The world is logically fallacious
-
Do not generalise. The stupidity of a few humans do not imply that the entire human race is unintelligent.
-
Do you think the big bang coincidentaly made us?
It is by coincidence that earth is situated between Mars and venus, not too near to the sun to cause searing heat of 700 degrees like that of Mercury, not too far like Mars where the summer is freezing -40 degrees?
It is by coincidence that earth is tilted at an angle that results in changing seasons?
It is by coincidence that earth has a metal core, when it spins it creates its own magnetic field that protects the earth and its inhabitants from the sun's dangerous rays? No other planet in our solar system has the amount of metal core earth has, that allows it to generate a magnetic field strong enough to withstand the sun.
Is it by coincidence that gas giants Jupiter and Saturn is located just out of earth's outskirts, its gravity power pull comets and harmful asteroids from colliding with earth?
Is it by coincidence that the presence of the moon creates low and high tides on earth?
Is it by coincidence that earth is filled with rich gasses of oxygen and nitrogen that encourage life to thrive? Whereas its twin sister, Venus atmosphere is filled with dangerous sulphur dioxide that creates global warming, resulting in 800 degrees heat, enough to melt lead.
Is it by coincidence that earth is the only world in our solar system rich with water resources? Scientist proven that Mars once had water but was drained off by the powerful sun rays because Mars lost its ability to create a magnetic field to protect its water.
If you think there's no superior being watching out for us, think again.
-
You are arguing using cause and effect.
In that case.
Is it by coincidence that millions of people starve to death in painful agony everyday?
Is it by coincidence that religious extreminist plot to harm innocent civilians to spread their bigoted worldviews everyday?
Is it by coincidence that despite the portrayal of a divine being being all loving, all caring, and purely good governing over us, humans eventually do more evil than good?
Is it by coincidence that if i pray for a superior being to appear before me, no physical entity will appear before me?
As you answer these questions and realise how sophistic and flawed it is to argue via a cause and effect methodology, reflect upon your reasons as to why there should be superior divine being.
I'm not saying there isn't one. But thats not exactly a good way to argue for the existence for one. -
Originally posted by OscarLeegacy:
This debate between creationism, evolution, between theist and atheist worldviews have been going on for a very long time. And whether any sides of the party would like to admit or not, there has been very intelligent people on both sides of the party, as well as very stupid and mildly retarded people. But for argument's sake, let us only consider the intelligent people.
When i first came to know about atheism, and who supported atheism, i came to believe that science must be the answer to it all. And that there is definitely nothing comparable to this field. But as i age( currently 17 ), i have come to realise that science is nothing more but a hypothesis, refined over and over again by very capable men, although there is no concrete proof for which gravity exists, we are able to state that for the laws of physics to work this way, well, something like gravity should exists. And if experimental data matches up, then it most probably does exist. But still, that is a hypothesis, and nothing more.
And it is a worldview that is powered by the same thing that powers religions. Faith. For the atheists or agnostics, it is faith in the truth of the great scientists that has drawn up reliable and inteligent theories, and it also faith for the theists to believe in a personal god, despite not having met one ever. Much like how scientists has never met gravity. You simply cannot confirm the existence of a immaterial entity, but can only draw upon logical theories to support your stand.
-
You'll find your answers at the end of the bottle.
-
Originally posted by BadzMaro:
You'll find your answers at the end of the bottle.
or if u dun, u can try other/more bottles...
The journey to enlightenment does not come easy~
-
Millions of people starve because we are just tiny insignifant ants to the superior being. Maybe millions of people starve (sad to say and we sure would not want to be part of) to save billions more. For instance in China, during cultural revolution, Mao Zedong starved millions of chinese thru his agrarian policy. But that brought down the Mao government and in the economic reforms of Deng Xiaopeng which prospered more modern day chinese. Truly there is a bigger force in the works.
All of us are evil. We have the seed of evil in us. You don't tell me you are so innocent that you never ever thought of hurting or killing somebody in your mind? There is no pure human being. All of us have that tendency for evil thoughts and deeds. All this is due to fate. Maybe you are what you are because of your upbringing. But have you ever thought that had, you suddenly end up in an alternative universe whereby you were brought up by an abusive step dad and broken down family. You start to mix with bad hats and turn into a gangster who robs and murders people. That could happen to you but fate has it, you are where you are because of your upbringing. So evil is always resident in us.
