Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Mageth · 05-28-2003, 01:26 PM

You mean the point that those things are evidences of the existence of the concept of god(s)? I get that. But that's basically the same as saying those things are evidences of human existence.

But even in light of the above, it still can be said that "gods have left no physical evidence of their existence," for gods as extant beings outside of the human imagination have not.

CX · 05-28-2003, 01:36 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Calzaer
Lots of things exist that aren't alive.

However, nothing exists that doesn't leave some form of physical evidence as to its existing.

Really? What is the physical evidence for Heron's Formula? How about the Pythagorean Theorem? Do abstract ideas not exist?

Tristan Scott · 05-28-2003, 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mageth
You mean the point that those things are evidences of the existence of the concept of god(s)? I get that. But that's basically the same as saying those things are evidences of human existence.

Exactly.

What our civilization has become is the result of all human experiences and concepts, our knowledge as well as our deities. Like it or not the influence is there.

Mageth · 05-28-2003, 03:06 PM

Absolutely.

Alix Nenuphar · 05-28-2003, 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Tenspace
Without going into a twenty-page thread, let me just refer to an old SF story I read. It was about beings that lived in suns. Totally incorporeal, and a scale of presence that allowed them to witness stellar evolution as a way of life.

I wish I could remember who wrote it, or what it was called. Anyway, I would say that the definition of life having a brain and a beating heart might be a bit earth-centric. We have no idea (yet) as to how life can evolve. Then you get into the whole machine-thing: can we create a machine that is truly alive?

When it comes to God, remember he is no more alive than any other character in a book you might read.

Who knows, a thousand years from now, machines could be worshipping Luke Skywalker as Jesus.

Tenspace

The story is by Arthur Clarke; it is called "Out of the Sun," and I cannot remember which anthology it first appeared in. Oddly enough, Clarke reminds me of Dawkins - both are terribly British, terribly polite, and intellectually ruthless.

hinduwoman · 05-28-2003, 06:00 PM

Since God speaks to his prophets are we to assume he has lungs? If he speaks in a still small voice, maybe weak lungs?

Calzaer · 05-28-2003, 08:26 PM

Quote:

Really? What is the physical evidence for Heron's Formula? How about the Pythagorean Theorem? Do abstract ideas not exist?

No, the Pythagorean Theorem does not exist. The Pythagorean Theorem is the name of an observable phenomena.
If I build a bridge, I can see the Pythagorean Theorem in action. If you want to claim God is the name of an observable phenomena, you'd better point to something we can oberserve about it.

AsimovsProtege · 05-29-2003, 01:02 AM

shouldn't the question be, if God is conscious, doesn't he have to be alive? If God can make decisions and reason, doesn't he have to be alive in a physical sense?

keyser_soze · 05-29-2003, 01:09 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by nemesis855
On a related note, I don't mean to sound "nitpicky", but if we're created in God's image doesn't that imply that God possesses all of mankind's "bad" qualities (hate, anger, etc.) as well as the "good" ones.

- nemesis855

Of course, haven't you read the OT? A prime example of a schizophrenic personality disorder, with dissociative tendencies related to personal creations....plus the whole meglo thing going on....damn nut case if you ask me. If we're made in that image, at least in the act of carbon copying, some freaking connection with reality made it's way in. For some of us at least.

Tristan Scott · 05-29-2003, 06:55 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Calzaer
No, the Pythagorean Theorem does not exist. The Pythagorean Theorem is the name of an observable phenomena.
If I build a bridge, I can see the Pythagorean Theorem in action. If you want to claim God is the name of an observable phenomena, you'd better point to something we can oberserve about it.

I'm sorry but I think that is incorrect. The Pythagorean Theorem is not the name of an observable phenomena. It is purely an invention of man. Like all mathematics it was invented to help man understand his surroundings.

That's the way it is with gods too, isn't it? Man has always invented gods to help explain that which he doesn't understand.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-28-2003, 01:26 PM	#31
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	You mean the point that those things are evidences of the existence of the concept of god(s)? I get that. But that's basically the same as saying those things are evidences of human existence. But even in light of the above, it still can be said that "gods have left no physical evidence of their existence," for gods as extant beings outside of the human imagination have not.

05-28-2003, 03:06 PM	#34
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	Absolutely.

05-28-2003, 06:00 PM	#36
hinduwoman Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: India Posts: 6,977	Since God speaks to his prophets are we to assume he has lungs? If he speaks in a still small voice, maybe weak lungs?

05-29-2003, 01:02 AM	#38
AsimovsProtege Junior Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Canada Posts: 21	shouldn't the question be, if God is conscious, doesn't he have to be alive? If God can make decisions and reason, doesn't he have to be alive in a physical sense?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.