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

The Argument From Reason...

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

  • Originally posted by seer View Post

    Descartes' way around this was to invoke God, a good, honest Deity. That He created the material world and our rational abilities to grasp the world. And therefore since He is trustworthy we can generally trust our perceptions.
    So it's sort of an ontological argument for truth in general?

    I'm actually growing fond of ontological arguments. I've recently come across Alvin Platingas Modal argument for Dualism: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOTn_wRwDE0

    I can appreciate the objections to it, but something about it resonates. Just an idea i've been ruminating on lately.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Machinist View Post

      So it's sort of an ontological argument for truth in general?

      I'm actually growing fond of ontological arguments. I've recently come across Alvin Platingas Modal argument for Dualism: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOTn_wRwDE0

      I can appreciate the objections to it, but something about it resonates. Just an idea i've been ruminating on lately.
      I love Alvin Plantinga, I e-mail him a couple of times and he got back to me. I'm going to check out the link, thanks...
      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 Stoic View Post

        Another way around it is to invoke senses and rational abilities that can generally be trusted.
        That would be a circular justification - wouldn't 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 Tassman View Post

          We know that the material world exists and, whether simulated or not, it remains material. Science gives us the experimental means to examine the material world; it is the only methodology of providing objective repeatable results, eliminating subjective human opinion.

          Conversely, your subjective world of spirits and souls and gods is an unsubstantiated article of faith and can only be accepted as such, i.e., merely something you choose to believe or not believe.
          Tass a simulation is not the same as a strictly material world. And science only works in a simulation if those controlling it deem it so. They could undermine it all, or any part of it, at a whim. And I will remind you of your unsubstantiated article of faith - that natural forces created this universe.

          Last edited by seer; 01-13-2022, 07:12 AM.
          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

            That would be a circular justification - wouldn't it?
            If our senses and rational abilities can generally be trusted, then we can be confident in the existence of the material world.

            How is that circular?

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Stoic View Post

              If our senses and rational abilities can generally be trusted, then we can be confident in the existence of the material world.

              How is that circular?
              Because you have to use your rational abilities to confirm that they are trustworthy in the first place. Or you have to use your rational abilities to even make the statement that said abilities can be trusted. That is circular.
              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

                Because you have to use your rational abilities to confirm that they are trustworthy in the first place. Or you have to use your rational abilities to even make the statement that said abilities can be trusted. That is circular.
                No, you have to start with a brute fact somewhere.

                I start with the brute fact that my senses and rational ability can generally be trusted.

                You start with the brute fact that there is a good, honest Deity, and conclude that we can therefore generally trust out perceptions.

                I think my way is simpler.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Stoic View Post

                  No, you have to start with a brute fact somewhere.

                  I start with the brute fact that my senses and rational ability can generally be trusted.

                  You start with the brute fact that there is a good, honest Deity, and conclude that we can therefore generally trust out perceptions.

                  I think my way is simpler.
                  You position is still circular, you can't escape that. My position would be deductive.
                  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

                    You position is still circular, you can't escape that. My position would be deductive.
                    How do you deduce that there is a good, honest Deity?

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by seer View Post

                      Tass a simulation is not the same as a strictly material world.
                      Of course a simulated world as per Prof. Nick Bostrom is material. You are surely not suggesting that it would be partly immaterial - like your incoherent body/mind dichotomy?

                      And science only works in a simulation if those controlling it deem it so. They could undermine it all, or any part of it, at a whim.
                      Science “works” by its systematic approach in examining how the material universe functions. It is the only vehicle for providing repeatable results and eliminating subjective human opinions.

                      And I will remind you of your unsubstantiated article of faith - that natural forces created this universe.
                      The ONLY unsubstantiated article of faith in this discussion is your subjective claim of the existence of immaterial spirits and souls and gods.


