Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Topic: God vs Science Posted: 19-Feb-2007 at 07:45 |
Originally posted by JanusRook
Zaitsev, now you are just arguing on a subjective perception and not an objective fact.
...
The objective opinion is that both are qualified individuals to convene in such an interview and both did admirably well in their arguements, although personally think Dawkins is a douchebag, but then again that's subjective.
|
Perhaps it is subjective, but so is the nature of any credential. GCLE, I did not say academic, I specifically said science. Regardless the point is hardly important. I have to disagree with you JanusRook. I think they both did very poorly in their arguments. They were obviously both avoiding getting into anything too significant. I find it odd that Dawkins actually said that God exists, just he didn't know which one. It was obviously just a personal jab, and not intended to be taken too seriously, but it is certainly quite interesting.
|
|
gcle2003
King
Suspended
Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Feb-2007 at 13:54 |
Originally posted by Zaitsev
I find it odd that Dawkins actually said that God exists, just he didn't know which one. It was obviously just a personal jab, and not intended to be taken too seriously, but it is certainly quite interesting.
|
It's not odd at all. I'm perfectly prepared to accept that one or more gods may exist but I see no reason whatsoever to choose any particular one of the various ones on offer.
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Feb-2007 at 07:30 |
Yes, but you're not Dawkins.
|
|
Mughal e Azam
Colonel
Joined: 10-Jul-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 646
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 15-Jul-2007 at 23:09 |
Originally posted by DocStaph
DAWKINS: There could be something incredibly grand and incomprehensible and beyond our present understanding.
COLLINS: That's God.
Here is the summary of the whole debate. As you can see, Dawkins has belifes but he is weary of revealing himself to his students. |
Damn straight. Atheists have never made sense to me. At all. They get lost in their long-winded, scientific, articulate diction. They soon begin to not make sense.
|
Mughal e Azam
|
|
Aster Thrax Eupator
Suspended
Suspended
Joined: 18-Jul-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1929
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 16-Jul-2007 at 14:44 |
Ha! As a deist- I don't see a conflict! Read Spinoza's Ethics - God is a product of man trying to comprehend the infinity of science. The various kinds of god that man is worshipping are just different guises of that one concept with various cultural masks to make it more accesable for the people that are worshipping it. Frankly, what is being fought over is the culture which is attached to what is ultimatley the same concept- nothing much else. The culture has become so firmly implemented over the concept, that the people who are practicing the religion simply can't see that it is fundamentally the same concept. God is infinity, I believe in the holiness of infinate knowledge and believe in the pursuit of that knowledge. I believe that the pursuit of that knowledge is a great and holy undertaking. That sense of wonder "the einstein religion" (as Dawkins called it) is God at it's most basic. THAT is what I believe in- the bare essentials of god which is simply man's capacity to explore in infinate ocean of knowledge. The form in which that has been worshipped or the ego which that has been given is irrelivant to me and other pan-deists like me.
TIME: Dr. Collins, you believe that science is compatible with Christian faith.
COLLINS: Yes. God's existence is either true or not. But calling it a scientific question implies that the tools of science can provide the answer. From my perspective, God cannot be completely contained within nature, and therefore God's existence is outside of science's ability to really weigh in. |
How can any "Idea" be weighed up by Science? That logic can be applied to all metaphysical concepts. So does that mean that philosophy and metaphysics are complete rubbish because they cannot be subjected to scientific examination? That would mean that things such as art is irrelevant to Mr.Dawkin's "wonderful" logic, because the concepts behind art cannot be put to the test by science and mathematics.
Many Atheists seem to use this argument. Bertrand Russel said that if there was a giant green teapot, and I had every right to believe in the giant green teapot, then that makes it real. What Russel did not quite appreciate is that fundamentally, god is a philosophical concept which simply cannot be applied to that materialistic argument. They always use materialistic arguments of ridicuolous things to try and prevent the argument of a concept. How can they use the same argument for both Physical and Metaphysical forms?
Edited by Earl Aster - 16-Jul-2007 at 14:52
|
|
elenos
Chieftain
Joined: 13-Jun-2007
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1457
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 18-Jul-2007 at 09:31 |
Nah! Green teapot? what rubbish. Like Linus I believe in the giant pumpkin!
|
elenos
|
|
Akolouthos
Sultan
Joined: 24-Feb-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2091
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Jul-2007 at 02:07 |
Originally posted by elenos
Nah! Green teapot? what rubbish. Like Linus I believe in the giant pumpkin!
|
Elenos, I feel I must correct your manifest, and soul destroying heresy. It is not the "giant pumpkin," it is the " Great Pumpkin". Such an error could turn the Pumpkinite world on its head. -Akolouthos
|
|
elenos
Chieftain
Joined: 13-Jun-2007
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1457
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Jul-2007 at 03:08 |
Oh, bare my chest, dress me in sack cloth and ashes, and make me kneel in the cold dark night in utter penance! Indeed I did utter such a profanity. Forgive me Great Pumpkin in the Patch for I have sinned. I will light a hundred candles and remain chaste for a hundred days!
|
elenos
|
|
Akolouthos
Sultan
Joined: 24-Feb-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2091
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Jul-2007 at 03:14 |
Hm. I guess we need a clergy if we are going to have a formal penitential process. What do you think? Should we nominate Linus as our Ecumenical Pumpkinite Patriarch?
-Akolouthos
|
|
Omar al Hashim
King
Suspended
Joined: 05-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5697
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Jul-2007 at 03:43 |
This isn't the same Linus as the creator of Linux is it?
Because if it is it solves many questions about creation. The world began on Epoch (00:00:00 UTC, January 1, 1970), and will end on 2^(8*sizeof(time_t))
Edited by Omar al Hashim - 20-Jul-2007 at 03:46
|
|
Akolouthos
Sultan
Joined: 24-Feb-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2091
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Jul-2007 at 03:52 |
|
|
elenos
Chieftain
Joined: 13-Jun-2007
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1457
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Jul-2007 at 04:12 |
We can use the sacred abode of Snoopy for our cathedral. Can't you all see how God is Dog spelled backwards? On one of his magnificent interior walls Snoopy has a full mural of the rise and fall of the Roman Empire!
|
elenos
|
|