why that was nice

Should i start using crystal meth?

  • Sure...its not that bad...

    Votes: 93 62.0%
  • Just say no!

    Votes: 57 38.0%

  • Total voters
    150
I am off to a movie, so I will respond later with a post explaining why your way of thinking is so wrong philosophically.

In the mean time, three simple ideas:

1. We must more clearly define "meaning" and "god".

2. A false dichotomy is being presented

3. There is an underlying argument here that the existence of god gives your life "purpose" or "meaning"; I would argue that it would actually strip your life of all meaning because, in the context I believe god is being used here, everything you do is either under god's control, must be done to appease god, or must be done on behalf of god.

 
black people don't fish?
********. A ton of black people fish. Not many of your "thugs" but a lot of the others fish, at least here in the South.

Those fishing poles aren't with their rightful owner?
//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif

river is only a few inches deep? you can see the stones almost breaking the surface.
Still more of the river you don't see. Besides, fish don't have to have deep water.

lmao- they have poles, but, are fishing with a "spool of thread"?


edit: i win
I have seen Mexicans fish with coke bottles...Literally. Tie the line to the coke bottle and wrap it around it...

 
I have seen Mexicans fish with coke bottles...Literally. Tie the line to the coke bottle and wrap it around it...
i've done that with a stick and fishing line. who needs a reel? i'll just snatch them shits out the water //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif

 
I am off to a movie, so I will respond later with a post explaining why your way of thinking is so wrong philosophically.
In the mean time, three simple ideas:

1. We must more clearly define "meaning" and "god".

2. A false dichotomy is being presented

3. There is an underlying argument here that the existence of god gives your life "purpose" or "meaning"; I would argue that it would actually strip your life of all meaning because, in the context I believe god is being used here, everything you do is either under god's control, must be done to appease god, or must be done on behalf of god.
1. No you cannot more clearly define god and meaning, and thats the problem with religion. If there is a such thing as god which i believe is undeniably true, you cannot define him (more appropriately, "It") That is Clear,

And the reason why every religion in the world fails. Stop picturing god as a mighty rule-giver on a throne. As much historic information as you can muster, evidential support is neg. Thus following the rules of any religion boils down to sacrificing villagers to the volcano. I do not for one second believe that any religion in the world has 100% of the truth, granted they all have benefits and good concepts but not truth. By definition if a creator of the universe existed it would be for the purpose of negating the impossibility of a universe otherwise, a reality that humans are a part of and can not escape to obtain a clear reference which to define a god or purpose.

In other words you have a problem of circular reasoning here that cannot be seen around or through because the path of logic is beyond human reasoning. That problem is:

There is a degree of impossibility to the idea of the universe existing out of nothing. So a Pre-existing eternal force would actually be the simplest explanation, the circular reasoning and rhetorical part of the concept is that a "god" fitting this description would by definition be impossible to understand from the human perspective. so Alas, you cannot know either way for sure. No atheist truly has a better support for his beliefs than a deist or vica versa. But my argument for life here is the chief reason i believe deistic.

2.even though i do believe so, I'm not arguing that god gives your life meaning or purpose, You are taking it too far. I'm saying that in a universe devoid of "higher beings" or "un-natural" unobservable things, the concept of evolution makes no sense. An underlying force which is responsible for evolution attempts to keep life going which is completely nonsensical. The simplest most natural course would be that life (even if created by chance) would simply die out rather than continue and change. Saying otherwise is saying that evolution is following an illogical course and thus can defined as a conscious being! like a (omg) "GOD"!?!?! lol jk

Back to god giving life meaning yes. Look around you everything which serves a purpose in your house was created. This is in no way parallel to the existence of man, but my point is that a created being does not need to be aware of his purpose in order to serve it. The more useful thing to note is that complex items serve complex purposes.

 
Adam's Curse is a 2003 book by Oxford University human genetics professor Bryan Sykes expounding his hypothesis that with the declining sperm count in men and the continual atrophy of the Y chromosome, within 5,000 generations (approximately 125,000 years) the male of the human species will become extinct.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam%27s_Curse

intresting but i ask this. with the ability to pretty much choose the sex of your baby these days how is this possible???

 
god created himself and then the universe, now i can see how he created the universe but himself that has been a giant stump in my brain for years now
Nope God is merely the eternal pre-existing force necessary for the universe to exist. In short what makes him "god" would be nothing other than the fact that he had no creator and exists on an eternal plane.

 
intresting but i ask this. with the ability to pretty much choose the sex of your baby these days how is this possible???
Every child, male or female is born with at least 1 X chromosome. A woman will always pass the X, a male can pass either an X (female birth - XX) or a Y (male birth - XY).

