goleafsgo Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RA9EiSJaXww Very interesting debate. I personally somewhat agree with Dawkins, although i think he is going a bit over the top in saying that 'the truth' is that there is no god. You cant prove that there is not god, even though it is very illogical for there to be one. any thoughts on the matter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BelizeIt Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 It's a matter of Faith, some people choose to believe in a higher power, others don't. Can anyone prove or disprove that God exists? Of course not. If you choose to believe the Bible, it states "And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to Him must believe that He exists and that He rewards those who earnestly seek Him" (Hebrews 11:6) Clearly, the majority of people believe in a higher power, that doesn't mean that you attend church every Sunday, it just means you have "Faith". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goleafsgo Posted October 20, 2006 Author Share Posted October 20, 2006 That is not really the argument. What Dawkins is saying is that religion is 'wrong', and that people need to realise that God is in fact a very illogical thing... Having 'faith' that god is there doesnt make it true. I think he doesnt like religion because it is the cause of alot of problems in the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBannedKid Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 But what you fail to prove is why religion is so 'wrong' and why God and His existence is so illogical. As you said, having 'faith' in God doesn't make it true...well then answer me this. How does having 'belief' that God doesn't exist prove his nonexistence? Really, I was rooting for you and your point, but you fail to realize the whole picture. I personally have the 'belief' that God does not exist, yet I am neither right nor wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goleafsgo Posted October 20, 2006 Author Share Posted October 20, 2006 But what you fail to prove is why religion is so 'wrong' and why God and His existence is so illogical. As you said, having 'faith' in God doesn't make it true...well then answer me this. How does having 'belief' that God doesn't exist prove his nonexistence? I was saying what Dawkins belives. I also somewhat agree with his views. Religion is 'wrong' because it has been the cause of so many conflicts for thousands of years... I never said that having belief that god doesnt exist proves his non-existance. I said that there are a lot of good points that Dawkins brings up that suggest that god deosnt exist. But as he says, you can never disprove anything... I do like his line about people everyone being atheists about all the other 'gods' like Thor and whanot, but that atheists just take it one god further. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBannedKid Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 But since when is religion the problem? It seems to be that the people who follow religion are the ones that screw everything up...not religion itself. The point is that you stated your opinion as a fact. You cant prove that there is not god, even though it is very illogical for there to be one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Real Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 ^That goes for everything though. Lots of systems are quite good. But people are inherently stupid and bad. So, since we are not perfect, everything screws up. The flip side to alot of this is that the same faith required to believe in God is required for alot of science. Alot of the things that we throw around as fact are mearly just theories and hypothesis's which are, in reality, nothing more than someones idea. If someone chooses to believe it, without it being a scientific law, then its mearly having faith in someone elses findings. Theres alot we cant explain out there. Alot of it needs no explaining. Most of it doesnt actually. But yes, Dawkings states his belief at fact though its just his belief. Ive said the same thing all along. It takes as much faith to beleive there isnt than there is to belive there is. That much is a fact in this arena. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLUSHIE Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 Colbert has had this discussion before wiht other people. I think it's something he really enjoys debating about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goleafsgo Posted October 20, 2006 Author Share Posted October 20, 2006 It takes as much faith to beleive there isnt than there is to belive there is. That much is a fact in this arena. I dont agree with that. when it comes to believing in god, there are no facts to go on, it is all faith. But with science, at least people are trying to figure things out and whatnot, and have some scientific evidence that there is no god. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyingScooter Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 I'll have to check this debate out when i get home tonight. I would like to add, though, that religious differances may cause some trouble in this world, money had greed have caused more. Hitler wanted to take over the world because everyone was inferior to the Germans and thought those people should rule. he also knew that were thereis land, there are also natural resources like gold, oil etc. Greed and or money cause more problems. just my 2cents. I have faith this will be a heated thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BelizeIt Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 The design requirements for our universe are like a chain of a 1000 links. If any link breaks, we do not have a less optimal universe-- we have a universe incapable of sustaining life. It takes a great deal more faith to believe in an "accidental" universe, than to believe in an intelligent creator, or God who crafted such a marvelous universe and beautiful place of habitation in planet Earth, and then created life (including human beings) to occupy it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 ^ Did you watch the interview? Dawkins contends that the universe is not random or accidental, but that it evolved very very slowly. He even elaborates to say that the biggest mistake in people's understanding of evolution is that is accidental or based off one minor change. I tend to agree with Dawkins in many ways, although I am still agnostic in my belief in a God. I do believe that God and religion have no place in science or scientific theory and that intelligent design should not be taught in a scientific setting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goleafsgo Posted October 20, 2006 Author Share Posted October 20, 2006 well, i think saying god made us is simply the easy answer to the question of why we are here. That doesnt make it more likely. In some other of his loger interviews, Dawkins mentions how life evolved very orderly, not just by random. Unfortunately i dont have a very good understand of the theory of evolution, or of positive entropy, but i am sure Dawkins know what he is talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dandaman Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 You can't judge 100% for yourself until you're dead. (And personally, if you could post here from beyond the grave, that'd make for an interesting post.