[wenger16]

(Original post by metalthrashin'mad)
Sounded like a crude way of Descartes method of doubt. Doubt everything you think you know and see what you can know and what you can't.

You also say "put a bubble in your mind" then "where does the bubble come from" WUT?

You didn't understand what I meant. I described to you basically think of everything you know exists and everything possible; basically not just the universe but everything in general terms. Put that in your mind and put a bubble around it, the bubble is only so you know "everything" is inside it. Now tell me where does the bubble meaning everything inside it come from and why is it there?

Basically i am mind ****ing myself as i am trying to simply grasp the thought of "everything"; the reason your not understanding is because of the human mind can not comprehend the totality of everything.

[catface I]

(Original post by wenger16)
The thing is we don't know "everything"; we probably don't know1 per cent of everything. Therefore when people present concrete "100 per cent true" arguments against a creator or for a creator its doesn't make sense.

Think of it this way... think of everything you know as a human being everything you know exists and everything you have ever learn about..eveything inluding whole universe everything you know exists...now in your mind put a "bubble" around it and trap everything inside...now tell me where has that bubble come from and the bigger question WHY? why is it there? Now friends there is no way to answer that question because we simply don't know. You might try to answer it with an answer like the big bang etc etc but the knowledge that leads to the answer of big bang lies inside that of bubble and therefore we cannot comprehend.

I don't know whether god exists but all i know is we will never really know the mystery of the universe or that "bubble" because simply we are not meant to know.

This probably doesn't even make sense but just contemplating the meaning of life etc.

This is EXACTLY how i think of the meaning of life
People believe in God or the Bigbang but don't feel obliged to explain WHERE the said God or Bigbang came from
And I totally love your bubble metaphor and will use it to argue with if ever need be. though i've mostly given up trying talking people out of their silliness. they're just so stupid!

[metalthrashin'mad]

(Original post by wenger16)
You didn't understand what I meant. I described to you basically think of everything you know exists and everything possible; basically not just the universe but everything in general terms. Put that in your mind and put a bubble around it, the bubble is only so you know "everything" is inside it. Now tell me where does the bubble meaning everything inside it come from and why is it there?

Basically i am mind ****ing myself as i am trying to simply grasp the thought of "everything"; the reason your not understanding is because of the human mind can not comprehend the totality of everything.

Or you're just explaining it really ****ing badly.

Go read the first 2 chapters of Descartes mediations. I think that's the idea you are trying to articulate possibly.

[wenger16]

(Original post by catface I)
This is EXACTLY how i think of the meaning of life
People believe in God or the Bigbang but don't feel obliged to explain WHERE the said God or Bigbang came from
And I totally love your bubble metaphor and will use it to argue with if ever need be. though i've mostly given up trying talking people out of their silliness. they're just so stupid!

Thanks I get what you mean; It can so hard to explain things like these to people/.

[Ursin]

Yep. Our whole world is based around certain things that are put in our mind from an early age. It is impossible to think of any object which is not formed from a basis of things which we know exist, because your mind only has the capacity to recall things which have already been presented to you. This may sound ridiculous, but I try to view the world with fresh eyes, with disregard to what society has taught me. Why is there more prominence of certain religions in certain countries? Because people just accept what they're taught about the bigger picture, I'm not sure they actually see what's outside of the 'bubble' of their own little society.

[Aoide]

You basically described most atheists. Only the most hypocritical atheists will truly believe "There is certainly no God". While many may argue against a belief in god what they usualy mean is while there could be a god we have no proof of it so it is illogical to act as there is one.

[wenger16]

(Original post by Ursin)
Yep. Our whole world is based around certain things that are put in our mind from an early age. It is impossible to think of any object which is not formed from a basis of things which we know exist, because your mind only has the capacity to recall things which have already been presented to you. This may sound ridiculous, but I try to view the world with fresh eyes, with disregard to what society has taught me. Why is there more prominence of certain religions in certain countries? Because people just accept what they're taught about the bigger picture, I'm not sure they actually see what's outside of the 'bubble' of their own little society.

Yeah this is basically religion/ cults etc. In India/middle east there's a lot of brain washing. People never get to look outside their society/culture and religion is imposed on their minds at a very young age. I think most people have a very narrow view of whole existence of humanity/ the universe.

For some people its just life as it is seen be born/study/marry/grow old/die and then a simple view afterlife of heaven and hell and thats it. Most people don't take a moment to stop and think. But i guess that sort of reality for people is quite cosy as there seems to be a definitive purpose to their existence.

