An Atheist Speaks

[vortexring 0]

There is nothing to support the evidence of carrowolves. Yet through the simple fact of billions of people having faith in a God of some form or other, throughout history, makes the comparrison poor.

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Where is the evidence it's simply a placebo effect?

apathetic agnostic here -
either way, don't know, don't care

I could have said "as a minimum.....as a placebo effect" - it would fit in better with my personal beliefs

I wonder, why wouldn't the "placebo effect" by definition define faith healing almost perfectly? You believe it'll get better, and it does. If you are faithful, this would be a great example of tangible effects of faith.......

but, meh, I don't mind either way

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[JackC 0]

Quote

Still, it seems we now have this statement to consider;

"In fact, it turns out that religion really does make you feel better. Recent sociological studies have shown that compared with non-religious people, the actively religious are happier, live longer, suffer fewer physical and mental illnesses, and recover faster from medical interventions such as surgery. All this is bad news for those of us who are not religious, but it might at least prompt us to ask why and how religion imparts its feel-good factor. And we'll come back to that later."

Any comments to this? It kind of supports what I've been saying along doesn't it?

First you're complaining there is no references to the evidence, then you're picking out statements that support your cause! Have some fucking consistency please.

So I assume you didn't bother to read this:

the placebo effect won't kick in if a sham medication is given covertly. Similarly, praying for yourself or knowing that family and friends are praying for you seems to produce some positive results, while being secretly prayed for does not (The Lancet, vol 366, p 211).

Please note the reference you complained wasn't there in your earlier post!

[vortexring 0]

Fair enough mate - maybe it is a placebo effect.

But there isn't a single person here who can prove it either way.

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[vortexring 0]

Quote

Quote

Still, it seems we now have this statement to consider;

"In fact, it turns out that religion really does make you feel better. Recent sociological studies have shown that compared with non-religious people, the actively religious are happier, live longer, suffer fewer physical and mental illnesses, and recover faster from medical interventions such as surgery. All this is bad news for those of us who are not religious, but it might at least prompt us to ask why and how religion imparts its feel-good factor. And we'll come back to that later."

Any comments to this? It kind of supports what I've been saying along doesn't it?

First you're complaining there is no references to the evidence, then you're picking out statements that support your cause! Have some fucking consistency please.

So I assume you didn't bother to read this:

the placebo effect won't kick in if a sham medication is given covertly. Similarly, praying for yourself or knowing that family and friends are praying for you seems to produce some positive results, while being secretly prayed for does not (The Lancet, vol 366, p 211).

Please note the reference you complained wasn't there in your earlier post!

I highlighted a paragraph I felt worthy of consideration. I didn't provide it as evidence.

Poor counter argument.

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

There is nothing to support the evidence of carrowolves. Yet through the simple fact of billions of people having faith in a God of some form or other, throughout history, makes the comparrison poor.

Not only is there nothing to support the evidence of carrowolves, there is no evidence of carrowolves at all.

Are you saying that there is verifiable evidence of the existence of a deity? If you are aware of such evidence, please share. (That billions of people believe in deities is not evidence of the existence of deities.)

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[jakee 1,500]

Quote

The deduction I've made is simple. It's a simple deduction from two facts.

And that's the problem, you've only looked at two very small pieces of the picture and taken them in isolation. Without an analysis of more of the factors causing social change in the modern world your deduction is meaningless. Absolutely meaningless.

Quote

Again, did I say communities without religion couldn't be good?

Yes. "Western culture is built on christian morals; even if you're not christian - if you take away christianity, you take away our Western morals, and you breed chaos." - "As to my assertion; it's through my continual observation of an increasingly immoral society which brings around my opinion. There are numerous answers to specific issues but I believe the intrinsic reason is through moral guidance. And I believe only religion can provide this."

Quote

Any comments to this? It kind of supports what I've been saying along doesn't it?

No. Saying that people are on average a bit happier if they are religious does not support your assertions that society will crumble into chaos without it.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[jakee 1,500]

Quote

Fair enough mate - maybe it is a placebo effect. But there isn't a single person here who can prove it either way.

And neither can anyone prove or disprove the existence of Carrowolves, but you've dismissed those pretty easily haven't you me old mucker?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[JackC 0]

Quote

I highlighted a paragraph I felt worthy of consideration. I didn't provide it as evidence.

Poor counter argument.

I provided the complete article as worthy of consideration which you dismissed because you couldn't spot the references that are actually contained in the text. Then you cherry pick one part of it because it supports your point of view.

