First Atheist in US Congress - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 03-13-2007, 03:19 PM   #31
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
redhotswami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Waiting for this madness to end.
Posts: 5,846
Local Time: 03:06 PM
^please do share what polls this came from.

by the way, i need to step in here and say something, because i'm so tired of people equating spirituality with stupidity. i see it happening again and again and that assumption right there is ignorant itself. is it really that hard for people from either side to respect the other's beliefs? sheesh!!!

sorry for the rant, but i'm tired of this. beliefs are debatable, but respect is not.

back to topic
__________________

__________________
redhotswami is offline  
Old 03-13-2007, 03:21 PM   #32
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 12:06 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by medmo
I would be willing to bet that Stark isn't the only atheist / non believer in there. Out of 535 people, that would be really doubtful. For the most part, people in Congress are intelligent and very well educated (yeah, I know there are some idiots in there, too), and polls have shown that the better educated are less likely to believe in a supreme being.

The others won't admit it for fear of not being re-elected.
I think many and perhaps most people fall more into the agnostic camp

is it really possible to say

their is no God? or supreme being of any kind?




I currently believe there is very little likelihood of any intelligent life (something that has language, that we could communicate with) in space.

But, I will not say that there is no possibility out there

I guess I am agnostic on other life in space

I am also agnostic on the concept of God

but I am a 100% believer in morals and ethics for the betterment of all humankind

for a better world, here and now
and to leave to our children
__________________

__________________
deep is offline  
Old 03-13-2007, 03:23 PM   #33
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 06:06 AM
Embracing a belief without any evidence to lend support or any plausible means of objective validation may not be stuoid but it involves willful suspension of reason, and the idea that we should somehow respect these concepts is equally absurd.

Quote:
is it really possible to say

their is no God? or supreme being of any kind?
If there is no need for God or evidence for God then it doesn't factor into existential considerations; if there was some plausible evidence pointing to such higher order then one could reasonably be agnostic but in the absence of such evidence I find the idea of it to be both unfounded and a lazy sokution (how does one uncover how God works, was formed and what rules it obeys?).
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 03-13-2007, 03:28 PM   #34
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
redhotswami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Waiting for this madness to end.
Posts: 5,846
Local Time: 03:06 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
Embracing a belief without any evidence to lend support or any plausible means of objective validation may not be stuoid but it involves willful suspension of reason, and the idea that we should somehow respect these concepts is equally absurd.
but that is all relative. we have our own temperaments, our own ways of processing and absorbing the world around us. your methods of analysis are different from mine. what works for me doesn't work for you, vice versa. this applies to more than just spirituality.
__________________
redhotswami is offline  
Old 03-13-2007, 03:31 PM   #35
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 06:06 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by redhotswami


but that is all relative. we have our own temperaments, our own ways of processing and absorbing the world around us. your methods of analysis are different from mine. what works for me doesn't work for you, vice versa. this applies to more than just spirituality.
But it's a bigger issue than how animals comprehend their world, the universe was in a state of existence before humanity came along and it didn't neccessitate God then; we can only break down the subjective bias of our own minds with the scientific method.

Just because your truth feels just as valid to you as mine does to me doesn't make either inherently correct.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 03-13-2007, 03:31 PM   #36
The Fly
 
medmo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: directing traffic on the disco floor
Posts: 256
Local Time: 02:06 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by redhotswami
^please do share what polls this came from.

by the way, i need to step in here and say something, because i'm so tired of people equating spirituality with stupidity. i see it happening again and again and that assumption right there is ignorant itself. is it really that hard for people from either side to respect the other's beliefs? sheesh!!!

sorry for the rant, but i'm tired of this. beliefs are debatable, but respect is not.

back to topic
I wasn't equating spirituality with stupidity, and if it sounded like I was, that wasn't my intention. I was referring to a poll I remembered reading. I didn't just make it up.

72% of Americans with high school diplomas or less are 'absolutely certain' there is a supreme being. For those with post graduate degrees, that percentage is 53.

Here is the poll; scroll down to table 2 to see what I'm talking about, but the entire poll is interesting.

http://www.harrisinteractive.com/har...ex.asp?PID=408
__________________
medmo is offline  
Old 03-13-2007, 03:38 PM   #37
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 12:06 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer


If there is no need for God or evidence for God then it doesn't factor into existential considerations; if there was some plausible evidence pointing to such higher order then one could reasonably be agnostic but in the absence of such evidence I find the idea of it to be both unfounded and a lazy sokution (how does one uncover how God works, was formed and what rules it obeys?).
with your line of logic

there would have been a time when one could argue there are no germs

because I can not see them (say the year 1000- 1100 A D)

or dark matter and dark energy that Scienece seems to be in complete agreement with (say any time before 1900 A D)


and even Eiensteine did not believe in Black holes when he died in the 1950s


all of these could use your argument that they saw no evidence


I do appreciate various Religious claims may be very specific
and evidence of support that should be there may not be there

But, I tend to think Atheists may be a bit lazy, because I do not see it, It is not true and cannot be true.
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 03-13-2007, 03:46 PM   #38
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 12:06 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by medmo


I wasn't equating spirituality with stupidity, and if it sounded like I was, that wasn't my intention. I was referring to a poll I remembered reading. I didn't just make it up.

