Skip to comments.Questions For Atheists...& Non-Atheists II
Posted on 11/28/2006 9:09:43 AM PST by Laissez-faire capitalist
This thread is a continuation of the first thread "Questions For Atheists & Non-Atheists"
Some points were brought up that I wish to address here.
I look forward to the responses.
Taken from one of my dictionaries in my personal library:
"Occam's Razor. A principle devised by the English philospher William of Occam, which states that entities must not be multiplied beyond what is necessary.
In a scientific context, Occam's Razor is the choice of the simplest theory from among the theories which fit what we know.
In logic, Occam's Razor is the statement of an argument in its essential and simplest terms."
1.) Occam's Razor is a philosophical principle.
2.) Building upon this particular dictionary definition, atheists do not know how matter originated, so how can they use Occam's Razor to frame the simplest theory from among the theories which fit the facts they know? They can't.
A theory requires something to be observed, tested and confirmed. How can an atheist observe, test and confirm an unknown, since they haven't a clue as to where matter came from, or how it came into existence?
3.) Also from this particular dictionary:
"Hypothesis. Something assumed because it seems likely to be a true explanation.
Theory. Explanation that is based on observation and reasoning, especially one that has been tested and confirmed as a general principle explaining a large number of facts."
How can that which is unknown to an atheist (the origin of matter) be observed, tested and confirmed? It can't. How can an atheist observe, test and confirm the origin of matter, when they don't even know how matter came into existence?
4.) Thesis - Please prove that matter is a completely natural phenomenon.
Antithesis - Please prove that a Supreme Being created matter.
Reducing this further:
Thesis - Please prove that there is a God.
Antithesis - Please prove how matter came into existence. (Since one cannot ask another to prove a negative, or, please prove that there is no God.)
5.) "Shaving" this down into its simplest form, please explain how matter in the universe actually came into existence.
When one applies inductive and deductive reasoning, the Socratic method, the Dialactic (since it varies slightly from the Socratic method) and logic, one reaches a conclusion:
How can matter have brought itself into existence?
It flies in the face of the aforementioned to believe that matter somehow brought itself into existence.
Given the ridiculously long odds against the Universse working out as it has on its own, Occam's Razor woudl require us to postulate that it was set up this way by something.
What that thing is or does is the next question. But to believe that it was all just spontaneous or a chian of random events is to belive that pigs fly.
Here is the first thread "Questions For Atheists...& Non-Atheists" is one wishes to peruse it.
What is mind? Never matter.
What is matter? Never mind.
I have yet to see any atheist explain how matter is a completely natural phenomenon.
I have debated atheists all across the web, and not one has yet explained how matter brought itself into existence.
Yes, I am doing my part to at least make agnostics out of atheists.
Sinc escience seems to hve determined that matter is compressed energy, I think the atheists at least have to believe that there is an energy that drove the creation of all this. From there, it's not a big step to the idea that there is a conscious, creative entity behind everything. That's God.
>>Given the ridiculously long odds against the Universse working out as it has on its own, Occam's Razor woudl require us to postulate that it was set up this way by something.<<
But if the universe had "worked out" differently, you (or your counterpart in that hypothetical other universe) would probably still be pointing out how ridiculously unlikely THAT ARRANGEMENT would be.
This is known as the Anthropic Principle (I recommend that you google it).
"The current sum total of scientific knowledge does not equal the future sum total of scientific knowledge. I can wait."
For what? Where's it gonna go when it reaches the end point?
And how will you know when it is the sum total?
And just how long are you willing to wait anyway?
Could be awhile.
"But if the universe had "worked out" differently, you (or your counterpart in that hypothetical other universe) would probably still be pointing out how ridiculously unlikely THAT ARRANGEMENT would be.
This is known as the Anthropic Principle (I recommend that you google it)."
Well, if it's a hypothetical universe then can I hypothetically Google it? Or would that be unlikely too?
Speaking of which, in your hypothetical universe would it still be the Anthropic Principle, or do you think they'd get to have one of their own?
"In Buddhism we focus on "being here now", paying careful attention to the moment-by-moment process, more so than on any ultimate goal."
If there's no goal then what's the point of observing or caring, or science for that matter?
But I got a riddle for you.
Suppose the soul is nothing more than the impression left by a signet ring in a blob of hot wax?
There's nothing real to it, it's just an impression.
Well, if the impression's not real, then why is there an impression? Nothing real is really anything, and anything that's real is nothing but illusion. But who decides what the trick is? If everything is a trick, then where's the Magician? You don't get tricks without trick makers, and you don't get illusions with Illusionists. Illusions don't create themselves, anymore than time cares how you perceive it.
Unless of course you think the trick created itself. Or created you. In which case how do you know that the trick isn't that you think the illusion isn't real?
And good night Gracie.
Another joke to add to the list here:
Stuartcr, Why ask why? Drink Bud dry.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.