/b/'s view on religion

  • 52 Replies
  • 7854 Views
*

Wendy

  • 18492
  • I laugh cus you fake
/b/'s view on religion
« on: February 03, 2009, 04:38:39 AM »
> The simple and rational argument that there is no god:

> 1- Most religions in the world say that they're right, and by consequence the rest of them are wrong.
> 2- At most one of these religions can be right.
> 3- Thus most religions are false.
> 4- Applying inductive reasoning, we can easily realize that because most of the world's religions were invented by man, that all of them share certain facets and lack evidence, thus all of them are probably false and made up.
Here's an explanation for ya. Lurk moar. Every single point you brought up has been posted, reposted, debated and debunked. There is a search function on this forum, and it is very easy to use.

?

Proleg

Re: /b/'s view on religion
« Reply #1 on: February 03, 2009, 05:43:27 AM »
We need stuff like this to be clarified by /b/ these days?

God help us all.

*

Wendy

  • 18492
  • I laugh cus you fake
Re: /b/'s view on religion
« Reply #2 on: February 03, 2009, 05:49:27 AM »
God help us all.

That's the exact opposite of my point, but okay.
Here's an explanation for ya. Lurk moar. Every single point you brought up has been posted, reposted, debated and debunked. There is a search function on this forum, and it is very easy to use.

*

midgard

  • 1300
Re: /b/'s view on religion
« Reply #3 on: February 03, 2009, 06:03:30 AM »
Let's start at the beginning...

1- Most religions in the world say that they're right, and by consequence the rest of them are wrong.

A. Why does the consequence "the rest of them are wrong" follow from "most religions in the world say that they're right."?
A.i. Is this in reference to religions saying that they are right and other religions are wrong?
A.ii. Is this in reference to inconsistent statements in different religions?
B. What do you mean when you say that a religion is right or wrong?
D. Can a religion be 'wrong' and still contain things that are true?



Meanwhile here's an argument that gods exist:

Symbolization Key:
A = Gods Exists
B = Concepts Exist
C = Gods are a concept

(B&C)=>A
(B&C)
:_: A
« Last Edit: February 03, 2009, 07:14:08 AM by midgard »

?

Cinlef

  • The Elder Ones
  • 969
  • The Earth is a Sphere
Re: /b/'s view on religion
« Reply #4 on: February 03, 2009, 10:25:02 AM »
> The simple and rational argument that there is no god:

> 1- Most religions in the world say that they're right, and by consequence the rest of them are wrong.
> 2- At most one of these religions can be right.
> 3- Thus most religions are false.
> 4- Applying inductive reasoning, we can easily realize that because most of the world's religions were invented by man, that all of them share certain facets and lack evidence, thus all of them are probably false and made up.


This is not ONE argument its is at least two.
Points 1-3
Should be phrased:
P1)If a religion is a true religion it is the sole path to truth
P2) There can only be at most one sole path to truth
C1) There can be at most one true religion

P3)If a religion is not the true religion it is false
P4) The majority of religions are not the true religion (C1)
C2)The majority of religions are false

Of course this argument only shows that all but one religions are necessarily false which is something virtually all religious people believe already. The issue is to show that a particular religions is false

Point (4) is utterly unrelated to the first 3 premises, it in no way follows and is merely several assertions freely asserted

Lets break it down

We can easily realize that most of the worlds religions were invented by man using inductive reasoning.

Objection 1) Freely asserted so freely denied. No we cannot (ie you must explain how inductive reasoning shows this)
Objection 2) Most? Clarify which were and which were not?


All religions [or possibly all religions created by man which the first sentence said is only most religions] certain facets and lack evidence.

Objection 1)Freely asserted so freely denied: No they don't
Objection 2) Define facets, then explain which are common to all
Objection 3) Clarify rules for evidence

Thus all of them are probably false and made up.

Objection 1) Due to poor formulation of this argument is does not seem to follow as the conclusion especially since it seems the argument seems to be only talking about most religions but makes a conclusion about all religions


There are many serious arguments for atheist
This is not one of them

An annoyed
Cinlef
« Last Edit: February 03, 2009, 10:30:42 AM by Cinlef »
Truth is great and will prevail-Thomas Jefferson

I've said it before and I'll say it again, Cinlef is the bestest!

