The Atheist Bus, It's Raising Quite a Fuss - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 02-25-2009, 07:58 PM   #16
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Lemonchick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4,647
Local Time: 03:50 PM
Or as someone in the Torontoist commented... "There's probably no god.
Now stop praying to him for the bus to show up."
__________________

__________________
Lemonchick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2009, 08:12 PM   #17
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Jive Turkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 13,646
Local Time: 02:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BonoVoxSupastar View Post
Do you have some other definition of atheism that I'm not aware of...
Not that he has the definitive say on the matter, but even Richard Dawkins, probably the worlds best known Atheist, when asked of the probability of there not being a God (in a spectacularly pointless interview....fuck you Ben Stein), replied "around 99%". Sure when Ben Stein, after pressuring him to put a percentage on it, asked "well how do you know its not 97%?" (are you serious, Ben? are you that much of a fucking halfwit?) Dawkins said he wasnt comfortable putting a number on it, but it shows that he believes that there is no way to be 100% sure of anything
__________________

__________________
Jive Turkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2009, 09:03 PM   #18
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Winnipeg, Canada
Posts: 2,451
Local Time: 01:50 PM
The difference between the Christian Right Dominionist crowd and hard core Atheists who both have to loudly proclaim beliefs...ZERO!!!

For your own good...stay away from both groups.
__________________
Harry Vest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2009, 09:28 PM   #19
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Jive Turkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 13,646
Local Time: 02:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Vest View Post
The difference between the Christian Right Dominionist crowd and hard core Atheists who both have to loudly proclaim beliefs...ZERO!!!

For your own good...stay away from both groups.
Its only when the Christian Right Dominionists start sticking their cloven hooves into the scientific field that I take offense
__________________
Jive Turkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2009, 09:40 PM   #20
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 08:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by A_Wanderer View Post
I'd really like to see the atheist that leaps to the conclusion there is not, and cannot possibly be, a God.
Well, there is Quentin Smith, but I wouldn't say he jumps to conclusions. He has developed an argument that Big Bang is strong indication for the non-existence of a deity, also an argument that a divine cause for the universe is logically implausible, I would be interested to hear what you think of them:

A Big Bang Cosmological Argument For God's Nonexistence

http://www.infidels.org/library/mode...causation.html


Also, his recent essay detailing a cosmological argument for a self-caused universe:

http://www.infidels.org/library/mode...lf-caused.html
__________________
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2009, 09:43 PM   #21
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 08:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BonoVoxSupastar View Post
Do you have some other definition of atheism that I'm not aware of...
A distinction has been made between 'weak' and 'strong' forms of atheism:

Weak and strong atheism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
__________________
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2009, 09:44 PM   #22
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,428
Local Time: 07:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jive Turkey View Post
Its only when the Christian Right Dominionists start sticking their cloven hooves into the scientific field that I take offense
And vice-versa.
__________________
nathan1977 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2009, 09:59 PM   #23
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 08:50 PM
In yet another of his essays, Smith develops an argument from evil, leading him to the conclusion that the existence of natural evil implies a malign creator is much more likely than a benign one:-

Quote:
Given that this is the case, Swinburne has failed to demonstrate that seemingly gratuitous natural evils are not really gratuitous. Given in addition Swinburne's principle of credulity ('things are as they seem to be, unless and until proved otherwise' (1979: 168)) we may conclude that in the light of the considerations Swinburne has offered, it is reasonable to conclude that there are gratuitous natural evils. On the same basis, it is reasonable to conclude that God does not exist, since God is omnipotent, omniscient and perfectly good and thereby would not permit any gratuitous natural evil. But since gratuitous natural evils are precisely what we would expect if a malevolent spirit created the universe, it follows that h' is confirmed. More exactly, P(h'/ee'k) >> P(h/ee'k) since P(h'/ek) = P(h/ek) and P(h'/e'k) >> P(h/e'k). If any spirit created the universe, it is malevolent, not benevolent.
The Anthropic Coincidences, Evil and the Disconfirmation of Theism

Shades of Gnosticism, methinks.

