Atheism

rosier79 · 23-07-2014 2:15am #1

Do you think it is possible that there's a spirit world but not a god?

basillarkin · 23-07-2014 2:18am

Immanuel · 23-07-2014 2:24am

Alien life could be in a spiritual form. Whatever form it takes, no evidence for alien life has been found to date, but I believe it's probably out there somewhere.

Turtwig · 23-07-2014 2:50am

Whatever about a spirit world, a world where pokemon are real would be fricking awesome!

Zillah · 23-07-2014 2:51am

rosier79 wrote: »

Do you think it is possible that there's a spirit world but not a god?

Anything is possible. But we have no evidence, so probably not.

Amirani · 23-07-2014 2:52am

Possible? I guess.

Likely? Not so much.

Nodin · 23-07-2014 5:36am

rosier79 wrote: »

Do you think it is possible that there's a spirit world but not a god?

No. I've seen the same evidence for the supernatural as I have for God (nada).

smacl · 23-07-2014 7:47am

rosier79 wrote: »

Do you think it is possible that there's a spirit world but not a god?

No just possible, but I've been there, and it rocks

unfortunately dwelling too long with said spirits will lead you straight to hell.

nozzferrahhtoo · 23-07-2014 8:41am

rosier79 wrote: »

Do you think it is possible that there's a spirit world but not a god?

I think it possible there is a god.

I think it possible there is a "spirit world".

I think it possible the elected politicians of the world have all been replaced by a reptilian alien species from space.

I think it possible that the plants in my garden grow because just when no one is looking, little tiny fairies come out with little tiny scaffolding and extend them.

I think it possible homeopathy actually works.

All this stuff is _possible_. The simply fact is however that they are all, every one of them, totally unsubstantiated.

There is a chasm of difference between recognizing a possibility, and lending credence to a claim in the face of substantiation.

SebBerkovich · 23-07-2014 8:58am

I'd tend to agree with most people here.

There's no evidence of spirits (how ever you define them) and so there probably isn't a place where they live.

Mr. CooL ICE · 23-07-2014 10:05am

But somebody would have to create the spirits. Therefore, god.

Corkfeen · 23-07-2014 10:44am

Turtwig wrote: »

Whatever about a spirit world, a world where pokemon are real would be fricking awesome!

PETA would implode with such a possibility.

kiffer · 23-07-2014 10:52am

Is it possible that there is life on neutron stars like in Baxters's book Flux?
Is it possible that there is a seemingly infinite number o pparallel Earths we can jump to using a potato powered device like in The Long Earth? Or Sliders...

Wereghost · 24-07-2014 12:53am

I don't think that a consciousness can persist while disembodied any more than a computer program can run without a computer. That goes for ghosts pretty much as well as gods (though some have argued that old stone buildings might somehow preserve and replay part of the mind-state of the deceased).

MayoSalmon · 24-07-2014 11:16am

Everything has a spirit, dogs, cats, trees, people. We all have inner spirits.

Where that spirits goes after this life i'm not sure, hopefully somewhere nice though.

Kidchameleon · 24-07-2014 11:19am

anything is possible OP

smacl · 24-07-2014 11:44am

Kidchameleon wrote: »

anything is possible OP

Many things are possible, but so massively improbable that we can safely dismiss them. e.g. regardless of what my email says, I didn't win the Spanish lottery this morning, nor is there a gentleman in Nigeria keen to transfer 7 million dollars in my bank account.

What we can say with a high degree of confidence that ghosts, Gods and Narnia don't exist, as there is no evidence whatsoever to support their existence.

MayoSalmon · 24-07-2014 11:59am

smacl wrote: »

Many things are possible, but so massively improbable that we can safely dismiss them. e.g. regardless of what my email says, I didn't win the Spanish lottery this morning, nor is there a gentleman in Nigeria keen to transfer 7 million dollars in my bank account.

What we can say with a high degree of confidence that ghosts, Gods and Narnia don't exist, as there is no evidence whatsoever to support their existence.

I would say flying on an airplane would of been massively improbable to 5th century celts, not sure if it should of been dismissed though.

My mind is always open and very relcutant to dismiss anything

magicbastarder · 24-07-2014 12:11pm

looks like a driveby.

Brian Shanahan · 24-07-2014 2:29pm

MayoSalmon wrote: »

Everything has a spirit, dogs, cats, trees, people. We all have inner spirits.