Some people see the superior being as evil for allowing this to happen. But if we look at it at another point of view, most likely the superior being is giving that freedom to us to do as we like on this earth. Yes its true, when tragedy strikes us, we strike our fist in the air and blame the superior being for allowing this to happen. But you think of it, we are only but tiny bacteria to that superior being. We exist because the superior being wants us to exist. Some religions also belief in the after-life. So if all of us do go into the after-life, then what is so important about whether we die in earth or not? (to the opinion of the superrior being).
Maybe sometime in kindergarden, this kid used to do bad things at you. Bully you, steal your lunch box. You hate this kid until you want to bash him up. But 20years later, you happen to bump into him while you shopping at Takashimaya and you both strike up a conversation. You notice he isn't that fat smelly kid anymore, instead he is well dressed, wear office tie and smart looking. Suddenly the anomisity is over and you both chat about fond memories as if the bad things never happen. So we humans tend to forget. If there is an after-life, why would we bother about the hurt or damage done to us in that past life? Of course we would be cursing (I would) when something bad happens in earth but if you and I are suddenly brought into a plain after we both had died and meet that superior being, we won't even give a damn what happened to us in earth whether we got raped, robbed, murdered or treated unfairly.
Why the heck would the superior being appear in front of you when you pray. You speak of the superior being as uncaring, perhaps not even exist. If I am a god, i wouldn't even be bothered because you are just a tiny unbelieving speck of ant. So what more would that superior being care too hoots about appearing in front of you? Did you do something so important in life that you save 10 milion people that warrants his attention?
Your argument is just as flawed. You focus on negative points to argue a non-existence of a superior being.
Fact of the matter is, no matter how smart us humans are, if it weren't for the superior being, we just be swept away or sucked into a blackhole. Because earth is just a tiny speck compared to the supreme universe.
Maybe we just warrant 5% of the superior being's attention to care to keep earth afloat.
-
Originally posted by Aneslayer:
None was arguing to forsake obtaining knowledge for knowledge sake. We are living in a time where technological advances made discoveries that debunk "facts" to myth. Its really subjective when it comes to unfalsifiable information. There will be times when we can only choose to believe or not.
Technological advances that we enjoy today are the fruits of the Judeo-Christian worldview which gave rise to modern science, as have been amply documented by science historians. Underlying the methodology of science is the PHILOSOPHY of science, untestable but assumed things about the universe without which one cannot even begin to do science. Yes, scientific knowledge has dispelled many myths held by people in the past, but it has also deepened our awareness of how ignorant we are after all, and how much more complex the world is, so much so that many are now sensing (even if they are not admitting) that all these must be the outworking of a Mind. The universe shows remarkable evidence of design. No amount of scientific knowledge has shown that God is a myth that has been debunked.
-
Originally posted by OscarLeegacy:
You are arguing using cause and effect.
In that case.
Is it by coincidence that millions of people starve to death in painful agony everyday?
Is it by coincidence that religious extreminist plot to harm innocent civilians to spread their bigoted worldviews everyday?
Is it by coincidence that despite the portrayal of a divine being being all loving, all caring, and purely good governing over us, humans eventually do more evil than good?
Is it by coincidence that if i pray for a superior being to appear before me, no physical entity will appear before me?
As you answer these questions and realise how sophistic and flawed it is to argue via a cause and effect methodology, reflect upon your reasons as to why there should be superior divine being.
I'm not saying there isn't one. But thats not exactly a good way to argue for the existence for one.I think there is a place for cause and effect reasoning. However, we must not confuse the cause of an effect with the reasons themselves. For example, consider the prayer that God must appear before an atheist to prove that He exists. My response would be this, that no true atheist would ever make a sincere prayer like that. The Bible says that those who would approach God must first believe that God exists, and the way to God is by and through FAITH.
Hebrews 11:6 says this, "And it is impossible to please God without faith. Anyone who wants to come to him must believe that God exists and that he rewards those who sincerely seek him."
Thus this verse explains why the atheist/nonbeliever's prayer goes unanswered. Of course I can also suggest other reasons why the prayer is not answered. Notice that this prayer is actually tempting or testing God. But why should God be manipulated by anyone? God made the entire universe so that by seeing creation we can give praise to the Creator and acknowledge Him. The existence of a painting is proof of the existence of a painter.
-
for every thing tat works , there is always a logic behind
*PS dun apply to human especially woman
-
Originally posted by lce:
for every thing tat works , there is always a logic behind
*PS dun apply to human especially woman
There's a logic behind everything that works because underlying everything that works is the working of a supreme MIND. Christians call this God.
