Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    This is nonsense. I have never seen anyone argue that. I have seen theists say we can never understand gods, of course, and that they move in mysterious ways.
    Really?! You'd be surprised how common it is. I can't see how atheists won't describe the universe as a brute fact considering materialism doesn't have the ability to answer the question. (I think it's safe to assume most or the majority of atheists are materialists)

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Supermonkey92)
    Really?! You'd be surprised how common it is.
    I would. I suggest you discuss the matter with intelligent atheists outside your current friendship circle.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Do you feel that there is absolutely no possible way that there is some kind of 'creator'? Or are you open to the idea of there being something/someone otherworldly that did create the world in some way?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    I would. I suggest you discuss the matter with intelligent atheists outside your current friendship circle.
    Say you haven't really got a reply then?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Supermonkey92)
    Say you haven't really got a reply then?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    You have had my reply. It is nonsense. Of course there is an explanation. We just don't know it yet.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    You have had my reply. It is nonsense. Of course there is an explanation. We just don't know it yet.
    I don't think you read the content of many intelligent atheists. Ironic considering.

    Could you explain how it is nonsense rather than asserting it? That's whether the idea that the universe is a brute fact or the idea that materialism entails it being a brute fact or both.

    And how do we answer the question? ( i assume by 'yet' you expect we will find the answer) science? Physics in particular?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Supermonkey92)
    I don't think you read the content of many intelligent atheists. Ironic considering.

    Could you explain how it is nonsense rather than asserting it? That's whether the idea that the universe is a brute fact or the idea that materialism entails it being a brute fact or both. It is a philosophical question. QED.

    And how do we answer the question? ( i assume by 'yet' you expect we will find the answer) science? Physics in particular?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    See bolded answer. Philosophy is not a science and can contribute nothing to what is a simple scientific question, the answer to which is not simple to discover, and may not be simple to understand.

    Scientific endeavour may, eventually, make the necessary discoveries. If not, then we'll never know. I'm sure I shall go to my grave in ignorance of the answer, as will you.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    See bolded answer. Philosophy is not a science and can contribute nothing to what is a simple scientific question, the answer to which is not simple to discover, and may not be simple to understand.

    Scientific endeavour may, eventually, make the necessary discoveries. If not, then we'll never know. I'm sure I shall go to my grave in ignorance of the answer, as will you.
    I can't see emboldened writing on the app. I'll assume you just meant that it's nonsense because it's philosophy, that's all you added to me post.

    So you are saying it's a scientific question? (Simple at that?!) Just tell me how science even has the tools the tackle the question.

    So you are sitting on the fence. Science could answer it or it couldn't. Of course that's assuming that science can even answer it in principle.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Blondie987)
    Do you feel that there is absolutely no possible way that there is some kind of 'creator'? Or are you open to the idea of there being something/someone otherworldly that did create the world in some way?
    I feel that the existence of a 'creator', of sorts, is about as plausible as the existence of unicorns. I basically subscribe to Bertrand Russell's view on this point:
    I do not think the existence of the Christian God any more probable than the existence of the Gods of Olympus or Valhalla. To take another illustration: nobody can prove that there is not between the Earth and Mars a china teapot revolving in an elliptical orbit, but nobody thinks this sufficiently likely to be taken into account in practice. I think the Christian God just as unlikely.
    Admittedly he is talking about the Christian God specifically, which is just one further level of implausible (than any 'creator' ) .
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Supermonkey92)
    I can't see emboldened writing on the app. I'll assume you just meant that it's nonsense because it's philosophy, that's all you added to me post.

    So you are saying it's a scientific question? (Simple at that?!) Just tell me how science even has the tools the tackle the question.

    So you are sitting on the fence. Science could answer it or it couldn't. Of course that's assuming that science can even answer it in principle.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Just read what I have written in my replies and think it though. They have been a complete answer.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Supermonkey92)
    I can't see emboldened writing on the app. I'll assume you just meant that it's nonsense because it's philosophy, that's all you added to me post.

    So you are saying it's a scientific question? (Simple at that?!) Just tell me how science even has the tools the tackle the question.

    So you are sitting on the fence. Science could answer it or it couldn't. Of course that's assuming that science can even answer it in principle.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I'm not sure what Good Bloke is on about to be honest; he seems a bit lost in all this. Most of what you're saying makes sense. You might be interested in this: https://www.reddit.com/r/askphilosop...losophers_are/
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by YesAllMen)
    I'm not sure what Good Bloke is on about to be honest; he seems a bit lost in all this. Most of what you're saying makes sense. You might be interested in this: https://www.reddit.com/r/askphilosop...losophers_are/
    Perhaps, then, you can explain how a philosopher's opinion changes what is the (currently unknown) truth about the origins of the universe?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    Just read what I have written in my replies and think it though. They have been a complete answer.
    You are being vague on purpose it seems. You haven't replied much apart from asserting that the common atheist answer is nonsense.

