I think that when we are discussing a subject so complicated as god, its impossible to have only one universal answer. It depends on what do you define as truthhood, and knowledge. Like in epistemology. If you take a empiricist perpective then its impossible to say if God exists or not, but no one said that you must be empiricist. One choose to be empiricist, is a matter of choice. If you take a intuicionist perpective, then god god could be provable.
Originally posted by CorderaMitchell
There is no proof for you, anything I say will have the consequence of no proof.You have to find your proof, everything isn't cut and paste.
That is what faith is, you clearly believe what you see...
That is a difficult concept to get. We often connect fact and truth together as if they were the same thing, but they are not.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
A fact is something that can be proven in a scientific way.
To who's standards, its on how many people can agree, think about it.
Light is a wave, and carries particles, that is a paradox there.
But who's to say what is right, its all on the majority of the people agreeing, what is blue, what is red, you follow?
We do need the same lines of communication however...
Originally posted by CorderaMitchell
To who's standards, its on how many people can agree, think about it.Light is a wave, and carries particles, that is a paradox there.
But who's to say what is right, its all on the majority of the people agreeing, what is blue, what is red, you follow?
We do need the same lines of communication however...
Repeatability is the standard. Someone does a test and comes up with data, then other people do the same test and come up with the same data. You do a series of tests that are then repeatable and the data must come to only one conclusion, this, then would be proven.
Originally posted by CorderaMitchell
There is no proof for you, anything I say will have the consequence of no proof.You have to find your proof, everything isn't cut and paste.
That is what faith is, you clearly believe what you see...
Faith is a belief that is not based on logical proof or material evidence. By extention, faith in the existence of God is not a matter of "believing what you see" or "finding your own proof," but of believing in the existence of God despite the absence of evidence.
To who's standards, its on how many people can agree, think about it.
um........no.
At different points in time, the majority of the people believed several things that were not true. This was due mostly to their lack of knowledge on the subject they were attempting to explain. It was at one point in time widely believed that the Earth was the center of our solar system. The Sun, planets and all stars visible in the night sky revolved around it. This of course was not true. We have since studied our solar system and have even ventured into space to see it for ourselves. We have attained the knowledge to know how wrong this assumption was.
If one was to be so confrontational, they could also say this is the reasoning behind many Christian beliefs. Man at the time did not have knowledge of the varied subjects they were trying to find explanations for. Because they had no knowledge of the subjects, they decided a mysterious god must be responsible for them. They had no knowledge of the several species of man that existed before homo sapiens.....so they had no idea they were not the first species of man to walk the planet......so they decided simply that a god must have placed them there. They had no knowledge of our solar system, galaxy or universe. They had never studied stars nor planets nor the creation of either.....therefore their best guess was simply, god must have made our planet.
Of course I won't discuss all that here.
To be honest i don't care if all the science and trash in the universe pointed to there being no god, i'd still believe. Because i'd rather think of life having a point then life being worthless, i'd rather think that my family actually mattered and everyones elses family mattered than the thought of murdering anyone.
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
It appears your lack of knowledge is not simply constrained to the sciences but also extends to a misinterpretation of the English language.
(Which is (partially) understandable if English isn't your first language. Is it? (It isn't mine).)Anyway, you vary the denotation and connotation of the word "reason" with each sentence, making your statements invalid and/or incoherent. The word has multiple meanings. Scientific explanations of the variables that produce natural phenomena, do not imply any underlying deliberate intentions driving such occurrences.
a reason for the sky's colour in this sense of the word.
1) There is a scientific explanation for why the sky is blue. There [b]is
2) There is no deliberate intention driving the sky to be blue. There is no reason for the sky's colour in this sense of the word.
The meaning of "reason" in (1) does not imply the meaning of "reason" in (2). [/B]
1. I don't think i'm the one misinterpreting the English language here. I have the spelling of an 18 year old and the reading of a 16/17 year old 😐
2. There doesn't need to be a deliberate reason in your case, the colour of the sky is an effect because of light. There is a reason why light's there, scientific and deliberate, otherwise you say there is no reason.
To be honest i don't care if all the science and trash in the universe pointed to there being no god, i'd still believe. Because i'd rather think of life having a point then life being worthless, i'd rather think that my family actually mattered and everyones elses family mattered than the thought of murdering anyoneit all sounded sincere until the last sentence............now why should people go around murdering others just because they didn't believe in a god
I don't think i'm the one misinterpreting the English language here. I have the spelling of an 18 year old and the reading of a 16/17 year oldspelling dont mean you interpreter things correctly though, you just write the words correctly, understanding what you write now thats a totally different matter alltogether
Originally posted by finti
it all sounded sincere until the last sentence............now why should people go around murdering others just because they didn't believe in a godspelling dont mean you interpreter things correctly though, you just write the words correctly, understanding what you write now thats a totally different matter alltogether
The reason why people should go around murdering:
1. It doesn't matter, noones life matters in the universe.
2. Whatever happens to them wouldn't effect you physically
3. Nothing stopping you except rules for the country.
I have an idea, let's stick to the point.
Originally posted by Chibi Boy
The reason why people should go around murdering:
1. It doesn't matter, noones life matters in the universe.
2. Whatever happens to them wouldn't effect you physically
3. Nothing stopping you except rules for the country.
I have an idea, let's stick to the point.