Question for Atheists...

[mikkel_the_dane]

Logical possibility doesn't mean much. Epistemic possibility is what gives an argument or assertion weight.

Yeah, you still have to explain your system and not just claim you have one.

 

[nPeace]

Now you add another debatable thing. What is physical and what is not? Are light electricity physical or not?

That my friend is the problem materialists have. Is consciousness physical?
Questions like these result in unending debates among materialists, or naturalists.
It's not a problem with Bible students.
The question you asked is a simple one though. I don't think that's debated.
However, ask if thoughts are physical, or radio waves. These might be more interesting.

 

[nPeace]

Christians are no less walls, than Muslims, Bahais and often Hindus.

You probably haven't met them. Hence your confusion.

 

[Yerda]

Logical possibility doesn't mean much. Epistemic possibility is what gives an argument or assertion weight.

I would say that the supernatural is epistemically possible. I don't think that grants a whole lot of weight in an argument either, to be fair. Just is what it is.

Is it?

(BTW: I would say that the supernatural is a logical impossibility)

I suppose I'm inclined to think that if something supernatural was demonstrated to exist then I'd likely call it natural - and that is kinda ruling out the supernatural by definition. But if I'm interpreting the claims of the supernatural generously then I'd say that it is possible. Depends a bit on what we mean. Gods are logically possible, for instance.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

That my friend is the problem materialists have. Is consciousness physical?

Why's that supposed to be a problem?

Questions like these result in unending debates among materialists, or naturalists.

They are? Strange that I, a materialist and naturalist, never noticed.

 

[nPeace]

Give an example of one that is not.

There are a few here.

 

[ppp]

I would say that the supernatural is epistemically possible.

You would say that. But so what? There is nothing to support you other than your handsome mug and winning smile.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I suppose I'm inclined to think that if something supernatural was demonstrated to exist then I'd likely call it natural - and that is kinda ruling out the supernatural by definition.

That was what I was getting at: "the natural" isn't defined prescriptively; it's defined descriptively based on what we observe. Anything that isn't "natural" is, by definition, not anything that we have evidence of.

But if I'm interpreting the claims of the supernatural generously then I'd say that it is possible. Depends a bit on what we mean. Gods are logically possible, for instance.

But this conflates two different questions:

- is there good reason to believe that (purported "supernatural" thing) is real?

- if (purported "supernatural" thing) were real, would be natural or supernatural?

I'll consider any "supernatural" claim on its merits, but any that I accept I'll consider natural, not supernatural.

 

[Polymath257]

There are a few here.

I responded. You gave no actual examples. Proprioception, vestibular senses, and others are ALL physical senses. We even know the sense organs that pick up on these. Also, the mechanisms we use for determining hunger are known and are very definitely *physical* mechanisms.

So you have no succeeded in giving examples. Your claimed examples are all physical.

 

[Polymath257]

That my friend is the problem materialists have. Is consciousness physical?

It is a physical process in the brain, yes.

Questions like these result in unending debates among materialists, or naturalists.

Not that I have seen. In fact, there seems to be agreement by those studying these things that consciousness is a physical process. We don't know all the details, but we know more about it every year.

It's not a problem with Bible students.
The question you asked is a simple one though. I don't think that's debated.
However, ask if thoughts are physical, or radio waves. These might be more interesting.

Thoughts are physical processes. And yes, radio waves are physical (they are long wavelength light).

 

[nPeace]

It is a physical process in the brain, yes.

That's your opinion.
its nature has led to millennia of analyses, explanations and debates by philosophers, theologians, linguists, and scientists. Opinions differ about what exactly needs to be studied or even considered consciousness.

Not that I have seen. In fact, there seems to be agreement by those studying these things that consciousness is a physical process. We don't know all the details, but we know more about it every year.

Really? Agreement where?

Thoughts are physical processes. And yes, radio waves are physical (they are long wavelength light).

You seem to know everything. I guess that makes everyone who disagrees with you wrong. Right?

 

[Polymath257]

That's your opinion.
its nature has led to millennia of analyses, explanations and debates by philosophers, theologians, linguists, and scientists. Opinions differ about what exactly needs to be studied or even considered consciousness.


Really? Agreement where?

Among the scientists (not philosophers) who actually study how the brain works. I might suggest the book 'Behave' by Sapolsky.

You seem to know everything. I guess that makes everyone who disagrees with you wrong. Right?

No I don't know everything. But I do know some things. Radio waves are a physical phenomenon. That is how we produce them and detect them.