                      “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Stoic View Post

                        How do you deduce that there is a good, honest Deity?
                        Not the point, mine is a deductive justification. Your argument starts with human reason to justify human reason (circular). Descartes was not trying to prove the existence of God, he was trying to find a non-circular way to justify the reliability of our senses and our reason. Concerning his argument for the existence of God you would have to look at his Ontological Argument.
                        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 Tassman View Post

                          The ONLY unsubstantiated article of faith in this discussion is your subjective claim of the existence of immaterial spirits and souls and gods.
                          Are you saying that subjective knowledge or experience can't be real? That something must be scientifically confirmed to be accepted?

                          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

                            [A] simulation is not the same as a strictly material world.
                            So what? If the simulation is designed with sufficient subtlety and sophistication, that after any conceivable test it’s not possible to detect its false state, then it’s real. If it fails any test, its false nature is then revealed, and a new true simulated state is observed. So far, no test has demonstrated our reality’s nature to be other than that which we perceive.

                            And science only works in a simulation if those controlling it deem it so.
                            Of course. But you are signally unable to demonstrate that our testable perceived reality is something other than that.

                            And what if all this is just a simulation? Can you demonstrate that the creators of the simulation are not themselves operating within someone else’s simulation. And that the creators of that simulation are not. . . . etc. etc. ad infinitum.

                            They could undermine it all, or any part of it, at a whim.
                            Only if the creators of their own simulation allow them to. Can you demonstrate otherwise?

                            And I will remind you of your unsubstantiated article of faith - that natural forces created this universe.
                            Well, for me nothing is “an article of faith.” It’s just that so far, and to the limits of our current knowledge, natural forces have explained every physical manifestation within our universe. Whatever is currently missing is best described as, “I don’t know.” Not, “Therefore God.”
                            When inventing a god, it is imperative to claim that it's; invisible, inaudible and imperceptible in every way. Otherwise - when it appears to no one, is silent and does nothing - intelligent people are liable to become sceptical.
                            - Anonymous

                            When asked why Omniscient and Omnipotent God, chose to burn alive the children of two Middle Eastern cities, came the reply;
                            “His hands were tied.” - DaveTheApologist

                            Comment




                            • Only Seer's view has an outside ontological component to it, that is, a component outside the circle, holding the circle. Of course that too would be a claim beginning with one's own reasoning, so it's easy to dismiss that view as being circular as well. It cannot be proven what's outside the circle. The atheist will continue to demand physical evidence for what's outside. The only thing the theist can offer is a deductive argument that assumes an immutable God. But at least that's something, and we all can agree that there is at least a possibility for the existence of God.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Markus River View Post

                                So what? If the simulation is designed with sufficient subtlety and sophistication, that after any conceivable test it’s not possible to detect its false state, then it’s real. If it fails any test, its false nature is then revealed, and a new true simulated state is observed. So far, no test has demonstrated our reality’s nature to be other than that which we perceive.
                                But the simulation would not actually be real even though we believed it was. And that was Descartes point you can not show otherwise, therefore we take reality by faith.


                                Of course. But you are signally unable to demonstrate that our testable perceived reality is something other than that.
                                Sure we all take by it faith that what we perceive corresponds to reality. The point is we can not deductively or empirically demonstrate that that is the case.

                                And what if all this is just a simulation? Can you demonstrate that the creators of the simulation are not themselves operating within someone else’s simulation. And that the creators of that simulation are not. . . . etc. etc. ad infinitum.
                                Correct. And?


                                Well, for me nothing is “an article of faith.” It’s just that so far, and to the limits of our current knowledge, natural forces have explained every physical manifestation within our universe. Whatever is currently missing is best described as, “I don’t know.” Not, “Therefore God.”
                                Except that assumption is a belief that can not be shown to be 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

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by whag, Yesterday, 03:01 PM
                                14 responses
                                43 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
                                21 responses
                                129 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
                                78 responses
                                411 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
                                45 responses
                                303 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Working...
                                X