 |
Business Directory |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Coupons |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Classifieds |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
| | Author | Messages | |
Veritas
Posts:250
 | | 09/24/2007 10:18 AM |
 Alert | | OK ... not sold on the rigor of this test, but for the sake of discussion, what does this tell us about science versus faith and the whole God question? | | | |
|
| | brakers
Posts:20
| | 09/24/2007 10:54 AM |
Alert | Posted By Veritas on 09/24/2007 10:18 AM
OK ... not sold on the rigor of this test, but for the sake of discussion, what does this tell us about science versus faith and the whole God question?
Humans are not special/unique when it comes to being self-aware. We're just monkeys, remember?
| | | |
|
| | Veritas
Posts:250
| | 09/24/2007 11:16 AM |
Alert | Well, we're not "just monkeys". While it's true that the "body plan" or what might be called somatic DNA are 99% the same, the DNA that makes us different from apes is no more than 74% identical. I know that it's been reported that we're 99% the same as monkeys, but that is an omission of facts that are widely known by scientists in that field. Pretty much anything with two legs and two arms will have a high correlation between somatic DNA.
Anyways, IF it were true that humans were not special as the only creatures who are self aware, how does this prove evolution or disprove God, faith,etc.? | | | |
|
| | Trogdor!
Posts:294
| | 09/24/2007 11:56 AM |
Alert | Veritas,
Have you read the book? | |
 | |
|
| | Veritas
Posts:250
| | 09/24/2007 3:14 PM |
Alert | No, I have not read the book and probably will not for some time ... too many other books/journals to read and other things to do -- and I've read two other books by him. Also, I'm hesitant to get his new book because of the excerpts that I've read (from his own site where you can read a random page from the book), all of his characterizations of faith and theology are contrary to reality. It's the same old tired argument from ignorance where atheists cling to statements and doctrine from the fringes of theism (Christianity) and wave them like banners even though most Christians don't think this way and Christian theology certainly does not make those statements. Honestly, it reads more like a continuous insult to theists than a responsible treatise on anything.
Hence, for now, I choose to quiz folks like you (who take him seriously) in hopes that by asking some relatively simple questions about what you think he meant and what you think you mean with regard to your own statements, that I can better understand this phenomena. | | | |
|
| | BeerLeague2
Posts:111
| | 09/24/2007 7:57 PM |
Alert | Veritas, you'd really need to read the entire book to have a logical, intelligent discussion on it. It is really not a "continuous insult to theists" in any way. It's a examination of the origins and purpose of religious/superstitious beliefs--to put it in very simplistic terms.
Dawkins' characterizations of faith and theology may be contrary to YOUR reality, but not mine or those of the millions of other atheists worldwide. Our reality is based on science, facts, probabilities and logic.
Don't be afraid to read this book or explore other scientific works. Opening your mind can certainly be scary and take you out of your comfort zone, but Dawkins is one of the great scientific minds of our times and at the very least, you will be just a little bit smarter for having read his book  | | | |
|
|  | Jason
Posts:3378
| | 09/24/2007 8:22 PM |
Alert | Dawkins' characterizations of faith and theology may be contrary to YOUR reality,
No, they are contrary to reality. There is no "your" reality and "my" reality, just "reality". And there are outright false claims in his books.
Atheistic beliefs are based on selective acceptance and limited understanding of science, facts, probabilities and logic.
Fixed that for you. | |
Joined: Jul 2005 | |
|
| | BeerLeague2
Posts:111
| | 09/24/2007 8:38 PM |
Alert | Did you read the book Jason?
What christian apologist website did you get that lame quote from? | | | |
|
| | Veritas
Posts:250
| | 09/24/2007 9:33 PM |
Alert | BeerLeague2, no ...
1. I don't need to read his book (right now) to have a "logical, intelligent discussion" on it ... it is my business as a college professor (math & physics) to have logical and intelligent discussions. Because I am equipped with the formal systems of science and logic, I need only sample his work (for now) in order to deal with it responsibly. Besides, I've read plenty of Dawkin's to know that he really is not saying anything new in the God Delusion. Also, I will eventually read his book (as stated in my post), but not before some more important things are done. Furthermore, I was asking you questions about what you thought, not him!
2. Actually, based on my sampling and the reviews (not by theists), it is a continuous insult against theism. The very title is an insult to theists. This doesn't bother me much anymore because I'm used to the fringe of Christianity being heralded as the mainstream of Christianity even though it is not representative.