Demiurge - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Personally I think the Auteurs said it pithier:

Quote:
So how could it be pre-arranged,
when there's no order anyway
('Don't Trust the Stars', the Auteurs)
__________________
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2009, 11:28 PM   #24
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Jive Turkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 13,646
Local Time: 02:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan1977 View Post
And vice-versa.

Fair enough, though by definition, science makes no claims with regard to the supernatural
__________________
Jive Turkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2009, 11:39 PM   #25
Breakdancing Soul Pilgrim
 
UberBeaver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: the most serious...douch hammer ever
Posts: 20,318
Local Time: 02:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
Well, there is Quentin Smith, but I wouldn't say he jumps to conclusions. He has developed an argument that Big Bang is strong indication for the non-existence of a deity, also an argument that a divine cause for the universe is logically implausible, I would be interested to hear what you think of them:

A Big Bang Cosmological Argument For God's Nonexistence

Causation and the Logical Impossibility of a Divine Cause


Also, his recent essay detailing a cosmological argument for a self-caused universe:

A Cosmological Argument for a Self-Caused Universe (The Great Debate)
Science will never be able to prove or disprove the existence of God. It's laughable to even attempt it. God - if it exists - is obviously not going to be bound by the laws of the universe since it was here before the universe was and in fact is responsible for the laws we have - and truth be told, we really don't know how the universe works or even what it's made of. This is not a Chicken and the Egg type scenario.
__________________
UberBeaver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2009, 05:13 AM   #26
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Kieran McConville's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Auto Dafoe
Posts: 9,600
Local Time: 05:50 AM
I find the idea of multiple universes fascinating, guys.

That is relevant in so far as I've read some speculating along the lines of our 'big bang' representing the birth point of a new universe (ours) as a sort of blister from another preexisting universe.

I'm afraid I find myself in 'it's turtles all the way down' territory there. The birth and evolution of a universe may prove to be as mundane as the life cycle of a sun... but I still end up wondering where all the universes came from, and why. Mostly why.
__________________
Kieran McConville is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2009, 11:30 AM   #27
Blue Crack Addict
 
DaveC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: illegitimi non carborundum
Posts: 17,388
Local Time: 02:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
Well, there is Quentin Smith, but I wouldn't say he jumps to conclusions. He has developed an argument that Big Bang is strong indication for the non-existence of a deity, also an argument that a divine cause for the universe is logically implausible, I would be interested to hear what you think of them:

A Big Bang Cosmological Argument For God's Nonexistence

Causation and the Logical Impossibility of a Divine Cause


Also, his recent essay detailing a cosmological argument for a self-caused universe:

A Cosmological Argument for a Self-Caused Universe (The Great Debate)
I once wrote a term paper on these theories for a Philosophy of Religion class. His arguments are very sound, and while he's arguing a non-provable point he definitely has something interesting to say.
__________________
DaveC is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2009, 02:12 PM   #28
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
U2DMfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: It's Inside A Black Hole
Posts: 6,637
Local Time: 01:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vincent Vega View Post
It's their freedom to decide from whom they accept ads on their busses.
It was sarcasm/irony, Vinny.

I was playing the dumb American ironically defending Canada, who seemingly can do no wrong on FYM, with a Bush-ism.

While it's usually the Americans taking the stick for a freedom of speech issue such as this around here.

Just dishing some good natured jabs out for my fine feathered Canadian friends.
__________________
U2DMfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2009, 05:01 PM   #29
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 05:50 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
Well, there is Quentin Smith, but I wouldn't say he jumps to conclusions. He has developed an argument that Big Bang is strong indication for the non-existence of a deity, also an argument that a divine cause for the universe is logically implausible, I would be interested to hear what you think of them:

A Big Bang Cosmological Argument For God's Nonexistence

Causation and the Logical Impossibility of a Divine Cause


Also, his recent essay detailing a cosmological argument for a self-caused universe:

A Cosmological Argument for a Self-Caused Universe (The Great Debate)
Looks really interesting, I know that Smolin has invoked the presence of black holes as a reason for the apparent fine tuning of the universe for life.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2009, 07:34 PM   #30
Refugee
 
MadelynIris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Craggy Island
Posts: 1,504
Local Time: 02:50 PM
I'd prefer an ad that just read...

JUST ENJOY YOUR LIFE!
__________________

__________________
MadelynIris is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:50 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com