Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Religion and Atheism

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 51
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 4 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 24 51 template Next
  • #131
    Re: Religion and Atheism

    Originally posted by Siggie View Post
    And since when is the veracity of something measured by the number of people who believe it to be true?
    Truth exists as a perceptual interpretation of a situation from a particular perspective. It can't be measured. However I'm willing to bet that majority of people will agree that truth exists, even if you can't physically touch it, see it, taste it, etc.
    "Nobody can give you freedom. Nobody can give you equality or justice or anything. If you're a man, you take it." ~Malcolm X

    Comment

    • #132
      Re: Religion and Atheism

      Originally posted by KanadaHye View Post
      Truth exists as a perceptual interpretation of a situation from a particular perspective. It can't be measured. However I'm willing to bet that majority of people will agree that truth exists, even if you can't physically touch it, see it, taste it, etc.
      If we take the standpoint that truth cannot be decided to a satisfactory degree for belief, then everything falls apart and we can't know anything about the world at all (i.e. become paralyzed... how can interact with a world you don't know exists?) and it becomes meaningless.
      It makes more sense to adopt a criterion, such that when the probability of truth reaches that threshold, then we adopt as fact/truth.
      [COLOR=#4b0082][B][SIZE=4][FONT=trebuchet ms]“If you think you can, or you can’t, you’re right.”
      -Henry Ford[/FONT][/SIZE][/B][/COLOR]

      Comment

      • #133
        Re: Religion and Atheism

        Originally posted by Siggie View Post
        If we take the standpoint that truth cannot be decided to a satisfactory degree for belief, then everything falls apart and we can't know anything about the world at all (i.e. become paralyzed... how can interact with a world you don't know exists?) and it becomes meaningless.
        It makes more sense to adopt a criterion, such that when the probability of truth reaches that threshold, then we adopt as fact/truth.
        Everyone sees events from a different perspective. One person's version of the truth may not be the same as another person's version of the truth even though they may both have been witnesses of the event. A person who didn't witness the event would require evidence to be convinced on who is telling the truth. However if both are only telling half of the truth then can the whole truth really be reconstructed from evidence alone?
        "Nobody can give you freedom. Nobody can give you equality or justice or anything. If you're a man, you take it." ~Malcolm X

        Comment

        • #134
          Re: Religion and Atheism

          Originally posted by KanadaHye View Post
          Small sects wouldn't be able to gather a large following without a convincing campaign. Scientology for example didn't have any historical events associated with it. There was no awakening or life changing event that created it.
          Christianity started off as a cult and wouldn't be the religion today if Constantine hadn't converted. Even in 1400 there were parts of Europe that weren't Christian. Maybe in 2000 years Scientology will be the Christianity of there day.

          I got a question to all Christians, why should any person believe in your god and not let us say the gods of Greeks?

          Comment

          • #135
            Re: Religion and Atheism

            Originally posted by KanadaHye View Post
            Everyone sees events from a different perspective. One person's version of the truth may not be the same as another person's version of the truth even though they may both have been witnesses of the event. A person who didn't witness the event would require evidence to be convinced on who is telling the truth. However if both are only telling half of the truth then can the whole truth really be reconstructed from evidence alone?
            No, people's perceptions differ and their memories for the event will differ (your scenario is actually exactly my field), but there is still the truth of what occurred. This is precisely the reason we seek objective measurement in science, btw.
            We can be closer or further from the truth, and just because we cannot conclude something is 100% truth, doesn't mean that we should throw the baby out with the bathwater and abandon all efforts for objective measurement of the truth and getting as close to the truth as possible.

            Originally posted by KarotheGreat View Post
            Christianity started off as a cult and wouldn't be the religion today if Constantine hadn't converted. Even in 1400 there were parts of Europe that weren't Christian. Maybe in 2000 years Scientology will be the Christianity of there day.
            I agree; good points Karo.
            [COLOR=#4b0082][B][SIZE=4][FONT=trebuchet ms]“If you think you can, or you can’t, you’re right.”
            -Henry Ford[/FONT][/SIZE][/B][/COLOR]

            Comment

            • #136
              Re: Religion and Atheism

              Originally posted by KarotheGreat View Post
              Christianity started off as a cult and wouldn't be the religion today if Constantine hadn't converted. Even in 1400 there were parts of Europe that weren't Christian. Maybe in 2000 years Scientology will be the Christianity of there day.