If I don't know something, I usually say so. if someone disagrees and *gives evidence*, I am more than happy to admit it when I am wrong. Are you?

 

[Audie]

That's your opinion.
its nature has led to millennia of analyses, explanations and debates by philosophers, theologians, linguists, and scientists. Opinions differ about what exactly needs to be studied or even considered consciousness.


Really? Agreement where?


You seem to know everything. I guess that makes everyone who disagrees with you wrong. Right?

"Philosophers" and " theolologians" would still
be yapping about where wind comes from, what stars are,
why we get sick, what fire and lightning are, 10,000
years from now.

It took scientists to figure it out.

I'd not be bragging on how many millenia your feckless
" theologians" waste debating and getting nowhere.

And then refuse to accept what science finds.

They've given up trying to keep earth at the center,
or perfect circle orbits of planets. They even gave up
and admitted there are sunspots!

But, 150 years on and they still deny evolution.


Figure it's just a "opinion".

Disagreement isn't always auto- wrong. Reasoned disagreement is exsential.
Disagreeing by saying "I believe in flood coz bible", or
the like though, is lame.

 

[Bird123]

No, but I do wonder why others do what they do and the basis for their beliefs and actions. Among other things, I wish to learn the truth, whether or not it is pleasant.

Even better, why would I think a 'high intelligence is even involved?

And maybe the good reason is that there is no reason. It just is how it is. Why assume a God is involved?


And, among other things, you have to be open to the possibility that no God exists. So many people *want* that to be true and are unwilling to consider the alternative. As you noted, they tend to find what they seek. It is known as confirmation bias.

You seem to be starting with the assumption that there is a God that is doing things. What is the basis for that belief? If I don't share that belief, do you conclude that I simply haven't had an open mind or I haven't thought deeply enough? What if I make the same as counter claims?

Yes, on a journey to Discover the Real Truth one must be open to all possibilities. Unless one has Discovered the Real Truth, the possibility that God does not exist must be included.

As I became an adult, I realized so much of religion did not add up. I started my journey to Discovery at this point. Yes, I was open for any possibility. I simply wanted the Real Truth regardless of what that might be.

Where to start? In a time-based causal universe, actions can be seen, even the actions of God if God really did exist. As I studied all around I worked at putting the puzzle together of why things are as they are. When one understands the actions of God, one comes to understand God and what God is doing with this world and people. Since all the physics adds up perfectly, so must the people factor. The people factor is much more complicated since it carries so many more variables.

The base one must not fall below is that everything must add up perfectly. Ebb and Flow of knowledge helps put the pieces together. You know. If I were to build a car, there are things all cars must have: an engine, a way to steer, a way to stop, and a place to sit or ride.

When you open one door, it leads to more doors that can be opened. A understanding increases , one starts to understand God. At this point, this is all beliefs. On the other hand, if you reach a certain level of understanding, you might just get a visit from God. This is where God will no longer be a belief. You will know.

So look around you. The knowledge exists around us all. It waits to be Discovered. On the other hand, each chooses for themselves what they want to Discover. As for me, I have always been one who had to know.

Now, don't get all worried. I have found no religion that actually understands God at all. Further, we all already know God whether we know we know or not. Understand and the view of this world changes. This world is not a mess. This world is a Masterpiece!!!

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

 

[Bird123]

And what makes you think that is a true statement? From what I can see, it is clearly false (because there is no evidence spirits even exist).

And, to me, it looks like a huge case of confirmation bias. Can you give actual evidence otherwise?

I have pointed you on my last reply where you can Discover all the evidence you need for yourself.
That's what I see. It's very clear!!

 

[Bird123]

I don't believe you. I don't even believe that you are capable of knowning such

Find a nice quiet place away from all distractions. Focus inward. Say to yourself: It's Me. This is who you really are. That physical body is no more than your transportation in this physical world.


Still having problems? Seek out the very youngest of children. Many can tell the difference from who they are and their physical self. These children must be very young. This physical world carries so much sensory input that soon one is seduced into thinking this physical world is all there is.

Look closely at the very youngest of children. They have recently left God's arms. An Observant person can see God's reflection in them,

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

 

[Polymath257]

Yes, on a journey to Discover the Real Truth one must be open to all possibilities. Unless one has Discovered the Real Truth, the possibility that God does not exist must be included.

I disagree. You do NOT have to be open to possibilities that have already been eliminated. If you have shown them to be false, there is no need to keep considering them (unless you modify the assumptions).