3. My reality is also based on science, facts, probabilities and logic ... and something that transcends those things, namely, spirituality. BTW, can you define science? define probability? state the nine rules of inference for first-order logic? say anything about second-order logic? The second sentence in your second paragraph seems a little imperious and therefore a lot like an insult.
4. I'm certainly not afraid to read Dawkin's book ... if you had read my post more closely, you would have taken note of the fact that I have other things to read and do, like read the journals Nature and Science ... ever heard of them? I have two daughters aged 3 & 5 ... they're way more important than reading a well known atheist do what he's always done.
5. Your last paragraph actually is insulting. You assume that because I am holding a view contrary to Dawkin's, that I am a fearful and uneducated dolt.
6. What makes a great scientific mind? Newton and Einstein are great scientific minds ... Dawkins is certainly a smart guy, but I do not put him in the league of "great scientific minds".
7. Why would reading ANY book "necessarily" make one smarter? It might mean that a person is more aware of a viewpoint, but awareness and intelligence are very different phenomena.
8. Could you please just answer the question that I asked before you accused me of being stupid, fearful and closed-minded? | | | |
|
| | Jason
Posts:3378
| | 09/24/2007 10:23 PM |
Alert | Posted By BeerLeague2 on 09/24/2007 8:38 PM
Did you read the book Jason?
My statements are completely valid based on the portions that I've read.
What christian apologist website did you get that lame quote from?
None, whereas we all know where you're getting your falsifications from. | |
Joined: Jul 2005 | |
|
| | Veritas
Posts:250
| | 09/25/2007 7:35 AM |
Alert | BeerLeague, can you cite where, in any "religious book", that it directs followers to be as stupid as you say?
Also, please define religion for me ... it seems that there is a great deal of equivocation happening with this term ... we should establish what that term means in this discussion. | | | |
|
| | Veritas
Posts:250
| | 09/25/2007 7:43 AM |
Alert | BeerLeague, when I speak of "contrary to reality", I mean the truth about faith and theology, NOT the basis of physical reality. He, and most atheists have a twisted view of what faith and theology truly are and this provokes an irrational response. In some cases, this irrational response is warranted by virtue of the fact that certain representatives of theism fail to convey the right message for some reason. The failure of a representative is a very different thing than the failure of an idea.
But with regard to Reality, there are some questions that you should answer for yourself and for the sake of this discussion.
1. What is physical reality and how do we know it exists?
2. Is there a spiritual reality and how can we know about it?
3. What are some adequate tests for truth? | | | |
|
| | Dan Rather
Posts:53
| | 09/25/2007 7:49 AM |
Alert | | You can have a debate about a book you didn't read? | |
Goodnight, weaklings. | |
|
| | Veritas
Posts:250
| | 09/25/2007 8:00 AM |
Alert | God has no parents because God is not born. The basic concept of god requires that god be infinite and eternal ... at least, this is the Christian concept as required by Scripture. Infinite and eternal entities are necessarily non-physical and separate from time. 
The fact that God necessarily transcends the space-time continuum by virtue of His nature (or super-nature), the question of "where was God" cannot be answered any better than "what was here before the Big Bang?". Because of the limitations of our physicality, we can essentially say nothing about what is beyond space-time. (String Theory and Brane Theory only move the clam shell) 
One of us could never be infinite and eternal because we are physical; therefore, God could never be one of us. The statement "what if God were one of us" makes for a catchy tune, but it does not hold much water when it comes to truth.  | | | |
|
| | Veritas
Posts:250
| | 09/25/2007 8:12 AM |
Alert | It's clear that you don't really understand the Big Bang Theory.
Essentially, all of the space,time, matter and energy that we currently observe in the physical universe came into existence from no-where at no-time giving "birth" to space and time itself.
The "infinite density" that you speak of is our best guess at the nature of the initial singularity. It's actually better than a guess, but my point is that a singularity from which all space and time emerge from defies physical law. In other words, natural science cannot "process" the idea because it is not subject to natural cause and effect cycles and therefore unable to be accessed methodologically by science. Ultimately, it demands a supernatural explanation and natural science does not deal with those ... but philosophy does.
So, having said that, why is it "not thinking" to ask what was here before the Big Bang? Seems like that question requires some reasoning that is higher than what science can give. | | | |
|
| | Veritas
Posts:250
| | 09/25/2007 8:26 AM |
Alert | Yes, because I am debating/discussing what others (y'all) are saying about it.