Woman also have reasons for things, just that sometimes man doesn't comprehend it. LOL!
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
Technological advances that we enjoy today are the fruits of the Judeo-Christian worldview which gave rise to modern science, as have been amply documented by science historians. Underlying the methodology of science is the PHILOSOPHY of science, untestable but assumed things about the universe without which one cannot even begin to do science. Yes, scientific knowledge has dispelled many myths held by people in the past, but it has also deepened our awareness of how ignorant we are after all, and how much more complex the world is, so much so that many are now sensing (even if they are not admitting) that all these must be the outworking of a Mind. The universe shows remarkable evidence of design. No amount of scientific knowledge has shown that God is a myth that has been debunked..
If that's what you believe so be it. You should have realized that many would be contently ignorant or deliberately rejecting of what you know of God and maintain their own pursuit of absolute truth. I hope you'd find some that would be happy to learn from you. For now, all are like the blind groping for the assumed light source.
-
Originally posted by Aneslayer:
If that's what you believe so be it. You should have realized that many would be contently ignorant or deliberately rejecting of what you know of God and maintain their own pursuit of absolute truth. I hope you'd find some that would be happy to learn from you. For now, all are like the blind groping for the assumed light source.
People are certainly free to reject my views. I am not disputing the right to reject my views. What I would challenge is their justification for rejection, if they do have one in the first place. But give me their reasons for rejection and I will show you how unwarranted or irrational their reasons are. People who think there is absolute truth to pursue must first JUSTIFY that pursuit, and for Christians this is not an issue because objective truth exists, because God exists. But those who deny the existence of God will have huge problems defending the idea of objective or absolute truths.
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
People are certainly free to reject my views. I am not disputing the right to reject my views. What I would challenge is their justification for rejection, if they do have one in the first place. But give me their reasons for rejection and I will show you how unwarranted or irrational their reasons are. People who think there is absolute truth to pursue must first JUSTIFY that pursuit, and for Christians this is not an issue because objective truth exists, because God exists. But those who deny the existence of God will have huge problems defending the idea of objective or absolute truths.
Can you accept rejection, with or without reasons? Does subjective justifications even matter? Problem is people may not purse God or some may pursue what's beyond your idea of God. Each is their own steward of their vessels. Its inevitable that some seeds will fall on stony ground. Those that fallen on fertile soil should yield fruits or weeds, depending on what's being sown.
-
Originally posted by Aneslayer:
Can you accept rejection, with or without reasons? Does subjective justifications even matter? Problem is people may not purse God or some may pursue what's beyond your idea of God. Each is their own steward of their vessels. Its inevitable that some seeds will fall on stony ground. Those that fallen on fertile soil should yield fruits or weeds, depending on what's being sown.
Of course I can accept rejection. Again the fact of rejection is not the issue, it is the justification for it. But what in the world is a subjective justification? You mean along the lines of "I reject atheism because I feel like it or because I am having a bad day?" Such are not justifications and hardly matters, they are whimsical tendencies and as flaky as mood swings.
Whether someone intends to pursue God or not, one should at least pause and examine what is already "in the market" so to speak. The one who truly seeks God should first ask if God has already revealed Himself to us. While we each are responsible for our choices, there is always a place for those who have made their choices to share and even persuade those who have not made theirs.
-
Originally posted by ^Acid^ aka s|aO^eH~:
or if u dun, u can try other/more bottles...
The journey to enlightenment does not come easy~
That depends on what you mean by enlightenment, and why you think it does not come easy.
-
Originally posted by speakoutfor:
Maybe we just warrant 5% of the superior being's attention to care to keep earth afloat.
I beg to differ. The Bible talks about God creating the heavens and the earth, yet the focus is on man's relationship to God on planet Earth. Jesus said that if God even cares for the sparrow or knows the number of hairs on our heads, that really shows how much God values us. Only man is made in God's image. We may be an insignificant speck in the entire physical universe, but size is not the measure of significance. Consider how a rich man may value a piece of rock (diamond) and create a huge building or fortress fortified with security features. Compared to the building in terms of size the diamond is insignificant. But yet it is of great worth to the owner, so much so that the construction of the entire building attests to the worth of the diamond. Perhaps we can also think likewise with regards to the earth and the universe?
