Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Apologetics 301 Guidelines
If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you
This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.
Forum Rules: Here
This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
Christianity, Atheism, and the Problem of Evil
Collapse
X
-
Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
-
Originally posted by seer View Post
But is it true that the wall is made of atoms?
Originally posted by seer View PostAnd my perception is that I can not run through the wall? Is that perception true?"It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
As in scientific fact yes.
The macroscopic world gives us solidity of objects but that does not hold at the atomic and sub-atomic level. For you to be permitted to run through the wall would require quantum tunnelling.Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View Post
Nope, both my claims are perfectly true ! Thanks for playing...
You asked three questions."It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
It is a reality but we do not perceive it in that way. Therefore what is reality and what is the "true" nature of the wall? And is your reality the same as mine?
Here let me help you out:
http://www.dictionary.com
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
As in scientific fact yes.
The macroscopic world gives us solidity of objects but that does not hold at the atomic and sub-atomic level. For you to be permitted to run through the wall would require quantum tunnelling.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View Post
By the way, what form of logic are you using in your arguments above?Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View Post
Sounds like you understand what the words "true" and "reality" mean after all. Yet you were demanding definitions.
Here let me help you out:
http://www.dictionary.com
Philosophically [and indeed scientifically] such concepts are more complex
Whose reality are we discussing? Yours? Mine? Seers? A butterfly's? A dog's?
Does reality even exist?
"It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View Post
By the way, what form of logic are you using in your arguments above?"It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
That is one definition of reality.
Philosophically [and indeed scientifically] such concepts are more complex
Whose reality are we discussing? Yours? Mine? Seers? A butterfly's? A dog's?
Does reality even exist?
I can truly say "Chocolate ice-cream" is the best. You can truly say, "Vanilla is the best" - both are true statements. They just need more context. If you state it like "Sparko likes chocolate ice-cream the best" and "Hypatia likes vanilla ice-cream the best" then it is easy to see both are true statements in the absolute sense and correspond with reality. There are not two truths, nor two realities at play.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View Post
There is only one reality.
Originally posted by Sparko View PostWhat we perceive may or may not correspond to that reality. So far your examples have only been about perceiving different aspects of that reality. Is a wall solid? Yes, at macroscopic scales. Is it mostly space between atoms? Yes at quantum scales.
Originally posted by Sparko View PostI can truly say "Chocolate ice-cream" is the best. You can truly say, "Vanilla is the best" - both are true statements.
Last edited by Hypatia_Alexandria; 08-04-2021, 04:31 PM."It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View PostIs there? If "What we perceive may or may not correspond to that reality" how can we ascertain the precise nature of this reality?
Precisely. Therefore how does seer ascertain the absolute and incontrovertible true nature of his wall? He has to choose the macroscopic level because that is what his consciousness and sense of perception tells him. However, at the quantum level his perception is incorrect and the wall is not solid.
True in what sense and in relation to what? Your example is merely two people expressing a personal subjective opinion. Neither of which has anything to do with the broader topic of reality, which you have alleged we may not be able to perceive anyway.
But then you know all this and clearly understand what seer and mountain man were saying, but you merely wanted to derail the topic because you knew you were wrong.
You seem to be trying to use logic to make your points. Which logic are you using?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostYou seem to be trying to use logic to make your points. Which logic are you using?
Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostThat is what science does.
However, you followed that assertion with this "What we perceive may or may not correspond to that reality".
You have therefore put yourself into a logical cul-de-sac. Premised on what you have written how do we know there is "only one reality", given that you have clearly stated that "what we perceive may or may not correspond to that reality"?
If "what we perceive not or may not correspond to that reality" how do we even know it exists?
Originally posted by Sparko View PostYou just need to have enough context to state the proposition in an absolute sense, or have enough common sense to know the implied context. When he says the wall is solid, it is obvious that he was talking about at a macroscopic scale. Even though there is space between the atoms in the wall, and in your own body, you are unable to pass through that wall at any scale without breaking a hole through it. Therefore it is solid.
Originally posted by Sparko View PostAll truth is absolute.
What is truth? There are facts that we accept are true in that they accord with perceived reality and they can be demonstrated as such e.g. the earth orbits the sun.
However, truth as a construct is something different. What you hold to be truth is not what I hold to be truth and therefore truth is not absolute.
Originally posted by Sparko View PostTruth is what corresponds with reality so there really aren't different truths.
Originally posted by Sparko View PostSome subjective truths are stated in a subjective context and may sound contradictory (like me and you both stating our opinion on which ice-cream is best) but when stated in a clearer context we can see both are true in an absolute sense also:
What you mean by "true in an absolute sense"?
"It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View PostScience would disagree with you with regard to your dogmatic assertion that "There is only one reality".
The purpose of science is to discover facts about our universe, our reality. We don't know it all yet, but we learn more every day.
However, you followed that assertion with this "What we perceive may or may not correspond to that reality".
You have therefore put yourself into a logical cul-de-sac. Premised on what you have written how do we know there is "only one reality", given that you have clearly stated that "what we perceive may or may not correspond to that reality"?
But that doesn't mean we can't tell what does correspond with reality or not. Again, there is only one reality. We might be wrong about some of it and right about other parts. Being wrong about it doesn't mean there is more than one reality. If I am wrong about God, that just means that in reality, God doesn't exist. It doesn't meant there are two realities, one where God exists and one where he doesn't. If science is wrong about something, it just means it is wrong about reality. The actual reality doesn't change. When scientists thought that the earth was the center of the universe, they were wrong. That didn't change reality or mean there were multiple realities.
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by whag, 03-27-2024, 03:01 PM
|
39 responses
186 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by whag
Yesterday, 03:32 PM
|
||
Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
|
21 responses
132 views
0 likes
|
Last Post 03-21-2024, 12:15 PM | ||
Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
|
80 responses
428 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by tabibito
Yesterday, 12:33 PM
|
||
Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
|
45 responses
305 views
1 like
|
Last Post 03-17-2024, 07:19 AM | ||
Started by rogue06, 12-26-2023, 11:05 AM
|
406 responses
2,517 views
2 likes
|
Last Post
by tabibito
Yesterday, 05:49 PM
|
Comment