Use this for an example:

Humans begin to show signs of aging through wrinkles. Wrinkles are caused by cells being regenerated (copied) over and over again until they slowly but surely become obsolete. The same thing is slowly happening with the X chromosome. Science predicts within 20 years women will be able to have children without a male donor, but the result will always be a female child.

 
1. No you cannot more clearly define god and meaning, and thats the problem with religion. If there is a such thing as god which i believe is undeniably true, you cannot define him (more appropriately, "It") That is Clear,
And the reason why every religion in the world fails. Stop picturing god as a mighty rule-giver on a throne. As much historic information as you can muster, evidential support is neg. Thus following the rules of any religion boils down to sacrificing villagers to the volcano. I do not for one second believe that any religion in the world has 100% of the truth, granted they all have benefits and good concepts but not truth. By definition if a creator of the universe existed it would be for the purpose of negating the impossibility of a universe otherwise, a reality that humans are a part of and can not escape to obtain a clear reference which to define a god or purpose.
If we are arguing that a god exists and that he provides meaning, then we absolutely must define what we mean by the word "god" and what we mean by the word "meaning". As you define god later in this post, he is the master physicist who created the universe with all its laws and is unseen and unknowable. I do agree completely, though, that the area in which you propose god exists is very unknowable. In fact, it is so unknowable that it is preposterous to assert that he exists.

In other words you have a problem of circular reasoning here that cannot be seen around or through because the path of logic is beyond human reasoning. That problem is:

There is a degree of impossibility to the idea of the universe existing out of nothing. So a Pre-existing eternal force would actually be the simplest explanation, the circular reasoning and rhetorical part of the concept is that a "god" fitting this description would by definition be impossible to understand from the human perspective. so Alas, you cannot know either way for sure. No atheist truly has a better support for his beliefs than a deist or vica versa. But my argument for life here is the chief reason i believe deistic.
The cosmological argument is both unsound and invalid. First, we of course have an infinite regress built into the god argument, and it is unclear why this one entity is able to overcome it other than by fiat. Further, it really does not make sense to ask what came before the universe; without time, there really is no "before" to speak of. Even if we establish the existence of something that gave rise to the universe, we are still not in a position to say anything reasonable about it. Calling it god or an entity or really anything is a non-sequitur. It is so far out of bounds that we cannot say, with any intellectual honesty, a thing about its properties, and in relation to us it resides in a state of non-existence.

Further, the deist is making an incredible leap of faith that an atheist refuses to make. Perhaps there was a creator god, but we simply do not have evidence for it. Yes, there is something we have a hard time understanding, but that does not mean the answer to it must, necessarily, be god; that is an argument from ignorance. If evidence or reasonable argumentation comes up that a god exists, an agnostic atheist such as myself would gladly change my opinion, whereas a deist is operating on the assumption that a god must have created the universe.

The Kalam cosmological argument is not much better than the original, either.

2.even though i do believe so, I'm not arguing that god gives your life meaning or purpose, You are taking it too far. I'm saying that in a universe devoid of "higher beings" or "un-natural" unobservable things, the concept of evolution makes no sense. An underlying force which is responsible for evolution attempts to keep life going which is completely nonsensical. The simplest most natural course would be that life (even if created by chance) would simply die out rather than continue and change. Saying otherwise is saying that evolution is following an illogical course and thus can defined as a conscious being! like a (omg) "GOD"!?!?! lol jk
That is an utter and complete bald assertion. What is your rational argument that supports the following premises:

1) Evolution makes no sense if it is not the product of a higher being.

2) Life producing life is non-sensical.

3) The "most natural" course would be that life simply die out.

These are all things that you're just saying are true, again by fiat. They are not really sound arguments, in my opinion.

Back to god giving life meaning yes. Look around you everything which serves a purpose in your house was created. This is in no way parallel to the existence of man, but my point is that a created being does not need to be aware of his purpose in order to serve it. The more useful thing to note is that complex items serve complex purposes.
Just because you want life to have a purpose doesn't mean it does. With that said, I think our purpose in life is to be the most productive members of society and aim to minimize suffering in our lives and others lives. That's not a directive from god; simply a recognition of what is often called "the human condition". It is the product of our very existence.

 
Activity
No one is currently typing a reply...

About this thread

faulkton

5,000+ posts
CarAudio.com Veteran
Thread starter
faulkton
Joined
Location
neverland
Start date
Participants
Who Replied
Replies
31,921
Views
518,574
Last reply date
Last reply from
natisfynest
561786595_18427607485102160_7010259965928918509_n.jpg

just call me KeV

    Oct 9, 2025
  • 0
  • 0
561583216_18427455586102160_8141545757991593433_n.jpg

just call me KeV

    Oct 9, 2025
  • 0
  • 0

New threads

Top