Where that spirits goes after this life i'm not sure, hopefully somewhere nice though.

Please point out the evidence you have for said "spirits".

nozzferrahhtoo · 24-07-2014 3:21pm

MayoSalmon wrote: »

My mind is always open and very relcutant to dismiss anything

I am not. I am willing to dismiss unsubstantiated assertion for example.

That is not dismissing the possibility, which is what the thread is about. There is a chasm of difference.

I think you and I are possibly operating off a different meaning of "open mind".

MayoSalmon wrote: »

Everything has a spirit, dogs, cats, trees, people. We all have inner spirits.

What do you mean by "spirit" exactly, and how have you substantiated its existence?

MayoSalmon · 24-07-2014 4:36pm

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

What do you mean by "spirit" exactly, and how have you substantiated its existence?

Not everything needs to be substantiated or analyzed.

I am talking about the energy you see in animals, nature and people. You might call it there soul but I see it more as there spirit. Personalities tend to be reflection of this spirit inside everything.

TwoShedsJackson · 24-07-2014 4:39pm

MayoSalmon wrote: »

Not everything needs to be substantiated or analyzed.

I am talking about the energy you see in animals, nature and people. You might call it there soul but I see it more as there spirit. Personalities tend to be reflection of this spirit inside everything.

Claims that something exists need to be backed up with evidence.

I don't see any 'energy' in animals, nature, or people - does that mean it doesn't exist?

smacl · 24-07-2014 4:47pm

MayoSalmon wrote: »

Not everything needs to be substantiated or analyzed.

So how do you then distinguish between what is real and what is imaginary?

I am talking about the energy you see in animals, nature and people. You might call it there soul but I see it more as there spirit. Personalities tend to be reflection of this spirit inside everything.

The energy I see in animals is largely kinetic and thermal. What energy do you see? How is it manifested such that you can see it? If you can see it, but it can't be measured, are you sure that it is real, and if so, why?

MayoSalmon · 24-07-2014 4:48pm

smacl wrote: »

So how do you then distinguish between what is real and what is imaginary?

The energy I see in animals is largely kinetic and thermal. What energy do you see? How is it manifested such that you can see it? If you can see it, but it can't be measured, are you sure that it is real, and if so, why?

I am not talking literally

smacl · 24-07-2014 4:58pm

MayoSalmon wrote: »

I am not talking literally

Ok, so there is no literal energy, but metaphorically or figuratively you are still referring to a thing that you believe exists. What is that thing, and what leads you to conclude that it is real rather than imaginary? At a guess, you're referring to the state of something being alive, and all that that entails. The problem comes when you get rid of the thing that was alive (e.g. cremate a dead body), how exactly can the no longer existing thing still have a state?

Kidchameleon · 24-07-2014 5:20pm

Wereghost wrote: »

I don't think that a consciousness can persist while disembodied any more than a computer program can run without a computer. That goes for ghosts pretty much as well as gods (though some have argued that old stone buildings might somehow preserve and replay part of the mind-state of the deceased).

Assuming for a moment that consciousness is a collection of neurons and synapses etc. It is possible that such a structure could be replicated on a computer. I'm talking computers hundreds if not thousands of years from now. Would a replicated brain develop a personality of its own accord? Would it be possible to transfer a human consciousness to a computer? We could conceivably duplicate minds, reprogram them. We could create a blank mind and program it to have certain traits, thereby becoming gods.

What if this has already happened? What if we are computers created by another race? We could be more advanced than them.

Turtwig · 24-07-2014 5:21pm

Earth is a giant computer run by lab mice.

Kidchameleon · 24-07-2014 5:22pm

TwoShedsJackson wrote: »

I don't see any 'energy' in animals, nature, or people - does that mean it doesn't exist?

If you see an animal, you are seeing a collection of atoms. Atoms = Energy.

MayoSalmon · 24-07-2014 5:33pm

smacl wrote: »

Ok, so there is no literal energy, but metaphorically or figuratively you are still referring to a thing that you believe exists. What is that thing, and what leads you to conclude that it is real rather than imaginary? At a guess, you're referring to the state of something being alive, and all that that entails. The problem comes when you get rid of the thing that was alive (e.g. cremate a dead body), how exactly can the no longer existing thing still have a state?