So, if I have considered the possibility that God exists and have eliminated it due to lack of evidence, I need not consider it *until* some evidence is presented.

As I became an adult, I realized so much of religion did not add up. I started my journey to Discovery at this point. Yes, I was open for any possibility. I simply wanted the Real Truth regardless of what that might be.

Good. Now, how did you eliminate falsehoods?

Where to start? In a time-based causal universe, actions can be seen, even the actions of God if God really did exist.

So God *is* detectable. That means there *is* evidence.

As I studied all around I worked at putting the puzzle together of why things are as they are. When one understands the actions of God, one comes to understand God and what God is doing with this world and people. Since all the physics adds up perfectly, so must the people factor. The people factor is much more complicated since it carries so many more variables.

Hmmm...that does not follow. Just because physics have fairly simple rules does NOT mean that humans do. Nor need human society 'add up' in the same way.

The base one must not fall below is that everything must add up perfectly. Ebb and Flow of knowledge helps put the pieces together. You know. If I were to build a car, there are things all cars must have: an engine, a way to steer, a way to stop, and a place to sit or ride.

I suspect that you use 'adding up perfectly' in a different way than I do.

When you open one door, it leads to more doors that can be opened. A understanding increases , one starts to understand God.

That assumes you attribute everything to God to start with. Why would someone do that?

At this point, this is all beliefs. On the other hand, if you reach a certain level of understanding, you might just get a visit from God. This is where God will no longer be a belief. You will know.

Such is the claim. Any actual evidence that would convince a skeptic?

So look around you. The knowledge exists around us all. It waits to be Discovered. On the other hand, each chooses for themselves what they want to Discover. As for me, I have always been one who had to know.

I agree. And one of the things I have discovered is that most concept of God are senseless and the others are simply unbelievable.

Now, don't get all worried. I have found no religion that actually understands God at all. Further, we all already know God whether we know we know or not. Understand and the view of this world changes. This world is not a mess. This world is a Masterpiece!!!

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

Sounds again like confirmation bias to me. You see what you are looking for and don't see what you are not.

Have you tried to prove your ideas about God to be wrong? if so, in what ways?

 

[Polymath257]

Find a nice quiet place away from all distractions. Focus inward. Say to yourself: It's Me. This is who you really are. That physical body is no more than your transportation in this physical world.

That is your claim. But how did you arrive at that conclusion?

I have found that my physical body *is* me. My thoughts are produced by my physical body. My sensations are produced by my physical body. Etc. Nothing is left after the physical body is put aside.

Still having problems? Seek out the very youngest of children. Many can tell the difference from who they are and their physical self. These children must be very young. This physical world carries so much sensory input that soon one is seduced into thinking this physical world is all there is.

Look closely at the very youngest of children. They have recently left God's arms. An Observant person can see God's reflection in them,

Yes, I always go to those who don't know anything to find the truth......

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

Uh huh.

 

[Polymath257]

I have pointed you on my last reply where you can Discover all the evidence you need for yourself.
That's what I see. It's very clear!!

And I have searched and found the concepts of God to be worthless and delusional.

 

[Bird123]

I think for myself. But believers, like yourself, don't. You don;t follow a God, you follow some religious framework that others designed and spread as truth. You don't understand how you do this.

Why are you asking me for answers that only a theist should know? Notice you offer no answers to your own questions. Why did your God design genes that cause cancer in children? Why did your God create flesh eating bacteria? Explain the purpose.

If your God exists it acts shy, or likes to play hide and seek, but no one ever finds it. Oh many claim to to find God, but these mortals don't behave in a way that impresses anyone that they claim is true. I'd think if some mortal actually found God that they would be remarkable humans with an astounding wisdom. Instead we see arrogance and other human flaws.

That's why so many different religious people find different Gods.

That's how children find evidence of the Tooth Fairy in the money under their pillow, or find Santa in the present under the tree. How do you explain colored eggs hidden in the bushes? Amazing the truths we find.

Are you open to the possibility that your religious beliefs are false? Be honest.

And you offer no illumination. At least cancer and bacterias are real. What can you show about your God that supposedly caused them, and deliberately harm people? Go on. Answer. It's what you see and it's clear, answer it.

I have found no religion that understands God at all. This means you can walk in a different direction.

You still point to others. Do you seek others to convince you to believe? I am doing things much different. I am pointing you in a direction by which you can Discover for yourself.

Think beyond you having it made. Look for the results and the changes that occur from the actions all around you.

Without understanding, you will be as confused as those relying on beliefs instead of what actually is and exists around us all.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!