[WanabeAussie]

Basically, we cannot know of God or experience God as he is meant to be a priori and nessecary. Using a posteriori evidence will not lead to any conclusion of the existence of such a being, as you too must be outside the 'bubble' (contingent reality we are in) It all comes back down to language, what to we mean be a priori, intuition and transcendence? The definition of such words, for example transendence means in some contexts to be 'beyond our knowledge' , the word transendence therefore is meaningless for it tries to describe what we cannot know to know, or know to exist.... It all starts to get very confusing (and im not going down Ayers verification route, just the the arguement de dicto- by defintion)

Our limited language and knowledge will never even get close to the concept that such a being exists. It just comes down to whether your are pre-supposed to believe, and if so, then such a being will exist in your reality (Language Games - wittengstien)


I hope that makes sense, philosophy just goes round in circles and neither has secure arguements against or for his existence.

[Ursin]

(Original post by wenger16)
Yeah this is basically religion/ cults etc. In India/middle east there's a lot of brain washing. People never get to look outside their society/culture and religion is imposed on their minds at a very young age. I think most people have a very narrow view of whole existence of humanity/ the universe.

For some people its just life as it is seen be born/study/marry/grow old/die and then a simple view afterlife of heaven and hell and thats it. Most people don't take a moment to stop and think. But i guess that sort of reality for people is quite cosy as there seems to be a definitive purpose to their existence.

Exactly. It's can actually be quite frightening to think that we may have a purpose in life other than the born-study-marry-grow old-die thing, which can be why people just don't question it. Or they just don't even take the time to consider it.

[beccac94]

You sound like a bit of a possiblium if you ask me. We watched it in college a few weeks ago and I was literally the only person who was remotely interested.

http://www.possibilian.com/

Watch the video its quite good.

[TheGrinningSkull]

(Original post by SsEe)
I think I'm just making the observation that the existence of a deity is unfalsifiable. In my view, the debate isn't over whether or not a god exists. That's a silly debate because of the unfalsifiability. One side can't win! It's over whether or not the theist's arguments in a god's favour are valid. That's the place where an agnostic atheist takes a positive stance. I think their arguments are invalid. Certainly the argument that "God exists because you can't prove he doesn't" is very weak!

Your beginning was good and then you go and pick the weakest or a weak argument to "prove" your point in finding it invalid?

There are many other points and I'm not going to go through them but I just wanted to mention how your final sentence sounded silly

[SsEe]

(Original post by TheGrinningSkull)
Your beginning was good and then you go and pick the weakest or a weak argument to "prove" your point in finding it invalid?

There are many other points and I'm not going to go through them but I just wanted to mention how your final sentence sounded silly

Perhaps I should have added some white space between the last sentence and the rest to separate it. I wasn't making some kind of argument by example, ie I wasn't saying "one particularly bad theist argument is bad, therefore all theist arguments are bad". I was just agreeing with the person I was replying to in saying that the unfalsifiability of something isn't an argument in its favour.

[TheGrinningSkull]

(Original post by SsEe)
Perhaps I should have added some white space between the last sentence and the rest to separate it. I wasn't making some kind of argument by example, ie I wasn't saying "one particularly bad theist argument is bad, therefore all theist arguments are bad". I was just agreeing with the person I was replying to in saying that the unfalsifiability of something isn't an argument in its favour.

Ah right, okay, makes sense now because earlier they looked connected :L

[Carter78]

(Original post by almasy)
http://www.cracked.com/article_19213...-our-eyes.html

uh, no proof for evolution? there's as much proof for evolution as there is humanity existing

You're quoting me wrong. I didn't say that there wasn't enough proof for evolution, I said that many religious people stick their head in sand and simply repeat "there is not enough proof for evolution" as some kind of mantra.

BTW as enjoyable as the cracked.com article was, a biology textbook would be a much more reliable - and respected - source of evidence for evolution

[aljolson]

(Original post by wenger16)
The thing is we don't know "everything"; we probably don't know1 per cent of everything. Therefore when people present concrete "100 per cent true" arguments against a creator or for a creator its doesn't make sense.

Think of it this way... think of everything you know as a human being everything you know exists and everything you have ever learn about..eveything inluding whole universe everything you know exists...now in your mind put a "bubble" around it and trap everything inside...now tell me where has that bubble come from and the bigger question WHY? why is it there? Now friends there is no way to answer that question because we simply don't know. You might try to answer it with an answer like the big bang etc etc but the knowledge that leads to the answer of big bang lies inside that of bubble and therefore we cannot comprehend.

I don't know whether god exists but all i know is we will never really know the mystery of the universe or that "bubble" because simply we are not meant to know.

This probably doesn't even make sense but just contemplating the meaning of life etc.

We have come a long way to understanding the universe and our understanding is growing, one may say exponentially. Of course this is a collective knowledge, individually we know very little, but standing on the shoulders of giants, it is immense. So all we need is some faith in the science, and we can negate God for ever.