That's a great summary, and it doesn't I would suggest it moves into a new state, no evidence etc of this of course. I guess I am a believer in the theory of reincarnation of some sort.

Barr125 · 24-07-2014 6:30pm

Kidchameleon wrote: »

If you see an animal, you are seeing a collection of atoms. Atoms = Energy.

Atoms aren't energy (unless you're talking about atomic energy specifically) and he has already pointed out the fact the "energy" he was referring to is not a literal energy.

Delirium · 24-07-2014 8:03pm

Turtwig wrote: »

Earth is a giant computer run by lab mice.

they finally did it?? :eek:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJPFSNu_QNs

:pac:

Brian Shanahan · 24-07-2014 9:29pm

MayoSalmon wrote: »

Not everything needs to be substantiated or analyzed.

So you've no evidence and these "spirits" are either something you've dreamed up, or someone else has dreamed up and you've accepted without evidence.

Nice to see we've that sorted out then.

Hotblack Desiato · 24-07-2014 9:51pm

Barr125 wrote: »

Atoms aren't energy (unless you're talking about atomic energy specifically) and he has already pointed out the fact the "energy" he was referring to is not a literal energy.

I believe in an invisible pink unicorn that lives at the end of my garden.

Of course, it's not a literal unicorn.

robindch · 24-07-2014 11:42pm

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

[...] it's not a literal unicorn.

Does your unicorn depend on context?

The Adversary · 24-07-2014 11:47pm

Yes OP, There is in fact a spirit world! Two actually.

The first one is called heaven, thats where good people go. There's an endless supply of ice cold beer and strippers.

The second is called hell, this is where bad people go. It's similar to heaven but the beer is stale and the strippers have STD'S.

Hotblack Desiato · 25-07-2014 1:10am

robindch wrote: »

Does your unicorn depend on context?

Everything depends on CONTEXT!!!1!!1!

Stop dissing my unicorn beliefs, or I'll have you up before the blasphemy police.

Hotblack Desiato · 25-07-2014 1:11am

And you failed to ask the obvious question.

If it's invisible... how do I know it is pink?

The answer shall be revealed.

TheChizler · 25-07-2014 1:16am

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

And you failed to ask the obvious question.

If it's invisible... how do I know it is pink?

The answer shall be revealed.

Faith, I believe.

Hotblack Desiato · 25-07-2014 1:19am

Sorry son, you're not of the pink unicorn god's chosen people. Hellfire and damnation await you, in an ironic it-doesn't-matter-how-you-live-your-life fashion.

Turtwig · 25-07-2014 1:20am

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Everything depends on CONTEXT!!!1!!1!

Stop dissing my unicorn beliefs, or I'll have you up before the blasphemy police.

Calm the fck down before we get our ban hammer out and play whack a mole with your head! Respect the atheist religion or suffer extremely sadistic torture!

Fck context! Fck everything. There is but only one interpretation and that is the interpretation of Mod.

Burn the heathens. Burn them!

Hotblack Desiato · 25-07-2014 1:33am

Turtwig wrote: »

Calm the fck down before we get our ban hammer out and play whack a mole with your head! Respect the atheist religion or suffer extremely sadistic torture!

How very dare you. I have the right to have a baby, as you have to have a man.

Behold the pink unicorn, lay down to F**k in front of him and/or her. Or else me daddy will lay retribution down upon yiz.

TheChizler · 25-07-2014 1:37am

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Sorry son, you're not of the pink unicorn god's chosen people. Hellfire and damnation await you, in an ironic it-doesn't-matter-how-you-live-your-life fashion.

Any worse than Sithrak, the god who hates you unconditionally?

(That comic's SFW, the rest of the website VERY much isn't)

Hotblack Desiato · 25-07-2014 1:47am

Turtwig, it shall be written in the first three or four books of the make-it-up-testament how you were an evil daemon who frustrated the prophet and reduced his profits.

Lettuce prey.

Ay, men.

nozzferrahhtoo · 25-07-2014 10:10am

MayoSalmon wrote: »

Not everything needs to be substantiated or analyzed.

Nice cop out sentence for not backing up a single thing you say or intend to ever say.

MayoSalmon wrote: »

I am talking about the energy you see in animals, nature and people. You might call it there soul but I see it more as there spirit.

