Turn on thread page Beta

Any Athiests who now believe in God? watch

    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    I cannot justify a god to myself but I can certainly justify Christian morality (modern 1940's etc) and think that a return to more morally correct times and a more religious homogenous society would be better for everyone overall. If there is a god he most certainly does not want to listen or is dead, looking around at life at the moment does not help my faith either
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Radioactivedecay)
    Actually thats quite easy, Aristotle did this years ago. He said I think therefore I am. So you easily prove if you exisist if you simply, well, think but not that otheres exisist.
    HAHAHA! Aristotle did not mate It was René Descartes.

    Also it's an argument that's completely flawed too pretty universally agreed upon tbh, thinking itself could also be a product of someone elses dreams.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cman123)
    HAHAHA! Aristotle did not mate It was René Descartes.

    Also it's an argument that's completely flawed too pretty universally agreed upon tbh, thinking itself could also be a product of someone elses dreams.
    Oh snap you're right ma bad, too many Greek philosophers lol.

    Also you cant just someone claim is flawed withouth giving any reasons to back it up, especially when that person spent a good chunk of his lofe thinking about questions like that.

    No one has proved that it's illogical or flawed, so no, it's not 'pretty universally agreed upon'.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Radioactivedecay)
    Oh snap you're right ma bad, too many Greek philosophers lol.

    Also you cant just someone claim is flawed withouth giving any reasons to back it up, especially when that person spent a good chunk of his lofe thinking about questions like that.

    No one has proved that it's illogical or flawed, so no, it's not 'pretty universally agreed upon'.
    You really have to be careful when you use the word "proved" in the field of philosophy since it's completey different to the general use of the word, e.g. in scince we use the proved in the sense of either real world maths or objective evidence.

    In philosophy we can't really objectively say that this or that is proven since philosophy dives into the realm of logic and reason alone (mostly) not empirical evidence alone like in the sciences.

    The "Proof" as u may put it is simply that we have no possible idea wheather or not the act of thinking (or conscienceness) is nessecarily linked to that or a corporical body or brain uniquely, you could just exist in the mind of someone else, meaning that your entire life and thoughts is a simply a very small part of a higher collective conscience with a compleatly different body, mind, and brain.

    What i meant by universally agreed upon is that Decartes' idea of what "cogito ergo sum" meant by using the phrase is pretty much wrong universally by the contemporary philosophers in the same field. Just like how Newton is wrong about his theory of gravity and it's been revised by Einstein.

    Look just because he's wrong about his philosophy on how someone can know he's alive or not in the sense of a living being, and his views on animal ethics (btw he said that animals just don't feel pain in order overcome the unethical treatment of animals), it doesn't mean that his entire life is worthless.

    For example he was a damm genius when it came to the field of mathematics. Ever heard of the cartesian graph (x,y axis graph)??

    Many people in the world actually live there entire life without achiveing much in the grand scheme of things, it's just fact. it's depressing but true.

    People who work in the field of quantum mechanics, and theoretical physics their entire life will most likely achieve nothing or very little through all their hard work.

    We can't all be winners.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chazwomaq)
    A topologist has no problem with that...
    On a flat surface.

    Also, may I add another example:

    If you are omnipotent:

    You can make anything

    Apart from a stone you can't lift.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Radioactivedecay)
    Actually thats quite easy, Aristotle did this years ago. He said I think therefore I am. So you easily prove if you exisist if you simply, well, think but not that otheres exisist.
    That was Descartes.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    Originally I was the atheist but the started to think that opposing beliefs is stupid simply because the complexity of universe implies the existence of almost anything in context of time space.

    But I adhere to certain beliefs myself though I am not trying to enforce on anybody.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chucke1992)
    Originally I was the atheist but the started to think that opposing beliefs is stupid simply because the complexity of universe implies the existence of almost anything in context of time space.

    But I adhere to certain beliefs myself though I am not trying to enforce on anybody.
    Bad argument. If the complexity of the universe requires a creator then why doesn't God? After all, he's supposed to be the most complex thing that exists.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Sometimes I see a perfectly crafted butt and almost shift from agnosticism to some form of actual theism but it's never quite happened.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Plantagenet Crown)
    Bad argument. If the complexity of the universe requires a creator then why doesn't God? After all, he's supposed to be the most complex thing that exists.
    Who mentioned a creator? I said that there are possibility of god existence, not necessary creator. In my own definition humanity can reach at least demi-god stage. I do not exclude that there might be a creator but at the same time I do not defend that he doesn't exist.

    You see, NPC in games - we don't know for sure - might consider us creators but they cannot comprehend our existence.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chucke1992)
    Who mentioned a creator? I said that there are possibility of god existence, not necessary creator. In my own definition humanity can reach at least demi-god stage. I do not exclude that there might be a creator but at the same time I do not defend that he doesn't exist.

    You see, NPC in games - we don't know for sure - might consider us creators but they cannot comprehend our existence.
    This is exactly the problem. In your own definition. We need some less subjective parameters so people can't move the goalposts.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Unkilled)
    This is exactly the problem. In your own definition. We need some less subjective parameters so people can't move the goalposts.
    So? I said

    But I adhere to certain beliefs myself though I am not trying to enforce on anybody
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chucke1992)
    So? I said
    Well what you said is wrong.

    Read "The Age of Reason" by Thomas Paine.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    If you are smart enough to give up religion it’s unlikely that you will suddenly become dumb.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Unkilled)
    Well what you said is wrong.

    Read "The Age of Reason" by Thomas Paine.
    What is wrong in saying that I have my own beliefs? ? I said that there might be creator or might be not (I don't care whether he interferes or not at all though). My point is that the complexity of university implies existence of almost anything. I don't share an idea that humanity is the peak of the universe development. Planets might be atoms for some higher level existence for all I care.

    I'll look into The Age of Reason though.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Thomazo)
    If you are smart enough to give up religion it’s unlikely that you will suddenly become dumb.
    But if you were never brought up in religion in the first then you still might later convert.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by zeldor711)
    But if you were never brought up in religion in the first then you still might later convert.
    Yes if the reason you are an atheist is because that’s how you were brought up, not because you are able to see why religion is nonsense.

    If you are smart enough to see why religion is bs, then there’s no chance you will convert.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Thomazo)
    Yes if the reason you are an atheist is because that’s how you were brought up, not because you are able to see why religion is nonsense.

    If you are smart enough to see why religion is bs, then there’s no chance you will convert.
    Yep, completely agree.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chucke1992)
    My point is that the complexity of university implies existence of almost anything.
    Don't really know what you mean by this and how it relates to God.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Plantagenet Crown)
    Bad argument. If the complexity of the universe requires a creator then why doesn't God? After all, he's supposed to be the most complex thing that exists.
    I only believe in the power, conscious force and organisation bit- a God symbiotic with the world - my beliefs about creation(or not) are more abstract and scientific.

    To think we have consciousness and are minute specs in terms of the cosmos and matter, and then rule out a higher conscious force completely seems like wishful thinking to me, and quite banal-

    But, I didn't get there my rationality, it was revelation.

    For the record
 
 
 
Poll
Who is most responsible for your success at university
Useful resources

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

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