-
Originally posted by ^Acid^ aka s|aO^eH~:
or if u dun, u can try other/more bottles...
The journey to enlightenment does not come easy~
Amen brother.
lol
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
Of course I can accept rejection. Again the fact of rejection is not the issue, it is the justification for it. But what in the world is a subjective justification? You mean along the lines of "I reject atheism because I feel like it or because I am having a bad day?" Such are not justifications and hardly matters, they are whimsical tendencies and as flaky as mood swings.
Whether someone intends to pursue God or not, one should at least pause and examine what is already "in the market" so to speak. The one who truly seeks God should first ask if God has already revealed Himself to us. While we each are responsible for our choices, there is always a place for those who have made their choices to share and even persuade those who have not made theirs.
Its really not my concern that you are unable to grasp "subjective" and "justification" when put together but to further this discussion;
sub·jec·tive (sb-jktv) adj. 1. a. Proceeding from or taking place in a person's mind rather than the external world: a subjective decision. b. Particular to a given person; personal: subjective experience. 2. Moodily introspective. 3. Existing only in the mind; illusory. 4. Psychology Existing only within the experiencer's mind. 5. Medicine Of, relating to, or designating a symptom or condition perceived by the patient and not by the examiner. 6. Expressing or bringing into prominence the individuality of the artist or author. 7. Grammar Relating to or being the nominative case. 8. Relating to the real nature of something; essential. Now choose one that you think that fits.
Allow me to make a cliche analogy: The cow doesn't want to drink yet. You'd be wasting the effort and risk being pushed into the pool if you insist it to drink now. You can judge whatever the reasons for rejecting, but ultimately the judgment is as measingless as the reasons.
Shouldn't it simply be reason before rejection, than rejection of reason for rejection?
"Whether someone intends to pursue God or not, one should at least pause and examine what is already "in the market" so to speak. The one who truly seeks God should first ask if God has already revealed Himself to us. While we each are responsible for our choices, there is always a place for those who have made their choices to share and even persuade those who have not made theirs"
Why should it be that way? The one who truly seeks will find that God is omnipresent, its has always been there, not hidden as you implied God to be. Freewill is a myth, at least to me and I'm still contemplating how it would impact on beliefs and the inevitabilities.
-
Originally posted by Aneslayer:
Its really not my concern that you are unable to grasp "subjective" and "justification" when put together but to further this discussion;
sub·jec·tive (sb-jktv) adj. 1. a. Proceeding from or taking place in a person's mind rather than the external world: a subjective decision. b. Particular to a given person; personal: subjective experience. 2. Moodily introspective. 3. Existing only in the mind; illusory. 4. Psychology Existing only within the experiencer's mind. 5. Medicine Of, relating to, or designating a symptom or condition perceived by the patient and not by the examiner. 6. Expressing or bringing into prominence the individuality of the artist or author. 7. Grammar Relating to or being the nominative case. 8. Relating to the real nature of something; essential. Now choose one that you think that fits.
Allow me to make a cliche analogy: The cow doesn't want to drink yet. You'd be wasting the effort and risk being pushed into the pool if you insist it to drink now. You can judge whatever the reasons for rejecting, but ultimately the judgment is as measingless as the reasons.
Shouldn't it simply be reason before rejection, than rejection of reason for rejection?
"Whether someone intends to pursue God or not, one should at least pause and examine what is already "in the market" so to speak. The one who truly seeks God should first ask if God has already revealed Himself to us. While we each are responsible for our choices, there is always a place for those who have made their choices to share and even persuade those who have not made theirs"
Why should it be that way? The one who truly seeks will find that God is omnipresent, its has always been there, not hidden as you implied God to be. Freewill is a myth, at least to me and I'm still contemplating how it would impact on beliefs and the inevitabilities.
Huh? I ask you to clarify what is subjective justification and you said it is not your concern? You mean everyone knows what you mean by that? Even if so, you should be humble to enlighten rather than be haughty and condescending in response.
You analogy is rather irrelevant. How is this discussion akin to pushing or forcing a cow to drink? No one is being forced to believe anything against his current beliefs.
And why should it not be the way I mentioned? And since when have I implied that God is hidden? I am saying clearly that God has revealed Himself in Creation, and in His Word, and by the incarnation.
Talking about freewill? Those who would deny that it exists, are they denying it out of their own freewill? Or predetermined to deny freewill? How would they know anyway?
