Question for Atheists...

[Polymath257]

The point here, is that mental and physical, are not the same.

Yes. The mental is a subset of the collection of physical processes.

Whatever it's called, the natures are different. That's why it's debated.
They can't pin it down to just physical.

What part do you think is missing?

What Is a Thought Made of?
...there are two possible definitions of a thought. Either it's a part of the material world - physical patterns of electricity generated by the neurons in our brains - or it's a part of something else, some kind of cosmic consciousness that floats around the Universe completely undetectable by the instruments of modern science.

What Is a Thought?
What thoughts are remains mysterious from a neuroscientific point of view.

Not sure, your word has any basis for acceptance.
When am I going to see something more than your claims? Anytime?

Here are a few articles:

ScienceDaily: Search Archives

Search ScienceDaily's archives of articles by keyword or phrase.

www.sciencedaily.com

Who says spirit is non-material?

Um, most people?

A different FORM OF ENERGY does not mean non-material... just because you don't know of it, nor understand it.

Hmmm...OK, can you give an example? What makes the E&M emissions from a person special as compared to those from a radio?

 

[Polymath257]

No. It's not.

Hee Hee.


Now, it's a "small dog"? You amaze me, Poly.

You insist on misunderstanding. There is nothing I can do against that.

All still subjective.

In that case, ALL evidence is subjective. The fact that I see a chair in my room isn't actually evidence that there is a chair in my room because my perceptions are subjective.

I really hope you aren't going to that level.

Your evolutionary tree tells us as much. Your ideas don't mean the evidence support them.

Correct. That they are my ideas doesn't mean the evidence supports them. And yet, the evidence does, in fact, support them. This is witnessed in multiple scientific articles over the last century and a half. And, even when people try to prove basic evolutionary theory wrong, they always fail.

Creationist fail because they don't understand the theory well enough to make serious arguments. others fail because of the weight of the evidence.

We have evidence of a creator in the world around us, and the Bible. That evidence paints a different picture from what you believe.


Now you are resorting to reasoning. Subjective. Agreed?

Um, no.

 

[Polymath257]

Don't let the bluntness fool you.
Jesus was blunt when he had to, for a reason, but that didn't mean his targets were unimportant to him.


I read small dog in a science paper. I also read wolf, in a science paper. I guess the authors were like me... not about calling big words like Pakicet... ouch. Bit my tongue.

they were giving a way to think of how large the animal was. They were NOT claiming the animal was a dog or a wolf.

I know enough about what I speak of. That's why I speak of it.
...and yes, I have understanding.

Not evident in your statements or questions.

The atheist try too hard with the demoralizing tactics. They work in warfare, yes, I know. So I understand your actions.

Pointing out that you don't understand what you are tlaking about isn't 'demoralizing tactics'. It is a suggestion that you learn a bit more so you can engage in debate.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Can you? What's the purpose of your question, if not to say we can't prove anything?
So why are persons coming on a forum and dogmatically says the equivalent of ?this is so, and that is so"?
How do you suggest we respond to that? Not. Prove it? Or should we say, "Oh. Okay. We don't know, So, maybe"?

I believe God is, because the design in nature speaks of a designer, and as said earlier - purpose.
If one believes different that's fine, but don't preach it as fact. Otherwise, I'll ask you to prove it.
You can't? Then why push it at people as if you know? Ego?

When I say you, I don't mean you Evangelicalhumanist... unless you are guilty.

And the plain fact of the matter is, you actually can't "prove" an enormous amount of stuff about the real world. (Formal mathematical and symbolic logic systems provide ways to "prove" much, but as Kurt Godel showed, they are incomplete by definition.)

But what you are failing to notice is that you can provide bucket loads, tanker loads, ocean loads of evidence to suggest that a lot of things, even though you may not be able to "absolutely prove" they are true, are at least worth giving a lot of credence to. Gravity, for example -- we have enough evidence that it works that I'm willing to bet you don't ever attempt to walk of the roofs of tall buildings.