All I've seen from you is back-tracking, claiming "you can't prove I'm wrong" even when you are presented with the evidence, then cherry picking that same evidence because it appears to support your agenda. I know these gutter tactics are par for the course here in SC but I am honestly disappointed that you would choose to employ them.

[vortexring 0]

Nope - I didn't say such evidence exists - feel free to re-read my post.

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[SpeedRacer 1]

Quote

Quote

But the main thing that people are doing when they practice their religion is NOT trying to explain the physical universe, but to make themselves become spiritually closer to God.

But in many cases, the concept of god is sold specifically as an explaination for the origin of the universe and that is very definately a scientific question. These scientific questions that religion seeks to answer (and it does even if you choose to ignore it) are the things that link god to the real physical world. Now if you remove all the "scientific" questions from religion, you remove the link between god and the real world. Not really. Statements about Art, for example, are about something in the real world, but they are not Scientific statementsReligion then becomes completely and utterly esoteric, abstract and disconnected. It's not even up to the deism level of god-world linkage (and that is about as weak as you can get without actually going down the atheist route). If god ceases to be the explaination for some real world event, god ceases to be.

Internal reality is a real world event. Even if it is associatd with brainwaves etc.,it still exists, and we can't pretend that it doesn't, because everyday we ALL live as if it DOES exist. (which doesn't prove the existence of anything like God, of course. Only that our minds do exist, and we're not just a bunch of un-concious, Borg-like, organic automatons walking around).

Anyway, we don't go into church thinking, "gee, I hope the priest explains quantum physics from a Christian perspective today!"

I've been over this before. Bottom line is, you deal with your inner sense of self differently than I do, but you still do have an internal sense of self. And it is up to me, not you, to define what I believe in the area of spiritual matters.
If we were talking about mathematical matters, that would be different. That is part of External reality, and doesn't depend on one's personal experience or beliefs.


I don't go skydiving looking for explanations, I go skydiving to experience something.
I go to church to become spiritually closer to God, not to look for explanations about how atoms were formed.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[JackC 0]

Quote

Internal reality is a real world event. Even if it is associatd with brainwaves etc.,it still exists, and we can't pretend that it doesn't, because everyday we ALL live as if it DOES exist. (which doesn't prove the existence of anything like God, of course. Only that our minds do exist, and we're not just a bunch of un-concious, Borg-like, organic automatons walking around).

Anyway, we don't go into church thinking, "gee, I hope the priest explains quantum physics from a Christian perspective today!"

I've been over this before. Bottom line is, you deal with your inner sense of self differently than I do, but you still do have an internal sense of self. And it is up to me, not you, to define what I believe in the area of spiritual matters.
If we were talking about mathematical matters, that would be different. That is part of External reality, and doesn't depend on one's personal experience or beliefs.


I don't go skydiving looking for explanations, I go skydiving to experience something.
I go to church to become spiritually closer to God, not to look for explanations about how atoms were formed.

I actually agree with all of that. Every word. The only thing I would add it that your inner sense of self and what you perceive as god are one and the same. There is no external objective entity to get closer to.

[vortexring 0]

Quote

Quote

The deduction I've made is simple. It's a simple deduction from two facts.

And that's the problem, you've only looked at two very small pieces of the picture and taken them in isolation. Without an analysis of more of the factors causing social change in the modern world your deduction is meaningless. Absolutely meaningless.

Quote

Again, did I say communities without religion couldn't be good?

Yes. "Western culture is built on christian morals; even if you're not christian - if you take away christianity, you take away our Western morals, and you breed chaos." - "As to my assertion; it's through my continual observation of an increasingly immoral society which brings around my opinion. There are numerous answers to specific issues but I believe the intrinsic reason is through moral guidance. And I believe only religion can provide this."

Quote

Any comments to this? It kind of supports what I've been saying along doesn't it?

No. Saying that people are on average a bit happier if they are religious does not support your assertions that society will crumble into chaos without it.

A key word, highlighted for you above.

Going back to the original point, it's my belief society is becoming more chaotic; I've welcomed people to speak their opinion on this themselves in an earlier post. Originally it was mainly tongue-in-cheek, but then it provoked so much interest for myself, I seriously began to wonder over the reasons of increased immorality. I came to, what's for me, an obvious conclusion.

Whilst you demand more substance to this conclusion to avoid addressing my assertion, your point does remain that such a conclusion deserves more study. I agree with you. But this is SC for fucks sake. Therefore, it should be readily apparant I'm not going to go forth and conduct the serious study you insist upon. But if it's your motivation to be obtuse and cry bullshit, bullshit, to everyones statements here you think haven't been studied enough, then as I said earlier - fine.

