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
See more
See less

Christianity, Atheism, and the Problem of Evil

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 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?
    But is it true that the wall is made of atoms? And my perception is that I can not run through the wall? Is that perception true?
    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

      But is it true that the wall is made of atoms?
      As in scientific fact yes.

      Originally posted by seer View Post
      And my perception is that I can not run through the wall? Is that perception true?
      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.
      "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.
        Nope, both my claims are perfectly true ! Thanks for playing...
        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 did not make any claims in your post #136.

          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?
            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

            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.
              By the way, what form of logic are you using in your arguments above?

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Sparko View Post

                By the way, what form of logic are you using in your arguments above?
                I have been asking that for a while, she refuses to answer...
                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
                  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?

                  "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?
                    I have put forward no argument. I have posed some questions and made a few brief observations.
                    "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?
                      There is only one reality. What 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. Both are true and correspond with different aspects of the same reality. They are not different realities. Nor are they contradictory truths.

                      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.
                        Is there? If "What we perceive may or may not correspond to that reality" how can we ascertain the precise nature of this reality?

                        Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                        What 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.
                        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.

                        Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                        I can truly say "Chocolate ice-cream" is the best. You can truly say, "Vanilla is the best" - both are true statements.
                        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.

                        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 Post
                          Is there? If "What we perceive may or may not correspond to that reality" how can we ascertain the precise nature of this reality?
                          That is what science does.

                          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.
                          rong! You 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.

                          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.
                          All truth is absolute. Truth is what corresponds with reality so there really aren't different truths. Some 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: It is absolutely true that Sparko likes chocolate ice-cream the best, and it is also absolutely true that Hypatia likes vanilla ice-cream the best. Of course that is just an example. I have no idea what your favorite ice-cream is.

                          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 Post
                            You seem to be trying to use logic to make your points. Which logic are you using?
                            Of course she is using Aristotelian logic but refused to admit it...

                            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
                              That is what science does.
                              Science would disagree with you with regard to your dogmatic assertion that "There is only one reality".

                              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 Post
                              You 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.
                              The point being that our perception of the wall is that it is quite solid. But that is only our reality. It is not the absolute true nature of that wall.

                              Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                              All truth is absolute.
                              An unsupported and dogmatic assumption.

                              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 Post
                              Truth is what corresponds with reality so there really aren't different truths.
                              What "truth" and what "reality"? I have stated that what you hold to be truth is not what I hold to be truth and you have already informed me that "What we perceive may or may not correspond to that reality".

                              Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                              Some 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:
                              Once again you need to define your terms.

                              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 Post
                                Science would disagree with you with regard to your dogmatic assertion that "There is only one reality".
                                Do you have a source for that? Or are you positing other universes or something?
                                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"?
                                Through the scientific method. We test our assumptions and see what is fact and what is fiction. What I meant was that people can believe false things that do not correspond with reality. I am sure you think my belief in God is one such example. Unfortunately we don't have a way to test that belief, so it remains a faith not a science.

                                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 whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
                                21 responses
                                132 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
                                80 responses
                                428 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
                                45 responses
                                305 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by rogue06, 12-26-2023, 11:05 AM
                                406 responses
                                2,517 views
                                2 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Working...
                                X