You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Why arguments and debates about God and religion are fruitless
- Thread starter Gabfly1
- Start date
I always find it interesting how those who think they know there is no God feel intellectually superior. Its almost 100%.
It is almost the tell tale sign of some who took science in a Liberal arts college but graduated with a Poly Sci or other non science degree. They were generally influenced by some neo commie or socialist professor and they never question what they were taught.
Its amusing --- as science is finding more and more evidence that our universe may have been designed. The "logical atheists" bury their head in the sand.
The only logical position regarding a Creator is to doubt or name what you believe faith.
It is almost the tell tale sign of some who took science in a Liberal arts college but graduated with a Poly Sci or other non science degree. They were generally influenced by some neo commie or socialist professor and they never question what they were taught.
Its amusing --- as science is finding more and more evidence that our universe may have been designed. The "logical atheists" bury their head in the sand.
The only logical position regarding a Creator is to doubt or name what you believe faith.
Quote from Kassz007:
Dawkins argues the same. A brainwashing that is passed on from generation to generation. That is a cycle not easily breakable.
notwithstanding the fact those who have seen Dawkins speak realize Dawkings admits the universe appears designed. So you would have to conclude he is one schizo prof.
Quote from Ricter:
They feel these things to be true. How are you going to make someone stop feeling something, make so much noise they forget about it?
When I was young (pre-high school) I used to believe in god only because others did and nobody gave an alternative point of view. Then I grew older and started to learn about the various religions and all of the hypocrisy. The more I compared theories of evolution and physics to what I knew about religion, the more I realized that god made no sense.
The point of my rant is that people's "feelings" can be changed with education.
Except I read his book cover to cover. Your point is taken out of context. Yes, he said it appears so. However, appearances are not scientific conclusions. He explained why appearances can be deceiving and the underlying science of a much more viable and less fanciful conclusion. Are you intentionally obfuscating, or do you genuinely just skim through material before latching onto firm conclusions?Quote from jem:
except those who have seen Dawkins speak realize Dawkings admits the universe appears designed.
Quote from jem:
notwithstanding the fact those who have seen Dawkins speak realize Dawkings admits the universe appears designed. So you would have to conclude he is one schizo prof.
Not at all. I have read his books. He admits the universe APPEARS to have been designed because of how all of the little parts fit together. He then proceeds to explain why it IS NOT designed.
Quote from Kassz007:
When I was young (pre-high school) I used to believe in god only because others did and nobody gave an alternative point of view. Then I grew older and started to learn about the various religions and all of the hypocrisy. The more I compared theories of evolution and physics to what I knew about religion, the more I realized that god made no sense.
The point of my rant is that people's "feelings" can be changed with education.
Belief and feeling are different things. But accepting your point, who's to say you got the right education? You, because you feel it to be right?
Quote from Gabfly1:
Except I read his book cover to cover. Your point is taken out of context. Yes, he said it appears so. However, appearances are not scientific conclusions. He explained why appearances can be deceiving and the underlying science of a much more viable and less fanciful conclusion. Are you intentionally obfuscating, or do you genuinely just skim through material before latching onto firm conclusions?
Not out of context at all. We agree. That is why I used the word appears.
Of course science can change.
He has faith science will change and discover why the universal constants exist. But until there is a an explanation... you are presented the choice... accept that if there is only one universe it appears designed or speculate there are almost infinite universes and we just happen to exist in the one which had the constants fine tuned for our existence.
Quote from Gabfly1:
Yes, but the question is, how many people have actually changed their mind as compared to voicing a view they already held? It's that old analogy of bringing a horse to water. I think people need to be willing to question their faith before logic can have any effect on them. And among the already inculcated, I think it has to happen on their own timetable if at all. A True Believer, by definition, cannot digest logic. I don't think the endless debates in this forum have changed anyone's mind.
things are changing. these debates are part of the education process. it wont happen fast. superstition is a powerful force. education is having an effect:
Evangelicals Fear the Loss of Their Teenagers
Despite their packed megachurches, their political clout and their increasing visibility on the national stage, evangelical Christian leaders are warning one another that their teenagers are abandoning the faith in droves.
At an unusual series of leadership meetings in 44 cities this fall, more than 6,000 pastors are hearing dire forecasts from some of the biggest names in the conservative evangelical movement.
Their alarm has been stoked by a highly suspect claim that if current trends continue, only 4 percent of teenagers will be âBible-believing Christiansâ as adults.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/06/us/06evangelical.html