    As I've said. It seems to follow from materialism that the universe is a brute fact. If you are a materialist and seek to hold on to intelligibility within the universe, please explain how.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by YesAllMen)
    I'm not sure what Good Bloke is on about to be honest; he seems a bit lost in all this. Most of what you're saying makes sense. You might be interested in this: https://www.reddit.com/r/askphilosop...losophers_are/
    Thanks for the link.

    Although, he seems to wish to act as though he has a firm handle on what he thinks (and more importantly, to come across as though he has reasons to think what he does!) He digs himself a whole by deliberately not answering. Just not replying would have been more efficient.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    Perhaps, then, you can explain how a philosopher's opinion changes what is the (currently unknown) truth about the origins of the universe?
    I have little to no interest in getting into a debate about this, however your objections to supermonkey92's posts involved the idea that "atheists don't say X because it's nonsense" (which is false) and that he should "speak with intelligent atheists" (which, if he did, including philosophers which are majorly non-theist, then he would find that most would agree with his ideas). I'm not too sure what your criteria for intelligence is but perhaps you should consider raising the bar a little

    The link provided was to show the different possibilities of the existence of the universe, and why the idea of brute fact would hold (which is what you were objecting to). It might not be a satisfying answer, however it's an answer nonetheless. Claiming some initial conditions of the universe are a brute fact is a positive answer as to their origins, and it's quite different than saying that one doesn't know what the origins are. This is a metaphysical question, hence, philosophy has a part to play. If is in indeed the case that you're unfamiliar with the existent philosophical literature (which I suspect is the case) then as supermonkey92 said above, not replying would be a more efficient use of your time

    The user above posted a quote by Russell, here's another:

    Copleston: (...) But your general point, then, Lord Russell, is that it's illegitimate even to ask the question of the cause of the world?
    Russell: Yes, that's my position.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Supermonkey92)
    You are being vague on purpose it seems. You haven't replied much apart from asserting that the common atheist answer is nonsense.

    As I've said. It seems to follow from materialism that the universe is a brute fact. If you are a materialist and seek to hold on to intelligibility within the universe, please explain how.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I made a thread on consciousness actually and it's nice to know someone thinks like I do. I don't see how pure materialism can give rise to intelligence i.e. the conscious.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nikembab)
    And what makes you thnk there is no God?
    I don't label myself as an atheist, so I was merely putting that question to those that are.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Supermonkey92)
    You are being vague on purpose it seems. You haven't replied much apart from asserting that the common atheist answer is nonsense.

    As I've said. It seems to follow from materialism that the universe is a brute fact. If you are a materialist and seek to hold on to intelligibility within the universe, please explain how.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I have told you that philosophical theories are irrelevant to the truth about the universe. How, then, can I be an adherent of materialism, which is a branch of philosophy?

    You must separate science and philosophy. Either seek the truth of the universe's origins, by becoming a physicist, or spend your life speculating and positing vainly about it by becoming a philosopher.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    I have told you that philosophical theories are irrelevant to the truth about the universe. How, then, can I be an adherent of materialism, which is a branch of philosophy?

    You must separate science and philosophy. Either seek the truth of the universe's origins, by becoming a physicist, or spend your life speculating and positing vainly about it by becoming a philosopher.
    So materialism - the world view which says that only things that are physical are real - is rejected by you because it's philosophical?! It's really just a statement that follows from science being the main (perhaps only) meaningful way to talk about the world.

    Which is what you are saying.

    How can you stay consistent and reject materialism, yet be an atheist who thinks of science as you do?

    What this has really been, is a wild goose chase to deny being a materialist or that the universe is a brute fact so you can ignore my original question.

    Note, you haven't even explained how physics could in principle answer the question why the universe exists. You've simply replied with assertions.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Supermonkey92)
    So materialism - the world view which says that only things that are physical are real - is rejected by you because it's philosophical?! It's really just a statement that follows from science being the main (perhaps only) meaningful way to talk about the world.

    Which is what you are saying.

    How can you stay consistent and reject materialism, yet be an atheist who thinks of science as you do?

    What this has really been, is a wild goose chase to deny being a materialist or that the universe is a brute fact so you can ignore my original question.

    Note, you haven't even explained how physics could in principle answer the question why the universe exists. You've simply replied with assertions.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    You do put a lot of words in other people's mouths and draw a lot of false conclusions from what they say, don't you?

    Physics is the study of the physical world using scientific processes and principles. It deals in the real world.

    Philosophy deals with speculation about beliefs, myths and morals.

    Which do you think is more likely to arrive, eventually, at an answer to the question of our origins? I think the former is.

    Other atheists may like to philosophise with you. I prefer the scientific process. We are all different.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: March 15, 2016
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Brussels sprouts
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.