Home » Forums » General Forums » General Conversation

Question to the rational responders.

Posted on: December 8, 2006 - 9:39pm
spacebuddha
Posts: 22
Joined: 2006-07-26
User is offlineOffline
Question to the rational responders.

I'm interested in knowing what your philosophical foundations are. Do you subscribe to reductionism, emergentism or holism? Do you have your own philosophy? Be as brief or as descriptive as you like.

‹ Electric Pasta Baby Jesus Stolen From Nativity Scene And Replaced With Beer Can ›

Posted on: December 13, 2006 - 11:44pm #51
Noor
Posts: 250
Joined: 2006-11-18
User is offlineOffline
nedbrek wrote:KSMB

nedbrek wrote:
KSMB wrote:
Please tell me how human action is responsible for: earth quakes, tsunamis, volcano eruptions, droughts, floods, hurricanes, cancer, AIDS, etc.

The Bible says, the world as it is today is not the world as God made it. The world is the way it is today because mankind rejected God.

#1. Most of the world believes in god today, and a fairly large number are Christian. Also please explain why most secular countries tend to be more successful while almost all the low-ranking countries are strongly religious ones.

#2. Wouldn't an all-knowing god know man would "reject" him? Why would this god create man if he knew in advance this would happen?


Posted on: December 14, 2006 - 12:30am #52
nedbrek
Theist
Posts: 195
Joined: 2006-12-08
User is offlineOffline
noor wrote: #1. Most of the

noor wrote:

#1. Most of the world believes in god today, and a fairly large number are Christian. Also please explain why most secular countries tend to be more successful while almost all the low-ranking countries are strongly religious ones.

Sorry, I wasn't implying everything about the world today is due to "the fall". I just meant, the way the world works now (suffering, natural disasters, diseases, etc.)

noor wrote:

#2. Wouldn't an all-knowing god know man would "reject" him? Why would this god create man if he knew in advance this would happen?

God knew man would reject him, but created man anyway. He arranged in advance for revelation and salvation.


Posted on: December 14, 2006 - 1:59am #53
Voided
Posts: 1195
Joined: 2006-02-20
User is offlineOffline
nedbrek wrote:Sorry, I

nedbrek wrote:
Sorry, I wasn't implying everything about the world today is due to "the fall". I just meant, the way the world works now (suffering, natural disasters, diseases, etc.)

How is "the way the world works now" being due to the fall different from "implying everything about the world today is due to 'the fall'"?

Quote:
God knew man would reject him, but created man anyway. He arranged in advance for revelation and salvation.

End to suffering or not are you saying god created man knowing they would suffer? To me that sounds like a little kid getting some ants and messing with them till they died...


Posted on: December 14, 2006 - 11:37pm #54
spacebuddha
Posts: 22
Joined: 2006-07-26
User is offlineOffline
Tomcat wrote:I'm gonna

Tomcat wrote:
I'm gonna venture a guess that Spacebuddha, you are familiar with the Integral approach =)

I am, now that I've read the wikipedia entry, lol. I can see that no single system can account for everything no matter how comprehensive it is. I've leaned toward materialism for a long time and up until recently, saw the most truth in dialectical materialism. But I've read a few essays that show there are holes in that theory and I don't think we can ever truly escape subjectivity. So I guess I'm a Kantian in that regard. I think there needs to be a further dialectic to reconcile the material and the ideal. I'm starting to take interest in Foucault and the post-modern movement which sees all truth as relative and subjective. I suppose the only thing we can ever be certain of is our own thought and existance (Descartes).


Posted on: December 15, 2006 - 3:06pm #55
ShaunPhilly
High Level ModeratorSilver Member
ShaunPhilly's picture
Posts: 473
Joined: 2006-03-15
User is offlineOffline
nedbrek wrote:Voiderest

nedbrek wrote:
Voiderest wrote:
nope

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/hawking/universes/html/univ_steady.html

Interesting, I am not familiar with this theory (which has lost favor anyway). I will have to look up the exact name of what I am thinking of, it is much older (I believe Augustine supported it).

Was i the only one that caught that? We're talking modern Cosmology and he's talking about a theory Augustine supported?

Augustine knew about as much about cosmology as I do about rocket engineering. That is, just about nothing.

To answer the OP, I should point out that atheism has no philosophy. It is a mere "no" to the question "Do you believe a god exists?" Atheists have all sorts of philosophical opinions.

I generally call myself a materialist/physicalist, libertarian, polyamorous/swinger, and a bunch of other big words.

But you can call me an atheist, if you like.

Shaun

I'll fight for a person's right to speak so long as that person will, in return, fight to allow me to challenge their opinions and ridicule them as the content of their ideas merit.


Posted on: December 15, 2006 - 11:00pm #56
nedbrek
Theist
Posts: 195
Joined: 2006-12-08
User is offlineOffline
Voiderest wrote:How is "the

Voiderest wrote:
How is "the way the world works now" being due to the fall different from "implying everything about the world today is due to 'the fall'"?

Someone asked about modern technology being due to the fall. That is just humans building things. It doesn't necessarily follow from the fall.

Voiderest wrote:

Quote:
God knew man would reject him, but created man anyway. He arranged in advance for revelation and salvation.

End to suffering or not are you saying god created man knowing they would suffer? To me that sounds like a little kid getting some ants and messing with them till they died...

Yes, given the choice of no humans at all, or humans with suffering, God chose to create us.


Posted on: December 15, 2006 - 11:03pm #57
nedbrek
Theist
Posts: 195
Joined: 2006-12-08
User is offlineOffline
ShaunPhilly wrote: Was i the

ShaunPhilly wrote:

Was i the only one that caught that? We're talking modern Cosmology and he's talking about a theory Augustine supported?

Augustine knew about as much about cosmology as I do about rocket engineering. That is, just about nothing.

Theories of the age of the earth have been around as along as philosophers (maybe longer Smiling. Simple ideas like, "the universe had a beginning" or "the universe has always existed" have too. As data comes in, certain ideas rise or fall... Given a few tweaks, and some new data, and an idea can get back in the ring.


Posted on: December 16, 2006 - 5:15am #58
Voided
Posts: 1195
Joined: 2006-02-20
User is offlineOffline
nedbrek wrote:Yes, given the

nedbrek wrote:
Yes, given the choice of no humans at all, or humans with suffering, God chose to create us.

Those aren't the only choices though. Couldn't a god create man without having them suffer?


Posted on: December 16, 2006 - 5:45am #59
Yellow_Number_Five
atheistRRS Core MemberScientist
Yellow_Number_Five's picture
Posts: 1389
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
nedbrek wrote:Ivan_Ivanov

nedbrek wrote:
Ivan_Ivanov wrote:
So what the Big Bang states, is that at the point in time from which we are able to describe the universe, there was a densely packed something, and the densely packed something rapidly expaned into the universe...

The state the instant before the big bang is not stable (otherwise, the big bang does not happen).

You can declare that time doesn't exist before then, but that makes the beginning of time "the beginning".

Otherwise, the change that converts the state from its stable condition to unstable is "the beginning".

The difference between "nothing" and "a super dense lump that sits idle for infinity" is largely semantics...

Read this:

http://www.rationalresponders.com/forums/yellow_number_five/evolution_of_life/debunking_creationism

And listen to show #9, it's a free on our homepage.

I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


« first‹ previous12