72% of Americans with high school diplomas or less are 'absolutely certain' there is a supreme being. For those with post graduate degrees, that percentage is 53.

Here is the poll; scroll down to table 2 to see what I'm talking about, but the entire poll is interesting.

http://www.harrisinteractive.com/har...ex.asp?PID=408

I guess this supports my belief

that most people fall into some degree of agnostic belief

this is what I find in general conversation
in religious people, they say something that reveals they have some doubt

and most self-professed atheist will admit that there is a possibility of a supreme being, some do want to stress a very, very remote possibility
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 03-13-2007, 03:50 PM   #39
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 06:06 AM
Hold out on the issues of dark matter and dark energy since cosmologists are reinventing the universe for every new batch of data - it is not fixed; but your right and the changes in knowledge shows how we should approach the world, we know nothing - we can only understand it on the basis of evidence and our understanding is only as good as our evidence, the base assumptions - now in the absence of any evidence for God there is no cause to take the existence of such a powers existence as anything more than a thought experiment - if we discovered evidence then that would change, I wouldn't oppose that solution if there was very persuasive evidence.

On all the multiple working hypothesis of the universe having a being of unknown origin and undefined power create it has a very low confidence level.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 03-13-2007, 03:51 PM   #40
The Fly
 
medmo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: directing traffic on the disco floor
Posts: 256
Local Time: 02:06 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by deep



I guess this supports my belief

that most people fall into some degree of agnostic belief

this is what I find in general conversation
in religious people, they say something that reveals they have some doubt

and most self-professed atheist will admit that there is a possibility of a supreme being, some do want to stress a very, very remote possibility
Yep. And all I was saying was that in a group of 535 people, most of them well educated, statistically there is almost certainly more than one atheist.
__________________
medmo is offline  
Old 03-13-2007, 03:57 PM   #41
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 12:06 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer


On all the multiple working hypothesis of the universe having a being of unknown origin and undefined power create it has a very low confidence level.

following the atheist model


what was?
before the big bang, or before what we call time?

and why and how did it start?

what was the power behind that?

is this where a supreme being model can fit

and yes I know the next question
who/ what created said supreme being ?
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 03-13-2007, 04:01 PM   #42
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 06:06 AM
The time dimension is thought to be a concequence of the big bang, how could a deity function without time?

And apart from that all of these points are uttery untestable and as I said before thought experiments.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 03-13-2007, 04:17 PM   #43
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 12:06 PM
and again

I would say because we can not (in 2007) explain, define or find a testable device to support a supreme being

dose not negate the possibility

in 1007 A D one would not have been able to present a testable device to support cell phones, man made satellites, you get the point


perhaps at this point in time we are the Tibetan sheepherders that can not comphrehend of what an iPod is
and if a neighbor came back from a trip and said he was able to hear all of the world in his head

he would be considered a liar or delusional
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 03-13-2007, 04:27 PM   #44
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 06:06 AM
The examples you give are of inventions, things that did not exist in 1007 and could be brought to remote tribes and demonstrated today, the issue of God seems to concern the origin of life and humans; the origins of life is still a difficult problem, but one where the mechanisms are grounded in naturalistic causes not supernatural intervention, humans however are more clear cut as being another animal and product of evolution.

If we are talking about the origin of the universe (if there was an origin - if the universe or permutations of it have existed for infinite then there is no need for a beginning and hence no need to posit a creator) then it is a more open ended question; but it is still one where evidence is not putting up a big picture of "God Was Here" and drawing people to that conclusion.

The burden of proof rests on those making the case for God; when there is no evidence for something I find it hard to say that the possibility of God is just as probable as it's inexistence.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 03-13-2007, 04:36 PM   #45
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 12:06 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
The examples you give are of inventions,
very good point

i should have used discoveries.

That would have been better.


And I still remain agnostic.

And through our discussions I seem to sense a small crack in your Atheist armor, towards Agnostic - leaning most likely no supreme being

I do not expect you to become a religious believer
__________________

__________________
deep is offline  
 

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 03:06 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