Melior est sapientia quam vires-Wisdom

*

Marcus Aurelius

  • 4546
  • My Alts: Tom Bishop, Gayer, theonlydann
Re: /b/'s view on religion
« Reply #5 on: February 03, 2009, 11:14:36 AM »
> The simple and rational argument that there is no god:

> 1- Most religions in the world say that they're right, and by consequence the rest of them are wrong.
> 2- At most one of these religions can be right.
> 3- Thus most religions are false.
> 4- Applying inductive reasoning, we can easily realize that because most of the world's religions were invented by man, that all of them share certain facets and lack evidence, thus all of them are probably false and made up.


Your conclusion does not support the premise, you have only concluded that most if not all of the religions are probably false and made up.  Even if they are all wrong, it in now way affirms your original conclusion (at the top) that there is no God.

*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30590
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: /b/'s view on religion
« Reply #6 on: February 03, 2009, 11:32:39 AM »
> The simple and rational argument that there is no god:

> 1- Most religions in the world say that they're right, and by consequence the rest of them are wrong.
> 2- At most one of these religions can be right.
> 3- Thus most religions are false.
> 4- Applying inductive reasoning, we can easily realize that because most of the world's religions were invented by man, that all of them share certain facets and lack evidence, thus all of them are probably false and made up.


Has anyone else noticed that any crappy "scientific proof" of something eventually gets stuck and uses a shitty premise that would make most people go "wat?".

I bolded it for you. Who here reads that and doesn't think "and this is my essay about how george washington was the best person born."

?

Eddy Baby

  • Official Member
  • 9986
Re: /b/'s view on religion
« Reply #7 on: February 03, 2009, 12:55:47 PM »
I think there are rational reasons why God exists as well.





Fancy knowing what my reasons are?
« Last Edit: February 03, 2009, 01:12:11 PM by Eddy Baby »

*

Marcus Aurelius

  • 4546
  • My Alts: Tom Bishop, Gayer, theonlydann
Re: /b/'s view on religion
« Reply #8 on: February 03, 2009, 01:13:54 PM »
Problem of evil paradox is a better argument for there not being a God.

Quote
Logical problem of evil

   1. God exists. (premise)
   2. God is omnipotent and omniscient. (premise ? or true by definition of the word "God")
   3. God is all-benevolent. (premise ? or true by definition)
   4. All-benevolent beings are opposed to all evil. (premise ? or true by definition)
   5. All-benevolent beings who can eliminate evil will do so immediately when they become aware of it. (premise)
   6. God is opposed to all evil. (conclusion from 3 and 4)
   7. God can eliminate evil completely and immediately. (conclusion from 2)
         1. Whatever the end result of suffering is, God can bring it about by ways that do not include suffering. (conclusion from 2)
         2. God has no reason not to eliminate evil. (conclusion from 7.1)
         3. God has no reason not to act immediately. (conclusion from 5)
   8. God will eliminate evil completely and immediately. (conclusion from 6, 7.2 and 7.3)
   9. Evil exists, has existed, and probably will always exist. (premise)
  10. Items 8 and 9 are contradictory; therefore, one or more of the premises is false: either God does not exist, evil does not exist, God is not simultaneously omnipotent, omniscient and all-benevolent, or all-benevolent beings who can eliminate evil will not necessarily do so immediately when they become aware of it.

?

Eddy Baby

  • Official Member
  • 9986
Re: /b/'s view on religion
« Reply #9 on: February 03, 2009, 01:31:11 PM »
I don't believe particularly in a Christian or other religion-specific God (I was raised an Atheist), but a few scientific/psychological things have made me think about the possibility:

My argument 1:
(Can't remember first name) Jung said that God is created in our minds; it's part of our nature. Freud said something similar.

If I was a God, I wouldn't tell everyone I existed as noone would be tested in any way on Earth..
but giving every human an in-built knowledge of my existence...hmm.... sounds like a good idea....

My argument 2:
Teleportation: disassembling someone at point A, and reassembling them at point B, presumably out of different cells. Would 'you' come out the other side? Presumably somebody who thought, looked, and remembered exactly the same as you would, but completely destroying somebody (at point A) often leads to their death.

