thoughts on life, religion, etc.

[future man]

Your points are really shit. I've lived around religious people all my life, I think they're borderline retarded but I haven't made it my personal quest to let everyone know since I was a teenager, because it occurred to me what a fucking idiot I must look like trying to lecture everyone on what's right when I clearly had no idea.

Way to stoop, with the last post by the way. Enjoy your hamster wheel, idiot.

[farsimon]

HEY! Get off my soapbox!

[IcedEarth]

I believe in tits.

[cocklove4headcheese]

Originally Posted by future man

Intelligent? Not the thread for it, by reading over the majority of the previous posts.

Yes, weak stuff. Your contribution was by far the most thought provoking

Originally Posted by future man

You're basically recycling tired points that've been mulled over thousands of times.

Where ? In the "Count Your Pubes" threads ?

Originally Posted by future man

Also, no, that isn't my philosophy, I just don't see why people put on a banner that says "LOL IM RIGHT" and run around screaming at everyone else about how terribly wrong they are.

Nonsense. Compared to you I went to great lengths to explain the things I believe in. All you brought is your arrogance.

Originally Posted by future man

You don't seem to have any real stance other than being overly motivated to go after someone's beliefs even though it's having no negative impact on you. Unless the impact is you're having to listen to all the religious drivel you think is wrong, in which case you should probably try to direct your focus more inwardly than going over everyone elses beliefs with such a fine toothed comb.

My position is perfectly clear. I couldn't have been more open and honest with complete strangers on the net.

[cocklove4headcheese]

Originally Posted by future man

Your points are really shit.

Wow, you could be a lawyer.

Originally Posted by future man

I've lived around religious people all my life, I think they're borderline retarded

Borderline retarded ? I seem to have a more sophisticated view on the matter, but that's how idiots like me are.

Originally Posted by future man

but I haven't made it my personal quest to let everyone know since I was a teenager,

There was more to this discussion than insulting religious people. I did that on the main page so I thought I'll clear some things up in here.

Originally Posted by future man

because it occurred to me what a fucking idiot I must look like trying to lecture everyone on what's right when I clearly had no idea.

Yes, you clearly have no idea what is right, you've proven that beyond any doubt.

Originally Posted by future man

Way to stoop, with the last post by the way. Enjoy your hamster wheel, idiot.

Ooh, future man called me an "idiot"... I'm devastated.

@ The Heart of Darkness: I'll answer your post later today.

[farsimon]

cockcheese:

Any point proven does not need defending.

What future is trying to tell you is that there's no need to break down someone else's belief regardless of your own. You made your point public, and we are all aware of it. Be graceful enough to accept the points of others without making a fool of yourself by sounding like a fanboy (regardless of the topic). I understand you want to have a debate - but some things can never be debated, especially things as exclusive as religion. If you want to discuss religion it's best to keep the discussions between people of the same belief.

We are but specks in the timeline of earth governed by instincts and our DNA and we are genetically geared towards believing in something greater. Thousands have been there before us, and will be there after us. Nothing we say or do will change anything - look at our history and you will see. You're waging a little online war which might make you feel all uppity for now, but believe me that you are in no way unique or special - we all have done this before, and seen it before.

[Lehesu]

All of you fucking geniuses of logic, I ask you to ponder a question.


Has anyone of you seriously considered the argument of determinism? If you can provide me with a logically and philosophically sound argument against determinism, than I will award you copious internet points.

If you can't, but you can't accept the logical conclusions of determinism, than religion might become a more appealing notion.

[farsimon]

Way too tedious. And I can't even rub your points on my dick...

But I will give you this: religion is not something you can simply switch on. So I think I'll stick to what I've got, thank you.

[Digital Limit]

Originally Posted by Lehesu

All of you fucking geniuses of logic, I ask you to ponder a question.


Has anyone of you seriously considered the argument of determinism? If you can provide me with a logically and philosophically sound argument against determinism, than I will award you copious internet points.

If you can't, but you can't accept the logical conclusions of determinism, than religion might become a more appealing notion.

I assume you're not talking about hard determinism? Otherwise I think every person's agency disproves any local deterministic ideals. And with that, I think we mostly live pretty local lives in the scheme of things, so determinism seems flawed all around. But that's coming from someone who only knows shallowly the concept of determinism and with that would prefer to play a reactionary role in this little debate you're inciting.

[Lehesu]

Individual determinism...whether or not I decide to skip class kind of determinism. Agency doesn't really prove anything because determinism is concerned with how that agency is "determined".

[cocklove4headcheese]

Originally Posted by The Heart Of Darkness

So it does correct its flaws

Yes, that's what I said. If you wrote something similar earlier, I must have missed it.

Originally Posted by The Heart Of Darkness

If scientists are ever able to experimentally recreate the big bang, I'm pretty sure that with today's modern technology they'd be able to create rock and soil out of burning gases, however I'm pretty much sure that they cannot create life out of nothingness.