Atheists do this all of the time when debating/discussion what Christians believe ... but they don't ever read the Bible. I just wanted to see what that was like before I read the book.
But since the book has been extensively quoted, mostly outside of this forum, I do not feel bad about analyzing those quotes in here. As I said in an original post, I'm not about to re-prioritize my schedule so that I can read this book immediately. Based on my sampling of it, and my past experience reading his books, Dawkins is not really saying anything new. More or less, he has simply reorganized his own thoughts and shuffled them among the thoughts of others.
Given that I haven't read the book, perhaps it should be easier for y'all to refute what I'm saying/asking? So far, everyone is ducking my questions about the statements that y'all are making/citing with regard to Dawkins book. Furthermore, the direction that these diversions are taking us are indicative of the complexity of the topic that is larger than Dawkins, his book, you, me, etc.
The sad thing is that the words of a man are taken as "gospel" simply because (1) he is a "respected scientist", (2) his ideas resonate with you and (3) his words belittle those that you disagree with.
This does not seem like a responsible form of skepticism to me. | | | |
|
| | CliffinAZ
Posts:405
| | 09/25/2007 8:53 AM |
Alert | This promises to be a very interesting discussion, especially for someone like myself who is agnostic (i.e., haven't made up my mind).
Veritas, can you include others' quotes where applicable in your posts (it makes it easier to see what you're responding to when doing multiple posts and/or when the posts start flying back and forth)? | | | |
|
| | joe_2007
Posts:83
| | 09/25/2007 11:23 AM |
Alert | Posted By BeerLeague2 on 09/24/2007 7:57 PM Don't be afraid to read this book or explore other scientific works. Opening your mind can certainly be scary and take you out of your comfort zone, but Dawkins is one of the great scientific minds of our times and at the very least, you will be just a little bit smarter for having read his book 
BeerLeague,
I can same the same exact thing about Lee Strobel's Case for the Creator.
| | | |
|
| | BeerLeague2
Posts:111
| | 09/25/2007 10:59 PM |
Alert | Hey kids, I was a christian for 30+ years, read the bible zillions of times as I went to private christian school was forced to dissect every minute detail. I tried like hell to believe it all so I could feel like one of the gang.
But truthfully, I was embarrased by the whole ordeal most of the time. It's like I was waiting for Candid Camera to pop up in church and tell me the whole thing was a joke. I really couldn't believe that adults would buy into this stuff....it reminded me of the "Emperor's New Clothes".
Still, I WANTED to believe. I prayed and prayed and prayed and prayed. I wanted there to be a god and a jesus and a holy spirit. I wanted to be like all the christians with those nifty jesus bumper stickers on their mini-vans. I wanted to go to the trendy bible studies that all my friends and co-workers went to. I wanted to join a mega-church and wear one of those WWJD bracelets....
I yearned to have a "sky daddy" to talk to in my darkest times. I NEEDED to have an answer to the "Why are we here?" question. I REALLY DID!!!
So, I've read your books. I've walked your walk. I've decided it's not "THE TRUTH" and I now have opened my mind to science and reason. I could read a million christian apologist books, but nothing will change my mind.
I know none of the die-hard jesus fans will ever read Dawkins or Sam Harris, et al. I don't expect you to. I just started this thread to discuss the book with anyone who has read it. Not someone who has read an excerpt, or was offended by the title.
So unless someone wants to have a book discussion, I'm done with this one.
| | | |
|
| | Veritas
Posts:250
| | 09/26/2007 8:09 AM |
Alert | BeerLeague ... I'm sorry that things went this way for you ... but I know why your quest failed. Also, I'll apologize in advance if anything that I say below is harsh ... I do not say it for the sake of being harsh, but rather because I cannot help but be honest with you. The goal here is to be truthful and straightforward with you even though what I'm about to say is not entirely pleasant.
Posted By BeerLeague2 on 09/25/2007 10:59 PM
Hey kids, I was a christian for 30+ years, read the bible zillions of times as I went to private christian school was forced to dissect every minute detail. I tried like hell to believe it all so I could feel like one of the gang.
1. You can't stop being a Christian ... either you are are you aren't ... it's a forever kind of thing.
2. Dissecting the Bible IS NOT a qualifier for becoming/being a Christian.
3. We don't believe so that we can "be one of the gang" ... we believe because it's true and we sincerely want to yield to God becasue he is God ... no other reason.
