express itself as consciousness (take ourselves as an example), again, forcing us to consider that a consciousness could in turn express itself as energy (in much the same way as matter and energy are interchangeable). If so, all of existence could well be the "mind of God, expressed", just as the ancients claimed.

pseudoscience

 

[PureX]

Energy does not express itself in any way. Consciousness, as best we can tell so far, is an experience. Therefore, it is not correct to say that consciousness can express itself as energy. That's tantamount to saying sadness can express itself and tears. They are connected in the sens that they are human trait that often occur in tandem, but it's not correct to say that one is the other.

Energy expresses itself as matter, as motion, as space and time. The combination of these expresses consciousness. Matter and energy are interchangeable. Leading us to suspect that they and consciousness might be as well.

The awareness of experience (energy expressing itself) is consciousness.

 

[sandandfoam]

Every time I open my eyes I am bombarded with evidence. Nature. Too much to comprehend. God isn't supernatural. God is natural.
Looking for a flying spaghetti monster when there's sunlight coming through the window seems daft to me.

 

[MSizer]

Energy expresses itself as matter, as motion, as space and time. The combination of these expresses consciousness. Matter and energy are interchangeable. Leading us to suspect that they and consciousness might be as well.

The awareness of experience (energy expressing itself) is consciousness.

If you take a primer on neuroscience you will leave that behind the way most people leave creationism behind when the take biology.

 

[sandandfoam]

If you take a primer on neuroscience you will leave that behind the way most people leave creationism behind when the take biology.

Would you care to advance a neuro-scientific understanding of consciousness?

 

[PureX]

1. Less so as we become more enlightened. It tends to be the less well educated who believe.

Yet, faith in "God" still works for a great number of very well educated people. By "works" I mean that they believe it to be a positive and transforming course of thought and action.

2. Evolution is not random but the 'breathing forth of life' may well have been. No purpose, no plan, just primordeal soup and lots of time.

The order I was referring to is far more elemental then that, see post #5.

3. And it could well not be. I'll go with the big bang. Where everything came from, I don't know but it doesn't make me want to invent a god who roasts babies in hell.

you are confusing one specific religious story with the existence of "God".

 

[PureX]

comfort =/= truth

We don't know what the truth is. My definition of "the truth" is that it's 'what is'. That would include 'what works' at least to some degree. And most people, I think, would feel the same.

infinite regress

So what?

pseudoscience

No, it's not. I may not be the best at explaining these things, but the ideas come from real science.

In the future, you might want to avoid making one-word pronouncements like this. It's rather insulting and not very informative.

 

[PureX]

If you take a primer on neuroscience you will leave that behind the way most people leave creationism behind when the take biology.

This is not offering us any sort of counterpoint. Nor is it offering us any evidence for god's non-existence. And it's a bit insulting, like: "If you knew what I know you'd be smarter than you are now".

 

[CarlinKnew]

We don't know what the truth is. My definition of "the truth" is that it's 'what is'. That would include 'what works' at least to some degree. And most people, I think, would feel the same.

If I believe there's a two ton diamond buried in my back yard, and this belief works for me, that has no bearing on its truth value. comfort =/= truth

So what?

So "god did it" explains nothing, it only pushes the question back farther. infinite regress

No, it's not. I may not be the best at explaining these things, but the ideas come from real science.

No, they don't. Source?

 

[PureX]

If I believe there's a two ton diamond buried in my back yard, and this belief works for me, that has no bearing on its truth value. comfort =/= truth

How would that belief "work" for you without the diamond being there?

When I say that the idea of "God" works for people, I mean exactly that. By living with that idea, and living according to that idea, their lives are made better, and they become better people to those around them. They are happier, more courageous, more generous, more at peace, and more forgiving as a result. These aren't just "feelings", or something we can dismiss as false comfort. This is a conceptual paradigm that can change every aspect of people's lives for the better.

AND there is no proof that the idea of God they choose to believe in doesn't actually exist. Why WOULDN'T they choose to believe, then?