-
"Huh? I ask you to clarify what is subjective justification and you said it is not your concern? You mean everyone knows what you mean by that? Even if so, you should be humble to enlighten rather than be haughty and condescending in response. "
The correct answer is number 1b. Such lack of initiative to find out simple definition is to be despised for its a mental block for learning and unlearning. I'm in no position to enlighten anyone for I'm not enlightened. You opinion of me does not matter to this discussion, try to be on topic for discussion sake.
"You analogy is rather irrelevant. How is this discussion akin to pushing or forcing a cow to drink? No one is being forced to believe anything against his current beliefs."
The moral of the story is: One would seek and drink when one is thirsty (for knowledge). There's a time for everything.
"And why should it not be the way I mentioned? And since when have I implied that God is hidden? I am saying clearly that God has revealed Himself in Creation, and in His Word, and by the incarnation."
Should everything be your way?
re·veal 1 (r-vl) tr.v.re·vealed, re·veal·ing, re·veals 1. a. To make known (something concealed or secret): revealed a confidence. b. To bring to view; show. 2. To make known by supernatural or divine meansI feel sorry for you if you did not realize the implication by now.
"Talking about freewill? Those who would deny that it exists, are they denying it out of their own freewill? Or predetermined to deny freewill? How would they know anyway?"
How do you know?
-
Originally posted by Aneslayer:
"Huh? I ask you to clarify what is subjective justification and you said it is not your concern? You mean everyone knows what you mean by that? Even if so, you should be humble to enlighten rather than be haughty and condescending in response. "
The correct answer is number 1b. Such lack of initiative to find out simple definition is to be despised for its a mental block for learning and unlearning. I'm in no position to enlighten anyone for I'm not enlightened. You opinion of me does not matter to this discussion, try to be on topic for discussion sake.
"You analogy is rather irrelevant. How is this discussion akin to pushing or forcing a cow to drink? No one is being forced to believe anything against his current beliefs."
The moral of the story is: One would seek and drink when one is thirsty (for knowledge). There's a time for everything.
"And why should it not be the way I mentioned? And since when have I implied that God is hidden? I am saying clearly that God has revealed Himself in Creation, and in His Word, and by the incarnation."
Should everything be your way?
re·veal 1 (r-vl) tr.v.re·vealed, re·veal·ing, re·veals 1. a. To make known (something concealed or secret): revealed a confidence. b. To bring to view; show. 2. To make known by supernatural or divine means
I feel sorry for you if you did not realize the implication by now.
"Talking about freewill? Those who would deny that it exists, are they denying it out of their own freewill? Or predetermined to deny freewill? How would they know anyway?"
How do you know?
Dude, your dictionary definition listed 7 meanings and you expected people to know you were referring to 1b? It has nothing to do with lack of initiative on my part, but your lack of clarity in communication and lack of courtesy. So my opinions of you does not matter yet you feel free to rant your opinions of me as if it mattered to the discussion? Double standards again? In any case, you failed to show how my earlier understanding was in anyway conflicting with your 1b definition.
Your moral of the story is flawed simply because it confuses a physical need which must be met for survival with a cognitive one which would inform how one should live his life. You can die of thirst pretty soon if you don't quench it, but you can also wander about meaninglessly your entire existence. So why wait until thirsty or when, as is usually the case, life crisis happens and then one thinks about more eternal or spiritual matters?
Did I insist that everything should be my way? Strawman argument. In any case, it need not be either/or. The one seeking God may well be led by God to the one talking about God.
I don't know what your pity is for, but I surely doubt the sincerity of it. Anyway what's your point?
The person who denies free will has a problem, he needs to ask himself if he came to that conclusion based on his own thinking (which involves freewill) or was he predetermined to come to that conclusion. The dilemma is yours, not mine. I believe in free will. In fact, I am conscious of it every moment. Your denial of it places yourself in a very awkward position, so awkward that you cannot even be coherent to defend it. The moment you CHOOSE to defend the view that no free will exists you have already affirmed free will.
-
this thread is in the wrong forum.
-
and well if TS is looking for anything constructive, i dont think he is gonna get much here.
-
Originally posted by [imdestinyz]:
and well if TS is looking for anything constructive, i dont think he is gonna get much here.
I noticed that you have not posted anything constructive so far here.
Anyway, TS has already responded to my invitation and posted in my forum which is more constructive. I am awaiting his reply....and it should be an interesting discussion so long as "Huo Bing" don't move it and lock it. ; )