Posted By BeerLeague2 on 09/25/2007 10:59 PM
But truthfully, I was embarrased by the whole ordeal most of the time. It's like I was waiting for Candid Camera to pop up in church and tell me the whole thing was a joke. I really couldn't believe that adults would buy into this stuff....it reminded me of the "Emperor's New Clothes".
4. You felt this way because your motivation to succeed was all wrong. You were not really looking for the Truth; but rather a way to "fit in" to a group that you valued for some reason. Since that reason to "fit in" was not pure, it ultimately failed and left you feeling scorched by the whole idea.
Posted By BeerLeague2 on 09/25/2007 10:59 PM
Still, I WANTED to believe. I prayed and prayed and prayed and prayed. I wanted there to be a god and a jesus and a holy spirit. I wanted to be like all the christians with those nifty jesus bumper stickers on their mini-vans. I wanted to go to the trendy bible studies that all my friends and co-workers went to. I wanted to join a mega-church and wear one of those WWJD bracelets....
5. More of the same ... why would God reveal Himself to you when you really don't want Him? You wanted the appearance of Him without the actuality of Him. Much like those little 4-cylinder cars that people trick out with loud pipes ... they sound like they perform, but they really don't.
6. Even still, God is revealed in everything from nature itslef to His Word through Scripture. Spirituality is often a mysterious thing and it is not as sensational as many pretend that it is. Life is often way too noisy to hear "the still small voice" that God predominantly uses to "speak" to His children.
7. Bottom line ... you were looking for significance in things that are insignificant. WWJD bracelets and mini-van juants to Bible Study are almost entirely meaningless ... they do not even approach the relational aspect of what true Christianity is all about. Having said that, I must admit that there is a great deal of falsehood among the groups that claim to be Christian ... falsehood in their motivations and their practices. In general, I find Christians to be sincere ... but there always seems to be a part of the group that is not. Humans are funny people.
Posted By BeerLeague2 on 09/25/2007 10:59 PM
I yearned to have a "sky daddy" to talk to in my darkest times. I NEEDED to have an answer to the "Why are we here?" question. I REALLY DID!!!
8. Again, this is why your quest did not work ... we seek God not to be our "sky daddy", but we seek God because we love Him, we believe that He is who He is and we desire to worship Him for that reason. We acknowledge our sin and our need for His forgiveness.
9. I've also been a Christian for 30+ years, but have NEVER needed to know "Why are we here?". I have certainly studied the issue from all angles (scientific and theological), but it is not anywhere near the center of my soul. I have also fallen into the trap of bumper stickers and other sorts of nonsense along the way, but eventually abandoned them for all sorts of reasons, namely because they are empty.
Posted By BeerLeague2 on 09/25/2007 10:59 PM
So, I've read your books. I've walked your walk. I've decided it's not "THE TRUTH" and I now have opened my mind to science and reason. I could read a million christian apologist books, but nothing will change my mind.
I know none of the die-hard jesus fans will ever read Dawkins or Sam Harris, et al. I don't expect you to. I just started this thread to discuss the book with anyone who has read it. Not someone who has read an excerpt, or was offended by the title.
So unless someone wants to have a book discussion, I'm done with this one.
10. As I suspected, you are not truly ready, willing or able to defend the position that you are taking with respect to The God Delusion. I have simply asked you to explain yourself ... but you are not willing. When I ask you a question, you avoid an answer by accusations and insults or pretending that the issue can't be addressed if the one asking a question hasn't "read the book". Do you really think that the topics addressed in The God Delusion are so unique and complex that only those who have read can talk about it? You can't possibly be this naive. You must have another motive.
11. I will start reading the book in a few weeks ... once I get through some other more pressing matters ... but I've already made mention of that in previous posts.
12. BTW, I have read two books by Dawkins prior to The God Delusion, as well as some articles by him, interviews that he's done, etc. This is why I can say that The God Delusion is "old news" ... mostly stuff that he's already done or said. That's why I'm qualified to discuss this book with you BEFORE I read it in full.
13. I'm sorry to see you go ... I hope that you'll come back in a few weeks when I start reading the book and posting stuff.
14. Also, I'm not angry or offended. | | | |
|
| |
| | You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
| |
ActiveForums 3.6 |
|
|
|