Now, when I honestly "don't know," (in the sense that I've just given, not in the sense of being able to formally prove or disprove), I do say so. I do not know how life began (abiogenesis), and with my present level of bio-chemical knowledge, I'm unlikely to ever know. I've read much on the topic, understood a little of it, but cannot say anything dogmatic about it. Evolution, on the other hand, is something that I have studied in depth (again, at my level of scientific sophistication, which is slight compared to those working in the field), and the evidence before my eyes is absolutely overwhelming.

But you see -- I actually have been looking at that evidence, while you have been trying desperately to ignore it. And ignoring something is the world's most perfect means of acquiring no knowledge about it.

So let's talk about "purpose." Let's talk about the "purpose" behind all the forest fires last your in the western US, and this year in Canada, and the billions of lives that were casually wiped out, in great fear and agony, and with stupified ignorance of why they were dying. Or the dear caught under a fallen limb, unable to escape, dying slowly of starvation, never understanding what is happening, but in misery all the same. Let's talk about the "purpose" of the icheumon wasp, and why it has to lay it's eggs in a living creature that will die an agonizing death, instead of in a lump of already dead organic material, which other creatures can do. Let's talk about the "purpose" of all the parasites that can cause so much misery to both humans and animals -- blindness, terrible diseases, even more terrible deaths.

Let's talk about the "purpose" of that most intelligent creature, the octopus -- so very clever, but usually dying as soon as it produces offspring.

You see, you can talk about "purpose," but you could not possibly give "God's purpose" for any of the things I've mentioned. And if you can't tell me WHAT the "purpose" is, it is only a blind guess on your part that there IS such a "purpose." Nothing more than a blind guess. You don't know THAT it is if you don't know WHAT it is.

 

[Bird123]

And why do you assume that is its purpose instead of a side effect? After all, the vast majority of the energy from the sun simply goes off into space.

And you assume that the benefits to us is the purpose? That seems incredibly egotistical.

A benefit is not the same as a purpose. You assume that benefits to us means there is a purpose. That seems highly unlikely. I see it as far more likely that we are a side effect with no purpose.

Doesn't the complexity of so very very many side effects coming together so well spell purpose? Why do you stop looking after effects? Do you take effort to look further?

Ebb and Flow of knowledge: If I were to build a car, there are some things all cars must have, an engine, a way to steer, braking, and a place to sit. Get the idea?

If I were to build a planet for people, what would I need for that? Look around you. Just like a car everything that is needed is here. Everything fits. How many things do you see that do not fit? Doesn't every single thing needed being here reflects Intelligence?

What do you see? If I placed a car in caveman days, the car would have no more purpose than a rock. How many concepts would the caveman be blind to see?

Now mankind can build a car. On the other hand, God is very High Intelligence. High Intelligence would create the entire universe from a single point to unfold or evolve into what we have today and beyond. The real genius comes when not only did God create the universe but God did so in a way that mankind will be able to figure it all out in time.

The knowledge is all here. It surrounds us all. We must all struggle to widen our view and advance our thinking in order that we see far beyond that of a caveman. This is something each must choose for themselves. The knowledge waits to be Discovered not merely believed or accepted!!!

An Action of God: God created the world so that Brains win in the end. Why did God do this? Simple. It fits so very well into God's system at work and the Purpose involved.

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

Oh, when I was the caveman, I was the one taking it apart to see how it worked in order to Discover the purpose.

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

 

[Bird123]

"This is rather as if you imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, 'This is an interesting world I find myself in - an interesting hole I find myself in - fits me rather neatly, doesn't it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!'"

-- Douglas Adams​

I am speaking to What is!! rather than things imagined. Imagination can be fun, however it doesn't always deal in Truth and Reality.

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

 

[Bird123]

Seek what? Define it. What are the leads? Why do think the thing to seek is even there to be found?



What does this mean?



Again, this abstract vaguery isn't going anywhere...




I don't know in advance what the answers are.
I go where the evidence leads. I don't decide before hand what I want to be true.


It doesn't sound very clear.

To seek is to look and search. How far would mankind be today if everyone waited for others to serve up everything to be believed, accepted or rejected? True Discovery, along with advancing forward takes work. Wisdom is acquired along the struggles to acquire knowledge.