No one ever claimed that scientists can or should create life out of "nothing". We were talking about the universe being so big that it's impossible for it to be devoid of life.

Originally Posted by The Heart Of Darkness

Can't decribe em cuz I've never been there, sorry

But you're 100% sure of their existence even if don't know anything about them ?

Originally Posted by The Heart Of Darkness

Satan is naughty cuz he's just as liable to be arrogant as any one of us is, and God doesn't get rid of satan because he challenged god.

Imagine it went like this:

Satan: God, I spit on your creation and I promise you if you'll just keep me alive to the end of time I'll mess up your petty humans
God: No deal. Burn Infidel.

But it doesn't go like this because even though God has given Satan a chance to corrupt humans, he also simultaneously gave humans a shot at immortality.

So Satan is allowed to live forever and torment humans, but we end up in Hell if we screw up under his influence ? Seriously, think about it.

Originally Posted by The Heart Of Darkness

God forgives all sins except the sin of denial, like I said before, denying God is like disappointing God, proving him wrong against a lower being (Satan). Frankly God's anger is quite understandable.

Let's assume an atheist cures some disease and brings other great things to the world. Does he get punished while some rapist and murderer who finds God in jail goes to Heaven ? Things just can't be that black and white.

Originally Posted by The Heart Of Darkness

Then why are they having the same hallucination? And why aren't there new people nowadays coming up with new hallucinations? I'm pretty sure the world still hasn't run out of simple minded individuals who let their judgement be controlled by emotions, who want attention and fame because they feel insignificant.

Dude, the world is full of weirdos and new sects pop up every day. There is no shortage of people who proclaim themselves one thing or another. Of course, none of them can do a damn thing to prove their special status.

Originally Posted by The Heart Of Darkness

I'm saying that if someone is going to be running around saying he's a prophet sent by God to mankind, why couldn't he just say something more fancy like:

-I am God's incarnation on Earth
-I am God's son
-I am the human avatar of all that is good

Heck, if you're gonna believe he's a prophet, then you'll believe anything else he says

Yes, these people exist. You can find clips and documentaries about them on torrent sites and even Youtube. Scary stuff. They have immense followings despite the fact that they are obviously faking it. There's even a very successful latino preacher who says that he's Jesus.

Originally Posted by The Heart Of Darkness

The last thing I'd like to say is this:

I live my life to the fullest and I see no difference in lifestyle between myself and any other person who does not believe in God. So I stand to lose nothing by believing in God; if I die and there's a heaven/hell hopefully I'll be dropped by at heaven where I would enjoy some free no-monthly fee completely non bugged version of WoW , and if there is no such thing as heaven/hell/God I'll be dead anyways so I wouldn't care.

Well, good luck. I'm not gonna bother you anymore.

[Digital Limit]

Originally Posted by MrBored

You're basically wrong and your logic is flawed, but the only part I wish to argue is the first.

Just because we haven't found life on other planets doesn't mean there isn't any. Once you comprehend the magnitude of the universe, this will make more sense.

At the moment we can only detect the existence of certain chemical compounds on other planets, when we can see the planets at all. Stars tend to make it almost impossible to see the planets that orbit them, so the best way of detecting them at the moment is by monitoring the positional wobble of the parent stars due to orbiting masses. That is a long cry from being able to detect life on them.

That is a distance problem, because our only means of measurement is e-m radition. Along with distance comes time. Light doesn't travel very fast, relatively speaking. The time it takes for light to travel from another solar system's planet to here can be up to the age of the universe. So it's possible that at the time the light set off on its journey, life didn't exist. It could exist right at this moment, but without faster than light travel, it's impossible to tell. At this point we are the caveman, looking out of his cave entrance, wondering what lies beyond.

The second time problem is what we're trying to detect. The SETI project is trying to detect e-m signals from other planets in the radio spectrum. I believe this is to be a bit of a foolish effort, but I guess there's no real harm in trying because we will learn something from it. Man has only been emitting signals powerful enough to reach into space for under 100 years. That is so incredibly insignificant it's almost incomprehensible. Now to think that an advanced civilisation existed on another planet billions of years before us (because the signal has to travel) with technological capabilities equal or better to us and those signals have reached us intact above the other interferance of the universe... well... it's fairly preposterous and in no way shape or form proof of anything other than we're still relatively cavemen.

That's not actually true.

The "wobble" you're speaking of is far too small for us to detect at present technology for planets smaller than anything Jovian, or more specifically, for anything Earth-like. That said, "wobble" detection is still effective at finding said Jovian planets, and given Jovians are required to be in the neighborhood of a potentially habitable planet like Earth, it's not a bad place to start.

Moreso, the infrared detection you mentioned as well as one other method are at the forefront of what SETI and other private organizations are using to make this leap toward finding extraterrestrial life. Infrared isn't wholly misguided, if only because Sun-like stars emit far less IR than their respective planets do. It is a very technically challenging feat and relies heavily on the resolution of our current technology, but it's probably the best thing we have.