If you compared yourself and yourself from 8 years ago, you'd find that you would be made of completely different cells (except for cells that fall off, and then you drink them accidentally and other things like that), so what keeps 'you', 'you'?



*

LordTalon69

  • 3717
  • I think I may have the lulz.
Re: /b/'s view on religion
« Reply #10 on: February 03, 2009, 04:25:43 PM »

My argument 2:
Teleportation: disassembling someone at point A, and reassembling them at point B, presumably out of different cells. Would 'you' come out the other side? Presumably somebody who thought, looked, and remembered exactly the same as you would, but completely destroying somebody (at point A) often leads to their death.

Kinda off the subject here but related to your comment. Being quite the star trek fan this is one thing that always bothered me about the transporter. I'd NEVER want to use it because it would essentially kill you and then make a copy of you on the other side. Yes it would be you but not the original you. If this seems to make no sense imagine identical twins. They start out exactly the same but are different people.

Re: /b/'s view on religion
« Reply #11 on: February 03, 2009, 10:42:10 PM »
Quote
so what keeps 'you', 'you'?

If you are asking what maintains the continuity of the form of your physical body, it is the unique pattern of information encoded within your DNA.
 believe that; the Earth is flat until such time as I stand within the Space Station and personally see that it is a Globe.
or that the Earth is a sphere until such time as I stand upon the Icewall and personally see that it is a Flat Disk.

*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30590
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: /b/'s view on religion
« Reply #12 on: February 03, 2009, 10:54:54 PM »
Quote
so what keeps 'you', 'you'?

If you are asking what maintains the continuity of the form of your physical body, it is the unique pattern of information encoded within your DNA.

Then identical twins pose a problem.

*

midgard

  • 1300
Re: /b/'s view on religion
« Reply #13 on: February 04, 2009, 03:55:53 AM »
My argument 1:
Carl Jung said that God is created in our minds; it's part of our nature. Freud said something similar.

If I was a God, I wouldn't tell everyone I existed as noone would be tested in any way on Earth..
but giving every human an in-built knowledge of my existence...hmm.... sounds like a good idea....

So basically you believe that there's some god who decided to create a universe and fill it with people just to see if they end up believing in him or not and that he tried to bias the results of the test by giving everybody built-in knowledge of his existence... hmmm... sounds like a pretty retarded god.

My argument 2:
Teleportation: disassembling someone at point A, and reassembling them at point B, presumably out of different cells. Would 'you' come out the other side? Presumably somebody who thought, looked, and remembered exactly the same as you would, but completely destroying somebody (at point A) often leads to their death.

If you compared yourself and yourself from 8 years ago, you'd find that you would be made of completely different cells (except for cells that fall off, and then you drink them accidentally and other things like that), so what keeps 'you', 'you'?

I really don't see what you are arguing here at all.

*

Marcus Aurelius

  • 4546
  • My Alts: Tom Bishop, Gayer, theonlydann
Re: /b/'s view on religion
« Reply #14 on: February 04, 2009, 04:57:12 AM »
My argument 2:
Teleportation: disassembling someone at point A, and reassembling them at point B, presumably out of different cells. Would 'you' come out the other side? Presumably somebody who thought, looked, and remembered exactly the same as you would, but completely destroying somebody (at point A) often leads to their death.

If you compared yourself and yourself from 8 years ago, you'd find that you would be made of completely different cells (except for cells that fall off, and then you drink them accidentally and other things like that), so what keeps 'you', 'you'?

Not really, the neurons in your brain do not divide, and remain until your death, they only create new synapse between other neurons.  So, the cells that are responsible for your personality, thoughts, dreams, actions, and what we would most closely define as YOU, are the same cells that were there 8 years ago, just with some additional synapse pathways.

?

Eddy Baby

  • Official Member
  • 9986
Re: /b/'s view on religion
« Reply #15 on: February 04, 2009, 08:33:52 AM »
My argument 2:
Teleportation: disassembling someone at point A, and reassembling them at point B, presumably out of different cells. Would 'you' come out the other side? Presumably somebody who thought, looked, and remembered exactly the same as you would, but completely destroying somebody (at point A) often leads to their death.