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

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

If I were to build a planet for people, what would I need for that? Look around you. Just like a car everything that is needed is here. Everything fits. How many things do you see that do not fit? Doesn't every single thing needed being here reflects Intelligence?

A complete failure to see it from the reverse perspective: we are here because we evolved in this environment, and we evolved to make use of what was here. In fact, this planet did not, at its beginning, have anything like the ability to support an animal such as us. For example, Earth’s first atmosphere had lots of water vapor but had almost no oxygen. Can you breathe water vapor -- and will it sustain you like oxygen does?

 

[Bird123]

All "purpose" I see in the world has been super-imposed on it by myself or other humans.

I see no purpose at all in anything absent a human brain that super-imposes that purpose unto whatever it is.

WE give meaning to things.
Things don't have meaning "inherently", independently from human brains..

When a car is built, every part has a purpose. The only purpose you might see is that it goes. Now if those parts you see no purpose in suddenly disappear, you are stuck on the side of the road realizing things have purpose that you have no clue about. As long as the car goes, you can still be blind to purpose.

Do you choose to be blind? Why is that?

Let God keep those priceless things with purpose we don't realize keep working at least until we can figure out just how to fix things. It's never fun being stranded in one's ignorance. It makes me want to go Discover something new!! On the other hand, we should not worry. God's system needs these thing to work just as we do.

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

 

[Bird123]

A complete failure to see it from the reverse perspective: we are here because we evolved in this environment, and we evolved to make use of what was here. In fact, this planet did not, at its beginning, have anything like the ability to support an animal such as us. For example, Earth’s first atmosphere had lots of water vapor but had almost no oxygen. Can you breathe water vapor -- and will it sustain you like oxygen does?

You are forgetting to look at the process. An apple tree will make apples. On the other hand, you can't expect apples when it is a seed or a seedling.

Look closer. It has never been POOF creation. The universe unfolds into what is today and beyond just like that seed will one day bring apples.

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

 

[Subduction Zone]

When a car is built, every part has a purpose. The only purpose you might see is that it goes. Now if those parts you see no purpose in suddenly disappear, you are stuck on the side of the road realizing things have purpose that you have no clue about. As long as the car goes, you can still be blind to purpose.

Do you choose to be blind? Why is that?

Let God keep those priceless things with purpose we don't realize keep working at least until we can figure out just how to fix things. It's never fun being stranded in one's ignorance. It makes me want to go Discover something new!! On the other hand, we should not worry. God's system needs these thing to work just as we do.

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

So what? That is a bad analogy since there is no evidence that the Earth was "built'. I do not think that you know how to make a proper analogy or even know what evidence is.

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

 

[Subduction Zone]

You are forgetting to look at the process. An apple tree will make apples. On the other hand, you can't expect apples when it is a seed or a seedling.

Look closer. It has never been POOF creation. The universe unfolds into what is today and beyond just like that seed will one day bring apples.

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

No, that is only evidence that there are apples and that they have a life cycle. It is definitely not 'PROOF" nor is it even evidence.

Would you like to learn some of the basics of reasoning?

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

You are forgetting to look at the process. An apple tree will make apples. On the other hand, you can't expect apples when it is a seed or a seedling.

Look closer. It has never been POOF creation. The universe unfolds into what is today and beyond just like that seed will one day bring apples.

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

If you look at next to nothing in a complex system, yes, I imagine it might be "very clear." The trick is to look at it all. And that's scary, isn't it?

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Would you like to learn some of the basics of reasoning?

Wish you hadn't asked that question -- it's clear that lots of members would regard that as pretty horrifying. And yet, you and I can't even communicate sensibly with them until they do.

Let's be honest, it does make us want to give up, sometimes, doesn't it? It sure does me, anyways.

 

[Polymath257]

Doesn't the complexity of so very very many side effects coming together so well spell purpose? Why do you stop looking after effects? Do you take effort to look further?

Absolutely. Do you?

For example, if, as you claim, the purpose of the sun is to provide energy to the Earth, why is the whole process so wasteful? If a human engineer had made an energy source that is that inefficient (in terms of getting the energy to the purpose at hand, they would be immediately ridiculed as being the worst engineer around.