But as it's only SC, why not demonstrate your superior intellect and explain why my statement cannot possibly be true, why it's bullshit.

Because all I'm hearing is hot air.

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

But there isn't a single person here who can prove it either way.

yeahman, now you're talking my language

don't know, don't care

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[kallend 2,029]

Quote

If that's the case, then I must admit to misunderstanding many of your posts. Could you please precisely define spiritual truth as you are using it.***

My belief is this. Spiritual(moral) Truth exists just as does scientific truth. Both have been established by God, and knowledge of both are vital to survival.This knowledge is acquired through study, faith, experimentation, and validation. Truth needs to be embraced and increased, not corrupted and molded to serve our evil purposes.

_______________________________________

The essential difference is that the existence your "spiritual truth" cannot be verified in any objective, repeatable way.

I, on the other hand, KNOW that anyone in the world can, with a little bit of effort, measure the gravitational constant and find a value that agrees with mine, within the limits of accuracy of their equipment. A FACT that has been repeated countless times. A FACT that needs no intervention by or reliance on an invisible, supernatural figment of your imagination being.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

Nope - I didn't say such evidence exists - feel free to re-read my post.

So, the reasoning you used to justify your claim that my comparison was poor is faulty reasoning.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[SpeedRacer 1]

So then Kallend, why do we bother teaching anything in the spectrum of the Humanities at all?

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[vortexring 0]

Quote

Quote

I highlighted a paragraph I felt worthy of consideration. I didn't provide it as evidence.

Poor counter argument.

I provided the complete article as worthy of consideration which you dismissed because you couldn't spot the references that are actually contained in the text. Then you cherry pick one part of it because it supports your point of view.

All I've seen from you is back-tracking, claiming "you can't prove I'm wrong" even when you are presented with the evidence, then cherry picking that same evidence because it appears to support your agenda. I know these gutter tactics are par for the course here in SC but I am honestly disappointed that you would choose to employ them.

Gutter tactics? Well, what can I say? Sorry if you've felt offended. I do see your point, and it is a fair one. The article certainly is worthy of consideration, and I appreciate you providing it. My initial reaction was indeed fairly poor, as I commented on something I hadn't fully read. But I will. And I'll provide a more considered opinion.

But claims that 'you can't prove me wrong' is simply a counter argument from people asking similiar of myself.

And yeah, I did cherry-pick a particular part which I thought worthy of consideration, as it slightly supported my side of the argument.

So I'm guilty. But gutter-tactics!? Surely not!

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[vortexring 0]

I've made my response clear enough earlier. As I've alluded to earlier. All the answers are there - go back and read them.

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[vortexring 0]

Quote

Quote

But there isn't a single person here who can prove it either way.

yeahman, now you're talking my language

don't know, don't care

Amazing how many people here think they know, though.

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

I've made my response clear enough earlier. As I've alluded to earlier. All the answers are there - go back and read them.

All I have seen in your previous posts is that billions of other people believing in something for which there is no evidence somehow makes it more credible than a brand new idea for which there is no evidence.

It's faulty logic. That's not to say that you shouldn't believe what you want, just that there is no reason atheists should need to justify their non-belief. There simply isn't any reason for them to abandon their null hypothesis.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[JackC 0]

Quote

But gutter-tactics!? Surely not!

Politicians use these tactics all the time and since they are by definition the contents of the gutter, I think the term is applicable.

Still, how can I be mad at someone with an avatar like yours. Self-portrait?

[vortexring 0]

Quote

Quote

I've made my response clear enough earlier. As I've alluded to earlier. All the answers are there - go back and read them.

All I have seen in your previous posts is that billions of other people believing in something for which there is no evidence somehow makes it more credible than a brand new idea for which there is no evidence.

It's faulty logic. That's not to say that you shouldn't believe what you want, just that there is no reason atheists should need to justify their non-belief. There simply isn't any reason for them to abandon their null hypothesis.

And it does make it more credible, whether you find that logic faulty or not. Hence it makes for a poor comparrison, hence a poor point.

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

And it does make it more credible, whether you find that logic faulty or not. Hence it makes for a poor comparrison, hence a poor point.

Unless there is more evidence, the belief is no more credible.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[vortexring 0]

Quote

Quote

But gutter-tactics!? Surely not!

Politicians use these tactics all the time and since they are by definition the contents of the gutter, I think the term is applicable.

Still, how can I be mad at someone with an avatar like yours. Self-portrait?

Jesus - I've brought myself to the level of politicians!!

But has it been an upward or downward journey?
Hey, WTF is wrong with the avatar? Handsome fucker am I not?

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'