If you compared yourself and yourself from 8 years ago, you'd find that you would be made of completely different cells (except for cells that fall off, and then you drink them accidentally and other things like that), so what keeps 'you', 'you'?

Not really, the neurons in your brain do not divide, and remain until your death, they only create new synapse between other neurons.  So, the cells that are responsible for your personality, thoughts, dreams, actions, and what we would most closely define as YOU, are the same cells that were there 8 years ago, just with some additional synapse pathways.

They don't divide, but the individual molecules aren't the same.
My argument 1:
Carl Jung said that God is created in our minds; it's part of our nature. Freud said something similar.

If I was a God, I wouldn't tell everyone I existed as noone would be tested in any way on Earth..
but giving every human an in-built knowledge of my existence...hmm.... sounds like a good idea....

So basically you believe that there's some god who decided to create a universe and fill it with people just to see if they end up believing in him or not and that he tried to bias the results of the test by giving everybody built-in knowledge of his existence... hmmm... sounds like a pretty retarded god.

I'm saying that a God that evidently doesn't have any power over the universe nowadays (not seen any miracles recently- but doesn't stop the universe having a creator) might have this built into people, so they have a chance to do good things.
Which, believe in God or not, are the right things to do.

?

Proleg

Re: /b/'s view on religion
« Reply #16 on: February 04, 2009, 08:43:12 AM »
Which, believe in God or not, are the right things to do.
Huh?

?

Eddy Baby

  • Official Member
  • 9986
Re: /b/'s view on religion
« Reply #17 on: February 04, 2009, 08:45:40 AM »
Which, believe in God or not, are the right things to do.
Huh?


Being good. It's just a good idea. If everyone believed in God, it would solve a lot of problems, but some people are ridiculous about it.

Actually, just stick to the 10 commandments and it's fine!

Let me just say again that I'm not religious, but not killing and stealing etc are rules I follow..

*

Guessed

  • 5379
Re: /b/'s view on religion
« Reply #18 on: February 04, 2009, 08:49:33 AM »
Which, believe in God or not, are the right things to do.
Huh?


Being good. It's just a good idea. If everyone believed in God, it would solve a lot of problems, but some people are ridiculous about it.

Actually, just stick to the 10 commandments and it's fine!

Let me just say again that I'm not religious, but not killing and stealing etc are rules I follow..

I disagree with this statement in that, in order for being good to be the right thing, we would have to define what good is, which frankly is impossible.

Just because killing and stealing are rules you follow, does not mean they are a) rules everyone should follow (they may not be applicable) or b) necessarily good or right in all circumstances.
« Last Edit: February 04, 2009, 08:52:50 AM by Guessed »
Is Dino open source?

Quote from: grogberries


?

Eddy Baby

  • Official Member
  • 9986
Re: /b/'s view on religion
« Reply #19 on: February 04, 2009, 08:53:37 AM »
Which, believe in God or not, are the right things to do.
Huh?


Being good. It's just a good idea. If everyone believed in God, it would solve a lot of problems, but some people are ridiculous about it.

Actually, just stick to the 10 commandments and it's fine!

Let me just say again that I'm not religious, but not killing and stealing etc are rules I follow..

I disagree with this statement in that, in order for being good to be the right thing, we would have to define what good is, which frankly is impossible.

Just because killing and stealing are rules you follow, does not mean they are a) rules everyone should follow (they may not be applicable) or b) necessarily good or right.

But my point is that the 'fundamentals' of all religions (strange to use that word in a good way when talking about religion) are just common sense. And whether it's because you want to go to heaven, or because you want everyone to have a good life, it doesn't matter.

?

Proleg

Re: /b/'s view on religion
« Reply #20 on: February 04, 2009, 08:56:17 AM »
Which, believe in God or not, are the right things to do.
Huh?


Being good. It's just a good idea. If everyone believed in God, it would solve a lot of problems, but some people are ridiculous about it.

Actually, just stick to the 10 commandments and it's fine!

Let me just say again that I'm not religious, but not killing and stealing etc are rules I follow..

I disagree with this statement in that, in order for being good to be the right thing, we would have to define what good is, which frankly is impossible.

Just because killing and stealing are rules you follow, does not mean they are a) rules everyone should follow (they may not be applicable) or b) necessarily good or right.

