Atheism

Started by 753144 pages

Originally posted by AsbestosFlaygon
1. Man cannot create matter from nothing.
Indeed, but just because we can't, doesn't mean it didn't happen in the beggining of the universe. We just can't recreate those conditions.

Even if it never happen and matter/energy have always existed in the same quantities as today in some form or another, this is not evidence for the existence of God.


2. Who/what created the Big Bang? Everything has a beginning/source, therefore something/someone created this mass of matter.
And who created this thing that created the big bang? Either God came from nothing or it always existed and the first cause problem makes no sense. So why assume the middle man? Either reality came from nothing or it always existed. If I'm not mistaken, some views of the big bang hold that time itself emerged with it.


3. Who/what gives life to our physical body? What gives it free-will, conscience, and emotions? Where do they come from, and how do they function the way they do?[quote] Nothing. Vitalism isn't really required to explain how we function. What we know about the purely physical behavior of matter does it just fine.

[quote]
4. Man cannot procreate life from nothing. Who/what created the one-celled organisms?

We know how chemical compounds can originate living cells. There are many possible pathways for the arisal of the biochemical complexity cells have today, although we don't know for sure which one actually happened. There is no misterious supernatural origin in it. Several of these steps can be reproduced in lab. They occur on its own when the right conditions are presented.

And again, just because we can't do something doesn't mean it didnt' happen naturally on its own. We can't create stars or planets either, but their formation process is well understood and requires no supernatural explanation.

edit: nah **** it you can cut the tension with a kinfe, one false move and all war will break out.

Originally posted by long pig
I was saying that earlier. If matter and energy can't be naturally created or destroyed then it must have been supernaturally created. ...

Or there was no creation. The big bang was just a change.

Originally posted by AsbestosFlaygon
1. Man cannot create matter from nothing.

So? Man also cannot gather up the materials to build a star but we see it happen without god interfering.

Admittedly the point you're probably trying to get at (where did the material of the universe come from?) is not one that I can answer and I suspect that even if I were a cosmologist or physicist I couldn't phrase the answer so most people could understand it anyway. The person to ask about that would be Stephen Hawking, who just wrote a book concluding that a creator is not a requirement for the Big Bang.

Originally posted by AsbestosFlaygon
2. Who/what created the Big Bang? Everything has a beginning/source, therefore something/someone created this mass of matter.

This results in an endless chain of creators/creations. If anything it disproves all traditional notions god.

Originally posted by AsbestosFlaygon
3. Who/what gives life to our physical body? What gives it free-will, conscience, and emotions? Where do they come from, and how do they function the way they do?

I taking introductory bio which is more than enough to know how the basic life functions of our body work without resorting to God.

How we get free will requires the assumption that we actually have free will. I find that to be a stretch, every aspect of our body is deterministic so there's no reason to think the resulting systems are not.

Emotions have been tied directly to chemicals and electrical impulses in the brain. There's a whole industry based on the fact that emotions arise from those things rather than god. I can't think of any emotion that doesn't have a useful aspect to it either, evolution then explains where they come from without a need for a designer.

Originally posted by AsbestosFlaygon
4. Man cannot procreate life from nothing. Who/what created the one-celled organisms?

Single celled organisms didn't pop into life out of no where. Their even simpler components would have existed first.

We know that random effects can produce organized things (a box of ropes can be tied into knots just by shaking it, baths of chemicals can form amino acids under conditions that are likely early in the existence of Earth). So with a few million years of random lightning strikes and an entire planet worth of chemicals in different mixes it becomes hard to imagine self replicating chemicals not forming. Once they do the well established principle of evolution is sufficient explanation for the development of cells.

Have you ever considered that the process of evolution itself may probably be the work of a supernatural force?

Originally posted by AsbestosFlaygon
Have you ever considered that the process of evolution itself may probably be the work of a supernatural force?

Please define supernatural force.

Originally posted by AsbestosFlaygon
Have you ever considered that the process of evolution itself may probably be the work of a supernatural force?

You'll have to specify what is a supernatural force in this case. If it another thing that is conveniently defined as utterly untestable, well yes it's crossed my mind but as I've said many times I see no reason to believe things in the absence of evidence and thus am inclined to reject it.

Surely a supernatural force that cannot be detected and behaves exactly in accordance with known natural rules of evolution is hardly worth believing in even if it does exist since evolution is exactly the same (by definition in this case) and far more useful.

On the other hand if you have positive evidence toward a supernatural guide to evolution I would be interested to hear it.

Originally posted by AsbestosFlaygon
Have you ever considered that the process of evolution itself may probably be the work of a supernatural force?
Not really, what we know about the generation of genetic variance and diferentiated acumulation of mutations among populations is enough to to explain evolution. One could speculate that there are supernatural forces guiding evolution, but there is no indication of this happening.

Originally posted by AsbestosFlaygon
Have you ever considered that the process of evolution itself may probably be the work of a supernatural force?

Of course it's possible. But a pencil falling when I drop it could also be a supernatural force. Or it could be gravity. Apply Occum's (sic?) Razor.

Same with evolution, which is why your question is fairly silly.

Originally posted by long pig
I was saying that earlier. If matter and energy can't be naturally created or destroyed then it must have been supernaturally created.

But it can be. That layman chesnut doesn't actually hold up to scientific scrutiny.

It's Occam (Ockham actually). You with your mind in the semen gutter.

shakefist

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Please define supernatural force.

Apologies.
My statement was rather poorly worded.

Evolution may be the work of something/someone who may or may not be supernatural in nature and/or technologically advanced.

Supernatural is something that defies the laws of physics or seems to. Thats a pefect legitimate defintion of supernatural and thats not me playing semantics.

Originally posted by AsbestosFlaygon
Apologies.
My statement was rather poorly worded.

Evolution may be the work of something/someone who may or may not be supernatural in nature and/or technologically advanced.

What's your evidence that this is the case in reality?

Originally posted by AsbestosFlaygon
Apologies.
My statement was rather poorly worded.

Evolution may be the work of something/someone who may or may not be supernatural in nature and/or technologically advanced.

😆 Are you sure?

BTW thanks for making me laugh, today I needed it.

Originally posted by Deadline
Supernatural is something that defies the laws of physics or seems to.

so, basically we can label anything that "seems" (a personally subjective variable) to not be physical as "supernatural"

though, by definition, if it is occuring, it is natural...

Originally posted by inimalist
so, basically we can label anything that "seems" (a personally subjective variable) to not be physical as "supernatural"

though, by definition, if it is occuring, it is natural...

So, by definition there can't be anything supernatural...

if we accept what the term "natural" is supposed to mean, then no. By definition, if it is happening, there is a natural explanation. If that explanation is "God done it", then the concept of "God" becomes natural. EDIT: though, it would remain as untestable or unpredictable, as we have no tools to investigate "God" as a phenomenon.

Originally posted by inimalist
if we accept what the term "natural" is supposed to mean, then no. By definition, if it is happening, there is a natural explanation. If that explanation is "God done it", then the concept of "God" becomes natural. EDIT: though, it would remain as untestable or unpredictable, as we have no tools to investigate "God" as a phenomenon.

If God is natural, we should be able to test this phenomenon. Just because we can't do it now, does not mean we can't do it in the future.

Originally posted by inimalist
so, basically we can label anything that "seems" (a personally subjective variable) to not be physical as "supernatural"

though, by definition, if it is occuring, it is natural...

Ok what point are you trying to make? All I did was give a defintion of supernatural.