Poll: The best argument against God, capital G.

[mikkel_the_dane]

There is no testable alternative explanation.
And the bio-electro-chemical model is
testable, & has yielded fascinating results.

Now if you can express the meaning of fascination in purely bio-electro-chemical terms and not use first person subjective terms like fascinating.
So here is the test: Speak only in objective scientific terms for the actual bio-electro-chemical terms also as you claim fascinating.

 

[Revoltingest]

Now if you can express the meaning of fascination in purely bio-electro-chemical terms and not use first person subjective terms like fascinating.
So here is the test: Speak only in objective scientific terms for the actual bio-electro-chemical terms also as you claim fascinating.

It's above my pay grade.

Think of it as analogous to knowing the Earth revolves
around the Sun. I can't explain in scientific terms how
general relativity makes it happen, but results of orbital
mechanics are still knowable to us uneducated sub-geniuses.

Is it useful to pose challenges that you know I cannot meet?
Perhaps you think that asking a question I can't answer
disproves what I say, & validates your view, eh.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

It's above my pay grade.

Think of it as analogous to knowing the Earth revolves
around the Sun. I can't explain in scientific terms how
general relativity makes it happen, but results of orbital
mechanics are still knowable to us uneducated sub-geniuses.

Is it useful to pose challenges that you know I cannot meet?
Perhaps you think that asking a question I can't answer
disproves what I say, & validates your view, eh.

Well, you could google it and find an explanation that is written in purely formal scientific terms for the subject as hand. That would count. You don't have to do it yourself, just link to a site where it is done.

 

[Revoltingest]

Well, you could google it and find an explanation that is written in purely formal scientific terms for the subject as hand. That would count. You don't have to do it yourself, just link to a site where it is done.

Why would I bother?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Why would I bother?

Because you claim you stated a fact. And that I couldn't make a test, you couldn't solve for your claim. I have done so and so far you have failed the test.

Now stop expressing yourself in first person subjective terms. You just do what you claim is a fact or if you can't do it, it is not a fact.
It is the same when theists claim their God is a fact. I ask for evidence. I just did the same with your claim of a fact.

 

[Revoltingest]

Because you claim you stated a fact. And that I couldn't make a test, you couldn't solve for your claim. I have done so and so far you have failed the test.

Now stop expressing yourself in first person subjective terms. You just do what you claim is a fact or if you can't do it, it is not a fact.
It is the same when theists claim their God is a fact. I ask for evidence. I just did the same with your claim of a fact.

You're not offering much incentive to discuss anything.
It seems like only bickering over nebulous arcane things.
I'm operating on an IQ south of 70, so don't be so demanding.

 

[Zwing]

While we cannot even conceive of the existence of the brain and it’s functions independently of the mind…

Rather, I think the truth is vice-versa of this. We cannot conceive of the existence of the mind and its functions independently of the brain. Cognitive science is showing this more and more every day, and anybody who has experienced an older loved one with dementia, such as that which results from Alzheimer’s disease, knows this intuitively.

…(because it is in the mind, and only in the mind, that conceptions are manifested)…

True , and this is the manifestation of the u deying reality of brain activity.

…to reduce the physical to the mental, as idealists do, is to completely abandon external, mind-independent reality. Thus we slip into the intolerable despair of solipsism.

Well said, and true, but not particularly relevant to the idea of the mind as the product of brain activity.

So we arrive at the point where mind and body, consciousness and objective physical reality, are interdependent.

Yes, very good! Thoughts and emotions in the mind which are produced by the brain do, indeed, affect the body, including having a reflexive effect of the function of the brain itself. This is why someone who is severely depressed feels muddled, and that they cannot think properly.

 

[Zwing]

I’m operating on an IQ south of 70…

Hahaha, you’re full of ****! Feel ‘ya, though.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

You're not offering much incentive to discuss anything.
It seems like only bickering over nebulous arcane things.
I'm operating on an IQ south of 70, so don't be so demanding.

Then learn to not claim something you can't back up. We are in debate and that demand is so for us all and not just the religious ones.

 

[Revoltingest]

Then learn to not claim something you can't back up.

Tis not that I can't.
You're just not worth the effort.
(It's because you bicker too much.)

 

[dybmh]

Even if a god were non physical, for it to be omnipotent, it would need to be able to exert infinite power in the physical realm. Infinite power can't exist in the physical realm as it would need infinite energy which would fold spacetime into a black hole. Omnipotence is physically (and logically) impossible.

Ummm, that same argument cuts both ways. Omnipotence would be able to prohibit folding spacetime into a blackhole. It seems simple to me, using omnipotence, God reduces itself into a manifestation to interact with the physical world. This occurs while remaining distant in the majority of its being, while a minority of its being reaches out to the physical. Assuming that there is a physical distance, which is unlikely, imo.

Just like a human getting onto the floor to play with a pet or a child. Or a teacher, who lowers their intellect to the students level in order to explain a complicated subject.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Tis not that I can't.
You're just not worth the effort.
(It's because you bicker too much.)

Yeah, I know. You are fond of your short dirty claims of facts, that you believe in. Where as I bicker too much, because I demand evidence, when you do that.

Such is life.

 

[Revoltingest]

Yeah, I know. You are fond of your short dirty claims of facts, that you believe in. Where as I bicker too much, because I demand evidence, when you do that.

Such is life.

You spend too much time thinking & posting about me.
It would be creepy if that weren't overwhelmed by the tedium.
BTW, you could put me on <ignore>.
Then you wouldn't endure my "dirty claims".

 

[Left Coast]

What is the difference between "no evidence" and "divine hiddenness"?

A person might see evidence for God in a variety of things: various arguments for God's existence, miracles, what their holy books say, etc. Divine hiddenness is more the idea that the evidence is not more conclusive or obvious.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

You spend too much time thinking & posting about me.
It would be creepy if that weren't overwhelmed by the tedium.
BTW, you could put me on <ignore>.
Then you wouldn't endure my "dirty claims".

Well, you are such fun to play with. But you are not the only one I play with.

 

[Left Coast]

Even if a god were non physical, for it to be omnipotent, it would need to be able to exert infinite power in the physical realm. Infinite power can't exist in the physical realm as it would need infinite energy which would fold spacetime into a black hole.

The asterisk there is that this is what we understand right now, pertaining to physical things. We don't know how those descriptive rules change if the non-physical interacts with the physical.

Omnipotence is physically (and logically) impossible.

That's gonna be tough to prove.

 

[Revoltingest]

Well, you are such fun to play with.

Lucky me.

 

[Revoltingest]

That's gonna be tough to prove.

Can a god make a burrito so hot he (she?) can't eat it?
Yes or no....a contradiction.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Lucky me.

Well, you are not alone as to whom I play with and you are only limited fun. But so am I.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Can a god make a burrito so hot he (she?) can't eat it?
Yes or no....a contradiction.

Yeah, first problem you run into is the induction problem from philosophy. But that is not the only one.