Life leads to complexity through feedback loops. it takes advantage of side effects in the process of evolution. Again, no purpose is require3d, simply benefit.

Ebb and Flow of knowledge: If I were to build a car, there are some things all cars must have, an engine, a way to steer, braking, and a place to sit. Get the idea?

Yes, absolutely.

If I were to build a planet for people, what would I need for that? Look around you. Just like a car everything that is needed is here. Everything fits. How many things do you see that do not fit? Doesn't every single thing needed being here reflects Intelligence?

No, things hardly fit at all. For example, the early Earth was quite inhospitable to life. There have been multiple times when life almost went extinct for various reasons. So, the planet as it was originally 'mde' could NOT have been 'for people'. And the fact that it took almost 4.5 billion years to get to people suggests that we are NOT the purpose, but rather a side effect.

What do you see? If I placed a car in caveman days, the car would have no more purpose than a rock. How many concepts would the caveman be blind to see?

That caveman would be amazed at the transportation allowed.

Now mankind can build a car. On the other hand, God is very High Intelligence. High Intelligence would create the entire universe from a single point to unfold or evolve into what we have today and beyond. The real genius comes when not only did God create the universe but God did so in a way that mankind will be able to figure it all out in time.

Of course that is the claim. But what is the actual evidence? Considering that humans have only been around for a couple hundred thousand years and the universe is almost 14 billion years old, it hardly seems reasonable to think we are the purpose. Even life seems an unlikely purpose given that the vast majority of the universe is very hostile to life.

The knowledge is all here. It surrounds us all. We must all struggle to widen our view and advance our thinking in order that we see far beyond that of a caveman. This is something each must choose for themselves. The knowledge waits to be Discovered not merely believed or accepted!!!

Yes, knowledge is all around us. The raw data from which we can understand things is there. We just have to be careful about misinterpretation and reading too much into it (something we civilized apes are prone to do).

An Action of God: God created the world so that Brains win in the end. Why did God do this? Simple. It fits so very well into God's system at work and the Purpose involved.

Brains win? You must be kidding! Brains are limited to one planet that we know of and are developed to a 'higher' level in only a couple of species.

You seem to think humans are special, but on a cosmic scale we are insignificant in the extreme.

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

Oh, when I was the caveman, I was the one taking it apart to see how it worked in order to Discover the purpose.

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

You seem very sure of your position. Are you sure you have been skeptical enough?

 

[ratiocinator]

I am speaking to What is!! rather than things imagined. Imagination can be fun, however it doesn't always deal in Truth and Reality.

You seem to have missed the point entirely.

You are looking at things in the world, asking "how does this help us to survive?" and concluding that answer represents its purpose. This is can never be anything but a baseless assumption (at best). Just like a puddle thinking the hole it's in was made to fit its shape, rather than its shape being the result of the hole it's in.

 

[PureX]

Wish you hadn't asked that question -- it's clear that lots of members would regard that as pretty horrifying. And yet, you and I can't even communicate sensibly with them until they do.

Let's be honest, it does make us want to give up, sometimes, doesn't it? It sure does me, anyways.

The problem is that you aren't trying to communicate with them, you're trying to correct their errant thinking. (You being the judge of what is errant thinking, an all.)

 

[Audie]

The problem is that you aren't trying to communicate with them, you're trying to correct their errant thinking.

As if you ever do differently except maybe
with a sycophant.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

The problem is that you aren't trying to communicate with them, you're trying to correct their errant thinking. (You being the judge of what is errant thinking, an all.)

That is certainly not the case. Just look at my post #704 Question for Atheists.... That is a clear example of trying to communicate, not by showing what was wrong, but by reasoning towards what is more likely to be right, based on the evidence we all have available to us.

 

[PureX]

That is certainly not the case. Just look at my post #704 Question for Atheists.... That is a clear example of trying to communicate, not by showing what was wrong, but by reasoning towards what is more likely to be right, based on the evidence we all have available to us.

Evidence isn't God. Especially to those who believe in a God.

You think it's all about the physical evidence, because that's what it's all about for you. Then you get frustrated when they don't care about the physical evidence as you do. They have their own non-objective, non-material evidence. And that's more important to them.