Burden of Proof - Does it ever lie with Atheists?

[jackstar7]

I don't see any reasonable explanation why the Universe can't or doesn't have a Creator when every subsequent event has a Creator... doesn't add up to me. We can spout off "there's no need for a Creator"... but that doesn't make it true. I think it's really dishonest to say that creation doesn't need a creator. The simple fact that the Universe had a beginning means it didn't always exist, and if something didn't always exist, something sprung it forward...and what brought if forward, has to exist prior to it.

It's the leap you have to make that leaves us non-believers behind. You see complexity as a form of evidence of the creator, while I look at the vast imperfections and see chaos as the source. People talk about the marvel of the human body and overlook wisdom teeth and all the other pieces of evidence of our terrible construction. Not saying that you do, but it's a thing I've heard/been told.

I think that regardless of whether a creator exists there is simply far more value in applying any thought available to the understanding of what we can observe and infer through our scientific methodology. The question of a creator is so meaningless. It strikes me as an attempt to quantify infinity. If I grant you that all of the complexity points to a creator... so what? What does that inference provide? Just another unknown. So what value does that inference serve?

 

[Retro Rob]

It's the leap you have to make that leaves us non-believers behind. You see complexity as a form of evidence of the creator, while I look at the vast imperfections and see chaos as the source. People talk about the marvel of the human body and overlook wisdom teeth and all the other pieces of evidence of our terrible construction. Not saying that you do, but it's a thing I've heard/been told.

Terrible construction? No -- there isn't. Anything "terribly constructed" ususally doesn't last. Humans have lasted a very long time.

I think that regardless of whether a creator exists there is simply far more value in applying any thought available to the understanding of what we can observe and infer through our scientific methodology. The question of a creator is so meaningless. It strikes me as an attempt to quantify infinity. If I grant you that all of the complexity points to a creator... so what? What does that inference provide? Just another unknown. So what value does that inference serve?

Normally, people who don't want any accountablity dismiss a higher being.

People simply need answers, that's why science is even around. This is a need. It's in our DNA... we need expanations about why we're here. The questions about a Creator is simply a consequence derived from our curiosity -- too bad you seem unable to understand this.

It's important because it attempts to answer the age-old question: "Is there a God?". When you look into the stars, you know something more powerful than you is at work up there. We can't create a solar system, nor even a human being from scratch. So we know something more powerful than us is at work here.

The question is more than relevant - it's logical, natural, and human.

 

[Retro Rob]

Yet in the final analysis nobody is going to change what they believe because you say science disproves what they believe...I say oh, really?

The false and mind-shrinkingly backward comparisons they make (and these are supposed to be inteliigent minds) with believing in God is with believing in the "flying teapot"... or the 'FSM".

How many adults believe in any of those things? Many of their grandparents, probably parents, were/are religious... this is not a childish belief system as they love to reduce it to... you have very smart, intelligent, grown men who are religious and are BECOMING religious everyday. Some of their esteemed collegues are religious.

While people are becoming less religious, they still believe in a God of some sort, and if people like Lawrence Krauss and Richard Dawkins want people to embrace science over religion or this belief in a diety, then mocking believers, making them appear small-minded, exhibiting hostility and hatred toward them isn't going to work. It's actually amazing to see such intelligent men reduce themselves to kindergarten tactics. I can personally admit, I will listen to people who can present a reasonable arguement, but once one starts mocking like he has all the answers, the conversation normally ends. They're employing the "childish" tactics....its actually amusing to see this.

Like they say, ignorance is overcome through education... they need to focus on educating, not boyish mocking.

 

[randomrogue]

Just because you don't understand something does not mean god did it.

 

[jackstar7]

Terrible construction? No -- there isn't. Anything "terribly constructed" ususally doesn't last. Humans have lasted a very long time.

Ask an engineer about the human body sometime... or just swing by a hospital...

 

[Retro Rob]

Just because you don't understand something does not mean god did it.

Who said that? I didn't.

If we don't understand something, we find a better science... simple.

I don't think you understand, my belief in God is fueled by science... not emotion. The more science uncovers, the stonger my beleif gets. For me and many others, science has the opposite effect.

Complex things can indeed come from complex (or simple) beginnings. As I explained, the Bible makes me comfortable with the fact God had no beginnig... so asking who created God, is pointless.

 

[randomrogue]

I misread completely. My bad. Was behind in the thread and rushed through it. Point still stands though.

 

[Retro Rob]

Ask an engineer about the human body sometime... or just swing by a hospital...