The other, and far less computationally heavy method is to search for a temporary dimming called a transit that occurs when a planet in an edge-on solar system orbits between us and its respective star. If the appropriately slight dimming occurs, and we confirm that it is a result of a planetary orbit, we're on our way to finding new life. That said, I imagine the previously mentioned method will then be employed directly on that solar system for confirmation, as this method only gives us a few bullet points of information and has the benefit of being able to be done over a wide field of view.

Anyway, that's all according to what I learned in Astronomy recently.

[cocklove4headcheese]

Originally Posted by farsimon

Any point proven does not need defending.

Yeah but it needs explaining, depending on who you're talking to.

Originally Posted by farsimon

What future is trying to tell you is that there's no need to break down someone else's belief regardless of your own. You made your point public, and we are all aware of it.

If I'm trying to break down someone's belief, they are invited to break down mine, if they can. It goes both ways. It's not my fault that logic is on my side.

Originally Posted by farsimon

Be graceful enough to accept the points of others without making a fool of yourself by sounding like a fanboy (regardless of the topic).

What points ? Superstitious ideas aren't points. I don't take them seriously.

Originally Posted by farsimon

I understand you want to have a debate - but some things can never be debated, especially things as exclusive as religion. If you want to discuss religion it's best to keep the discussions between people of the same belief.

I completely disagree. Tell me, why should religion have special status ? Why is it taboo to attack aspects of it that are utterly stupid ? Explain that to me. Should we close our eyes and be tolerant of everything just because that's the nice thing to do ?
Everyone should be able to make sense when it comes to the important things in life. What do you think, is it fair of me to expect that ?

Originally Posted by farsimon

We are but specks in the timeline of earth governed by instincts and our DNA and we are genetically geared towards believing in something greater. Thousands have been there before us, and will be there after us. Nothing we say or do will change anything - look at our history and you will see. You're waging a little online war which might make you feel all uppity for now, but believe me that you are in no way unique or special - we all have done this before, and seen it before.

If everyone was so fatalistic, we'd all lay down and die. But if everyone believed they can make a change, well, they would make a change. The balance will tip in the favor of those who fight harder. Our actions aren't pointless just because they don't directly influence thousands of people.

[cocklove4headcheese]

Originally Posted by Lehesu

All of you fucking geniuses of logic, I ask you to ponder a question.


Has anyone of you seriously considered the argument of determinism? If you can provide me with a logically and philosophically sound argument against determinism, than I will award you copious internet points.

If you can't, but you can't accept the logical conclusions of determinism, than religion might become a more appealing notion.

It's the first time I hear of determinism so I'm not qualified, nor very interested in proving it or disproving it.

[The Heart Of Darkness]

Originally Posted by cocklove4headcheese

So Satan is allowed to live forever and torment humans, but we end up in Hell if we screw up under his influence ? Seriously, think about it.

But we end up with everything if we DON'T screw up

Originally Posted by cocklove4headcheese

Let's assume an atheist cures some disease and brings other great things to the world. Does he get punished while some rapist and murderer who finds God in jail goes to Heaven ? Things just can't be that black and white.

They aren't, things aren't black and white and that is not the way things work. And people who think they do work like that are the reason we have murderous fanatics, merciless terrorists, and self-righteous rapists. To elaborate on that would require a very long and tedious post. However, I find the closest non-religious description to the way these things work in Dante's The Purgatory (Purgatorio) if you are interested in reading more about the topic.

[Lehesu]

The Free Will vs. Determinism debate boils down to the notion that actions have direct causal antecedents. If actions are the result of causal antecedents, how can any of our actions be said to be freely determined?

[King Speedy]

You all amuse me. But not in a good way.

[cocklove4headcheese]

Originally Posted by King Speedy

You all amuse me. But not in a good way.

Well you bore me. Definitely not in a good way.

[cocklove4headcheese]

Originally Posted by The Heart Of Darkness

But we end up with everything if we DON'T screw up

We really don't know that and I'm done debating it. Unless you want to add anything else.

Originally Posted by The Heart Of Darkness

They aren't, things aren't black and white and that is not the way things work. And people who think they do work like that are the reason we have murderous fanatics, merciless terrorists, and self-righteous rapists. To elaborate on that would require a very long and tedious post. However, I find the closest non-religious description to the way these things work in Dante's The Purgatory (Purgatorio) if you are interested in reading more about the topic.

Sure, but take your time. We can continue tomorrow. I've neglected my duties today in favor of posting here.

[cocklove4headcheese]

Originally Posted by Lehesu

The Free Will vs. Determinism debate boils down to the notion that actions have direct causal antecedents. If actions are the result of causal antecedents, how can any of our actions be said to be freely determined?

Our actions are the result of a ton of factors. It seems to me that determinism is too enthusiastic in simplifying the problem.
But what do I know ? It's best if I read up on the subject first.

Ok, I'm taking a break. See you later or tomorrow.