Which energy exactly? All the energy in these creatures comes from food. It is released from there by processes we already greatly understand. We know what this energy is and I see no reason to call it "spirit" or "soul".

I asked you to define the word "spirit" and clarify what it is you are even talking about. You appear unable to do even that. No surprise as others have failed before you. Look at the debate between Kyle Butt and Dan Barker for example where Barker asked Butt to define his idea of soul too. What Butt listed were a list of attributes of what "soul" is NOT. He could not, even when pressed, identify a single thing it actually IS.

MayoSalmon wrote: »

I am not talking literally

Then what ARE you talking? Nonsense? Contrived Nonsense? Or just woo nonsense?

I am struggling to add an option to that list that does not use the word nonsense but that might actually apply.

MayoSalmon wrote: »

That's a great summary, and it doesn't I would suggest it moves into a new state, no evidence etc of this of course. I guess I am a believer in the theory of reincarnation of some sort.

We have another one around here who likes the idea of reincarnation and we pressed him to support the idea. He failed in a way that was as spectacular as it was comical. Quite literally the best he could come up with was to point at a single woman who appeared to be able to speak a language (though not very well at all it turns out) that no one knew how she learned.

That was _quite literally_ the sum total of the evidence he could find supporting reincarnation.

I think reincarnation is the wrong word. Everything that makes you: you... will be "recycled". Reused. There is, for example, a not insignificant chance that one atom in the water you drank today at one point passed through the bowels of Abraham Lincoln.

But none of the break down and re-use of your self that naturally occurs on death in any way conforms to any definition of "reincarnation" I have ever read. Perhaps you are merely operating under a definition I have not yet been made aware of?

Brian Shanahan · 25-07-2014 11:43am

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

If it's invisible... how do I know it is pink?

It is permanently stuck in the physical and mental state known as "being an eight year old girl".

TwoShedsJackson · 25-07-2014 2:10pm

Kidchameleon wrote: »

If you see an animal, you are seeing a collection of atoms. Atoms = Energy.

Clearly not the sort of 'energy' that MayoSalmon was referring to.

Kiwi in IE · 28-07-2014 1:04pm

smacl wrote: »

nor is there a gentleman in Nigeria keen to transfer 7 million dollars in my bank account.

Hahaha I got that email yesterday too.

"Dear *Surname*
I am the personal atorney for a Mr *same surname*"

You'd think that an attorney might be able to spell their professional title correctly wouldn't you?

Probably wouldn't send it to people if they knew they were atheist, far less likely to be gullible gob****es!

Iollan Leeden · 27-08-2016 10:38pm

rosier79 wrote: »

Do you think it is possible that there's a spirit world but not a god?

No spirit world nor gods. But people have some cognitive biases to see the world as functional. It might explain - in part - why there are believers.

Iollan Leeden · 27-08-2016 10:49pm

ronbyrne2005 wrote: »

Any one who has sufficent intelligence can see that atheism is as blind as christianity or islam, only agnosticism is the home of the openminded.we cannot know if a god existsor doesnt exist as athiests beleive, we cannot know the origins of the universe etc but we can be curious and ponder it or just accept that we wont ever know unless there is an afterlife(highly unlikely but no possible to say it doesnt exist) or a god reveals himself to us or provides evidence.anyone that follows a religon based on poor documentary evidence from unscientiic era's like the bible and koran are fools,but their blind faith could be true! nothing re faith can be completley discounted!
from agnostic ronnie

Not really. If you start by talking about our ignorance, you might as well talk about your next fart as the cause of the next earthquake. Would you stop farting (if you could)? In the same way, if a woman claims that she killed Napoleon, would you put her in prison?
Being atheist doesn't mean we absolutely know that there are no gods but that doesn't mean we can't judge them as simple human stories. Agnosticism is by far invalid.

Iollan Leeden · 27-08-2016 10:56pm

O'Coonassa wrote: »

I've had it cynically explained to me as the belief that there was nothing, and nothing acted upon that nothingness, and then for an unknown reason it exploded into everything; then for no good reason other than sheer random chance bits of everything rearranged themselves into bits that could make more of themselves and then they turned into apes who thought they knew about nearly everything.

Is that fair?

Problem is that we have cognitive biases to see the world as functional. So, when someone explains to you that there are no reasons, it might be difficult to accept (it's quite dangerous to believe in the brain...).

Atheism

Comments