This is where I call you out:

Can you do better? I mean, can you make a living, functional being apart from the chemicals and resources already available and make it more robust than what we already have?

Of course, you can't.. so why are you complaining?

 

[SMOGZINN]

Normally, people who don't want any accountablity dismiss a higher being.

I hear this from religious people a lot, and it is patently ridiculous. I know a lot of atheists, and not a one of them would consider themselves with out accountability. The fact is as an atheist I am more accountable for my actions then religious people believe they are.
I have no magic man to grant me absolution from my actions. If I screw up no amount of asking for forgiveness is going to make it better, no matter how repentant I am. No, if I mess up I have to do the hard work to make it better, and live with the fact that I caused harm, because I know that no matter what I do I can't really undo the fact that I hurt someone.
For me there is no repentance, no magic words that make it all right. I live with every single thing I've done wrong, and the only thing I can do is try to do better next time. Not because I want into some mythical utopia. Not because I'm afraid of some imagined judgement. Not because some boogeyman is going to punish me. Just because it is the right thing to do. I need no further motivation then that because I know that no magic man is going to make it all right in the end. If I want a happy ending I have to create it myself right here on earth.

And yet religious people keep telling me that I'm the immoral one.

 

[SMOGZINN]

This is where I call you out:

Can you do better? I mean, can you make a living, functional being apart from the chemicals and resources already available and make it more robust than what we already have?

Of course, you can't.. so why are you complaining?

Now you are being intentionally obtuse. I don't have to be able to build a better house to know a ramshackle hovel when I see one.

 

[randomrogue]

Humans aren't very old at all.

 

[jackstar7]

This is where I call you out:

Can you do better? I mean, can you make a living, functional being apart from the chemicals and resources already available and make it more robust than what we already have?

Of course, you can't.. so why are you complaining?

Who is complaining? I'm simply stating a reality. The human body is vulnerable to just about everything. Heck, most of the planet is water, but we can't breathe underwater... what is that about?

I don't have to be able to construct a better person to understand that the human being is not ideally designed. I'm not sure why you think one is dependent on the other.

Why is our balance controlled by our ears? Why are our heads wildly under-protected?

If your position is that humans are well-designed, please explain how so.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

I don't think you understand, my belief in God is fueled by science... not emotion. The more science uncovers, the stonger my beleif gets. For me and many others, science has the opposite effect.

Then you don't understand religion, or science, or both.

 

[Retro Rob]

I hear this from religious people a lot, and it is patently ridiculous.

Fair enough.

I have no magic man to grant me absolution from my actions. If I screw up no amount of asking for forgiveness is going to make it better, no matter how repentant I am. No, if I mess up I have to do the hard work to make it better, and live with the fact that I caused harm, because I know that no matter what I do I can't really undo the fact that I hurt someone.

I don't believe in magic men either, but I believe in Jesus.

You're not undertsanding something -- being forgiven by God "doesn't make it better", per se' because you still have consequences to face. All that means is that you can be forgiven by God. This does NOT make Christians exempt from working hard to make it better. If I mess up, I have to do the same thing you do as a non-believer... work hard to try to right the wrong.

For me there is no repentance, no magic words that make it all right. I live with every single thing I've done wrong, and the only thing I can do is try to do better next time. Not because I want into some mythical utopia. Not because I'm afraid of some imagined judgement. Not because some boogeyman is going to punish me. Just because it is the right thing to do. I need no further motivation then that because I know that no magic man is going to make it all right in the end. If I want a happy ending I have to create it myself right here on earth.

Can you type out a rational and respectful counter-argument without mocking my beliefs?

There are no magic words for me, either... boogeymen aren't real, and I also don't believe in some imagined enternal punishment. Like I said above, we are not exempt from working to make things right with our fellow man.... the only difference is we believe God forgives. We also have to live with the consquences of bad mistakes/choices. We are all subject to the same moral principles that you are as a non-believer. We are both motivated by something... so please stop trying to marginalize what you think motivates me....

We both have our own beliefs...but we have to conduct ourselves in the same manner you do.

 

[Retro Rob]

Then you don't understand religion, or science, or both.

So, one can't look at... say... how fit for life our planet is and not see intelligence behind it?

Is that irrational?

 

[Retro Rob]

Who is complaining? I'm simply stating a reality. The human body is vulnerable to just about everything. Heck, most of the planet is water, but we can't breathe underwater... what is that about?

I don't have to be able to construct a better person to understand that the human being is not ideally designed. I'm not sure why you think one is dependent on the other.