              I got a question to all Christians, why should any person believe in your god and not let us say the gods of Greeks?
              However, as a figure of authority he did convert. The question is why would a powerful man agree to represent something that would take power away from him? The Greek gods were just figures or idols, they didn't represent a form of guidance or intellectual enlightenment.
              "Nobody can give you freedom. Nobody can give you equality or justice or anything. If you're a man, you take it." ~Malcolm X

              Comment

              • #137
                Re: Religion and Atheism

                Originally posted by Siggie View Post
                That's a flawed argument (originally proposed as a joke even) and assumes God would appreciate that you "believed" in him just to cover your @ss. And if he's omniscient (as most religions purpose), then he'd know the "true" believers from those that are "believing" for gain.
                I think if he did exist and was a benevolent god, then he'd understand that he just didn't provide enough evidence for me to believe. At least it's honest, which is more in line with his alleged teachings (or most of humanity's concept of morality).

                Also, by this argument, you should believe in all the gods of the other religions too because what if you're wrong about them? You'd already be making the incorrect wager by only believing in the Christian god by this logic. Further, it's not really that there's nothing lost from believing in a false god... what about the types that fore go medical treatment for prayer? Aren't they seeing harm as a result of their belief?
                No, it was not made up as a joke. You should probably read the article, and the section on criticism. His logic is not flawed and he explains the position you just brought up, about God knowing someone is believing in him but not out of sincerity. Of course God would know. Just read the article, it is explained rather well.
                For the first time in more than 600 years, Armenia is free and independent, and we are therefore obligated
                to place our national interests ahead of our personal gains or aspirations.



                http://www.armenianhighland.com/main.html

                Comment

                • #138
                  Re: Religion and Atheism

                  Originally posted by Siggie View Post
                  If we take the standpoint that truth cannot be decided to a satisfactory degree for belief, then everything falls apart and we can't know anything about the world at all (i.e. become paralyzed... how can interact with a world you don't know exists?) and it becomes meaningless.
                  It makes more sense to adopt a criterion, such that when the probability of truth reaches that threshold, then we adopt as fact/truth.
                  Well I'm glad you are not a post-modernist. But I could be wrong.
                  For the first time in more than 600 years, Armenia is free and independent, and we are therefore obligated
                  to place our national interests ahead of our personal gains or aspirations.



                  http://www.armenianhighland.com/main.html

                  Comment

                  • #139
                    Re: Religion and Atheism

                    Originally posted by Siggie View Post
                    No, people's perceptions differ and their memories for the event will differ (your scenario is actually exactly my field), but there is still the truth of what occurred. This is precisely the reason we seek objective measurement in science, btw.
                    We can be closer or further from the truth, and just because we cannot conclude something is 100% truth, doesn't mean that we should throw the baby out with the bathwater and abandon all efforts for objective measurement of the truth and getting as close to the truth as possible.
                    That's not what I said. I said half of each story was true and the other half of each story was made up to leave question or doubt in order to persuade the third party that THEIR version of the truth is what really occured. It's impossible to prove something that is entirely made up and difficult to prove that it didn't occur. It's hard to prove something that really happened when half truths of accounts are created to change the events and leave doubt.
                    Last edited by KanadaHye; 06-09-2011, 10:17 AM.
                    "Nobody can give you freedom. Nobody can give you equality or justice or anything. If you're a man, you take it." ~Malcolm X

                    Comment

                    • #140
                      Re: Religion and Atheism

                      Originally posted by KarotheGreat View Post
                      Christianity started off as a cult and wouldn't be the religion today if Constantine hadn't converted. Even in 1400 there were parts of Europe that weren't Christian. Maybe in 2000 years Scientology will be the Christianity of there day.

                      I got a question to all Christians, why should any person believe in your god and not let us say the gods of Greeks?
                      I guess living in western Europe will turn one into an atheist?

                      If you read about Perennialism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perennial_philosophy) you will understand that there as always been a Creator, but people throughout history have seen different aspects of the Creator. Some saw multiple gods, others a few, and more recently, only one. The answers are out there, but you will never get them from science because that is not what science was created for nor should do.
                      For the first time in more than 600 years, Armenia is free and independent, and we are therefore obligated
                      to place our national interests ahead of our personal gains or aspirations.



                      http://www.armenianhighland.com/main.html

                      Comment

                      Previous 1 4 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 24 51 template Next
                      Working...
                      X