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyingScooter Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 ^If we get any new members with the name Houdini, I'm blaming you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BiCoastal Kid Posted October 22, 2006 Share Posted October 22, 2006 The flip side to alot of this is that the same faith required to believe in God is required for alot of science. Alot of the things that we throw around as fact are mearly just theories and hypothesis's which are, in reality, nothing more than someones idea. If someone chooses to believe it, without it being a scientific law, then its mearly having faith in someone elses findings. I would say that's a rather unfair comparison in most cases. Things like String Theory, yes you can say the same faith applies, but most theories come after a lot of observation and nit picking. Sciences bases itself off of probability. Most will stand behind something if there is shown to be a high probability that it is true(such as, if multiple experiments are run and a majority of them return the same results). That does not require faith, that it is simply following evidence. When you try to find what caused the discrepencies and can't pinpoint the problem, that's when the "faith" aspect comes into science. Theres alot we cant explain out there. Alot of it needs no explaining. Most of it doesnt actually. Does anything need explanation? No. Nothing does, but once you ask for one you have to ask for the rest. If you don't, you're only searching for half-truths and not the big picture. It takes as much faith to beleive there isnt than there is to belive there is. I would disagree on that one. I would say it requires equals amounts of faith. It may be HARDER to justify and explain a belief in the big bang than it is to simply say "God made us," but when you get right down to it, both are equally as probable and logical as the other. The only difference is that we can make inferences to the workings behind a big bang based off of widely accepted and proven theories, whereas with God, the belief is based entirely on faith and nothing more than human opinions. There are no numbers behind God, to my knowledge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Movieguy Posted October 22, 2006 Share Posted October 22, 2006 I've never been an extensively religious type, but I find it hard to believe that we're simply here by chance, that something could just appear out of nothingness. I don't really know if there is a god. But if there is a higher power or consciousness out there in the universe, it's probably something that none of us can ever fully comprehend. And if there is a whole other world beyond what we see in this one, it's probably beyond anything any person could imagine in this life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calvin Posted October 22, 2006 Share Posted October 22, 2006 I wonder when religious fanatics are going to storm the streets and shout that gravity is only a theory and scientists are heretics for speaking about it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Real Posted October 22, 2006 Share Posted October 22, 2006 @ SoCal - Probability is just that though, probability. Its probable that Ill eat breakfast, but not 100%. If its not 100%, then its not a fact. And if its not a fact, its on the same level as faith. As for your last quote of me - you said you disagreed but then agreed with me. What I said is that it takes equal faith for both. Reread my sentence you quoted. Plus a few points - Theories are not proven. When they are proven, they are called facts, or laws. (if they make it that far) - Numbers - In this world where the human is severely underdeveloped and uses barely 15% of its brain, how can one even think that the numbers and systems we have created cover all possibilities? Of course, its all we know but in reality Science and Mathematics are alot like God. There is ALOT that cannot be explained because we cannot and will not ever wrap our petty little brains around all there is or, even wrap our brains around things weve been fighting to figure out for thousands of years. Its mind boggling to think that numbers in general could either be wrong, or uncompleted but the fact is - its possible. Sadly, Probability says that virtually anything is possible. Just because we cant wrap our brains around something doesnt mean its not probable. Just means arent as smart as we think we are. Just never forget the definition of a Theory: - a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact. Its gotten way too easy for theories to come out that happen just over the 50% mark and suddenly OMG its true! based on probability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Posted October 22, 2006 Share Posted October 22, 2006 ^ There is a huge huge hugei difference between a theory and a SCIENTIFIC theory. This is one of the major mistakes people make when trying to disprove scientific theories like evolution and the big bang. I'm quoting this from WP and bolding the important stuff: In scientific usage, a theory does not mean an unsubstantiated guess or hunch, as it often does in other contexts. A theory is a logically self-consistent model or framework for describing the behavior of a related set of natural or social phenomena. It originates from and/or is supported by experimental evidence] (see scientific method). In this sense, a theory is a systematic and formalized expression of all previous observations that is predictive, logical and testable. The idea of a God is a regular theory, as it is basically ALL conjecture. There is no way to test for God. An idea like evolution is a scientific theory, because it can be modeled, tested, and shown in real world evidence. Also, the "Human Only Use % of the brain" is false, as well. It is a myth. http://www.snopes.com/science/stats/10percnt.htm http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/tenper.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BiCoastal Kid Posted October 22, 2006 Share Posted October 22, 2006 As for your last quote of me - you said you disagreed but then agreed with me. What I said is that it takes equal faith for both. Reread my sentence you quoted. I'll concede that I totally misread that as "it takes much more" since somebody earlier in this thread said that and it connected weirdly in my brain. haha But still, like Wes said, you still can't compare a "theory" like God, and a scientific theory like, say, gravity.... or heliocentricity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now