So "god did it" explains nothing, it only pushes the question back farther. infinite regress

I agree. It explains nothing. It simply gives the mystery a name, and allows people to face this mystery in some way.

Again, so what? It's good that we can face this mystery that is the source and sustinance of all that exists, and maybe learn not to be so frightened of it.

What's your alternative? That we pretend it doesn't matter? That we pretend all that exists is mindless and unconscious except us? And that the glaring questions that spring up, here, are moot? That doesn't seem a very healthy thing to do.

Source?

Several books on quantum physics written over the last ten years or so.

 

[CarlinKnew]

How would that belief "work" for you without the diamond being there?

When I say that the idea of "God" works for people, I mean exactly that. By living with that idea, and living according to that idea, their lives are made better, and they become better people to those around them. They are happier, more courageous, more generous, more at peace, and more forgiving as a result. These aren't just "feelings", or something we can dismiss as false comfort. This is a conceptual paradigm that can change every aspect of people's lives for the better.

I receive the same benefits by believing that diamond's there. Again, that has no bearing on the belief's truth value.

AND there is no proof that the idea of God they choose to believe in doesn't actually exist. Why WOULDN'T they choose to believe, then?

Because there's no evidence that the idea of god they choose to believe in exists. Some people care about the truth.

I agree. It explains nothing. It simply gives the mystery a name, and allows people face this mystery in some way.

Again, so what? It's good that we can face this mystery that is the source and sustinance of all that exists, and maybe learn not to be so frightened of it.

What's your alternative? That we pretend it doesn't matter? That we pretend all that exists is mindless and unconscious except us? And that the glaring questions that spring up, here, are moot?

My alternative is not to believe things based on comfort.

Several books on quantum physics written over the last ten years or so.

If only my professors let me cite sources like this...

 

[McBell]

If only my professors let me cite sources like this...

Well perhaps those books do not have names or authors...?
Didn't think of that, now did you?

 

[elisheba]

If evolution were true there would not be any more monkeys.
" " " " the administrators at work would get their jobs by showing how little their feet resemble hands( further along evolutionarily speaking ).

 

[linwood]

1. The idea of God works for most people most of the time. Ideas that work for us on a regular basis tend to be taken as accurate.

You must see the fallacy in that concept.

2. The ordered nature of existence forces us to consider the reality of a "God". Existence is not random. How do we explain this? What is responsible for the order? And why? The answers to these questions are a mystery, and we have named this mystery "God".

I name mysteries "unknown" that`s why they are called mysteries.
If your satisfied by putting any old answer in place of evidence you`re likely to stop looking for answers.
Evolution is the answer to the order you perceive in existence.
The whole time we simply used "God" as the answer we didn`t figure it out.
One guy started figuring it out when he took the lazy answer out of the equation.

3. Energy can express itself as consciousness (take ourselves as an example), again, forcing us to consider that a consciousness could in turn express itself as energy (in much the same way as matter and energy are interchangeable). If so, all of existence could well be the "mind of God, expressed", just as the ancients claimed.

Energy doesn`t express itself.
It`s not conscious.

 

[Runewolf1973]

3. Energy can express itself as consciousness (take ourselves as an example), again, forcing us to consider that a consciousness could in turn express itself as energy (in much the same way as matter and energy are interchangeable). If so, all of existence could well be the "mind of God, expressed", just as the ancients claimed.

If our own consciousness is merely the result of electrical stimulation in the brain, then why could a single atom not have such an "electrical stimulation" that provides it with a very basic form of awareness? Our brains and bodies are ultimately no more than collection of atoms and molecules moving together, that have consciousness. We are not much different than rocks which are also a collection of atoms and molecules. How can one form have consciousness and not the other? To believe that consciousness is somehow created in the brain, to me is Pseudoscience. I don't believe anything is created, it just changes form. I believe you are right, in fact I believe that consciousness must come before even energy or matter. As Marx Planck would say, it is the "matrix of all matter".