Why is our balance controlled by our ears? Why are our heads wildly under-protected?

If your position is that humans are well-designed, please explain how so.

Eh, ok... you win. I haven't studied the human body but I can appreciate how mines work to keep me alive...

 

[jackstar7]

So, one can't look at... say... how fit for life our planet is and not see intelligence behind it?

Is that irrational?

Please to explain: "fit for life".

 

[jackstar7]

Eh, ok... you win. I haven't studied the human body but I can appreciate how mines work to keep me alive...

Why say I win and then admit that you haven't changed your mind at all...? Are you trying to define disingenuous?


Also, your body does very little to keep you alive. You have to eat all the time in order to maintain fuel levels for all the processes of your body and that food isn't even used completely and we produce tons of waste. Lack of efficiency all over the place.

 

[Retro Rob]

Please to explain: "fit for life".

I don't have to...

Compare this planet with the barren Universe and our 7 other lifeless planets in this Solar System... draw your own conclusions, sir.

 

[Retro Rob]

Why say I win and then admit that you haven't changed your mind at all...? Are you trying to define disingenuous?

No, I concede this part of the debate... I am not educated enough on the human body to from an educated, coherent arguement.

 

[jackstar7]

I don't have to...

Compare this planet with the barren Universe and our 7 other lifeless planets in this Solar System... draw your own conclusions, sir.

You're right, you don't have to back up your statements with your reasons. But that is the thrust of how DC is supposed to work.

And I'd say that considering we do not have a full understanding of what constitutes life or being alive (can a machine be alive?), I'm not sure how you can rule out anything. Heck, what is the difference between beliving in your god and believing that life on Earth is a direct result of a planet that previously had life and exploded and became the asteroid belt? Oh right, we can disprove the asteroid theory with more study...

 

[Charles Kozierok]

I don't have to...

Actually, you sort of do. Explaining your position, especially when directly asked, is an important part of reasonable discussion.

If you want to play games, go do it in P&N. You seem much more interested in running everyone around in circles than actually having a meaningful conversation.

 

[jackstar7]

Time Out: Rob, I truly hope you don't take my statements as disrespectful of you. We've had discussions on various subjects where I think we were able to see through the noise and actually understand each other (even in P&N, which is tantamount to miraculous!), and while I understand how difficult it can be to divorce ourselves from our deepest beliefs and philosophies, that it's not you, as a person, that I disagree with, just the conclusions that you've reached. I could very well be wrong and you right, I just cannot get to where you have using my own process.

You come across as a reasonable and respectful person and while we bounce back and forth on this, I hope you don't think I've lost sight of your decency. And I certainly hope I don't come off as too much of an ass that you lose sight of what I hope is mine.

Time in!

 

[Retro Rob]

You're right, you don't have to back up your statements with your reasons. But that is the thrust of how DC is supposed to work.

And I'd say that considering we do not have a full understanding of what constitutes life or being alive (can a machine be alive?), I'm not sure how you can rule out anything. Heck, what is the difference between beliving in your god and believing that life on Earth is a direct result of a planet that previously had life and exploded and became the asteroid belt? Oh right, we can disprove the asteroid theory with more study...

I don't know what consitutes "life", but I know that I am alive and what I need to live -- food, water, oxygen, among other things... so I can say confidently that I know what's needed for human life.

You can look at the rest of the barren universe and see where life thrives, and where it doesn't... what we have and what others planets either lack or have too much of give us a clue of what's needed for life as we know it.

The difference between believing we were created or are a result of chaos, is that I've yet to see anything "created" from chaos and ended up being a useful, functional piece of... life, or, being or whatnot.

IF there is a repeatable demonstration of such things, then I would love to see it.

 

[jackstar7]

I don't know what consitutes "life", but I know that I am alive and what I need to live -- food, water, oxygen, among other things... so I can say confidently that I know what's needed for human life.

You can look at the rest of the barren universe and see where life thrives, and where it doesn't... what we have and what others planets either lack or have too much of give us a clue of what's needed for life as we know it.

The difference between believing we were created or are a result of chaos, is that I've yet to see anything "created" from chaos and ended up being a useful, functional piece of... life, or, being or whatnot.

IF there is a repeatable demonstration of such things, then I would love to see it.

I would say that mammalian sexual reproduction is exactly that. The chaos of millions of sperm shotgunned at an ovum where one among those millions MIGHT create a new life/lives. What is that if not chaos which later becomes order?