But my point is that the 'fundamentals' of all religions (strange to use that word in a good way when talking about religion) are just common sense. And whether it's because you want to go to heaven, or because you want everyone to have a good life, it doesn't matter.
...or because you want to control people? That is the only common element all religions seem to share. Most of the time, they do not succeed in doing even that.

*

Guessed

  • 5379
Re: /b/'s view on religion
« Reply #21 on: February 04, 2009, 08:57:38 AM »
Which, believe in God or not, are the right things to do.
Huh?


Being good. It's just a good idea. If everyone believed in God, it would solve a lot of problems, but some people are ridiculous about it.

Actually, just stick to the 10 commandments and it's fine!

Let me just say again that I'm not religious, but not killing and stealing etc are rules I follow..

I disagree with this statement in that, in order for being good to be the right thing, we would have to define what good is, which frankly is impossible.

Just because killing and stealing are rules you follow, does not mean they are a) rules everyone should follow (they may not be applicable) or b) necessarily good or right.

But my point is that the 'fundamentals' of all religions (strange to use that word in a good way when talking about religion) are just common sense. And whether it's because you want to go to heaven, or because you want everyone to have a good life, it doesn't matter.

That's fair enough, in fact I agree to an extent.  However, I still maintain that doing things such as not killing or stealing, does not necessarily mean you've lead a good life. It's completely based upon circumstance.  But I digress.
Is Dino open source?

Quote from: grogberries


?

Eddy Baby

  • Official Member
  • 9986
Re: /b/'s view on religion
« Reply #22 on: February 04, 2009, 09:04:09 AM »
To sum up everything I think



Don't be a massive twat


Which is also religion, without the silly bits.


P.S. I wasn't calling anyone a massive twat.

*

Guessed

  • 5379
Re: /b/'s view on religion
« Reply #23 on: February 04, 2009, 09:06:42 AM »
To sum up everything I think



Don't be a massive twat


Which is also religion, without the silly bits.


P.S. I wasn't calling anyone a massive twat.

Fair enough, although there are instances when it is necessary to be a twat. But I'll stop nit-picking.
Is Dino open source?

Quote from: grogberries


?

Eddy Baby

  • Official Member
  • 9986
Re: /b/'s view on religion
« Reply #24 on: February 04, 2009, 09:12:13 AM »
Just don't piss anyone off.

And if you don't get into heaven (existence permitting), at least you tried.

*

Guessed

  • 5379
Re: /b/'s view on religion
« Reply #25 on: February 04, 2009, 09:15:21 AM »
I can get behind that. But once again, it is sometimes beneficial to piss people off  ;)
Is Dino open source?

Quote from: grogberries


?

Eddy Baby

  • Official Member
  • 9986
Re: /b/'s view on religion
« Reply #26 on: February 04, 2009, 09:21:39 AM »
As long as more people find it funny than people that get angry.

*

Guessed

  • 5379
Re: /b/'s view on religion
« Reply #27 on: February 04, 2009, 09:23:05 AM »
Fair enough.
Is Dino open source?

Quote from: grogberries


*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30590
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: /b/'s view on religion
« Reply #28 on: February 04, 2009, 09:39:32 AM »
Which, believe in God or not, are the right things to do.
Huh?


Being good. It's just a good idea. If everyone believed in God, it would solve a lot of problems, but some people are ridiculous about it.

Actually, just stick to the 10 commandments and it's fine!

Let me just say again that I'm not religious, but not killing and stealing etc are rules I follow..

I disagree with this statement in that, in order for being good to be the right thing, we would have to define what good is, which frankly is impossible.

Just because killing and stealing are rules you follow, does not mean they are a) rules everyone should follow (they may not be applicable) or b) necessarily good or right.

But my point is that the 'fundamentals' of all religions (strange to use that word in a good way when talking about religion) are just common sense. And whether it's because you want to go to heaven, or because you want everyone to have a good life, it doesn't matter.
...or because you want to control people? That is the only common element all religions seem to share. Most of the time, they do not succeed in doing even that.

Find a single organization that isn't.

?

Proleg

Re: /b/'s view on religion
« Reply #29 on: February 04, 2009, 09:45:54 AM »
Find a single organization that isn't.
PETA.