Language:
switch to room list switch to menu My folders
Go to page: First ... 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12
[#] Sat May 01 2021 07:50:37 EDT from Nurb432

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Thanos was right.

I just dont want to be in the 1/2 that vanishes :) 



[#] Sat May 01 2021 10:00:16 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Do you consider science a religion?

To be sure ... science is not a religion, but Science(tm) is a religion.

science = begin with observations and questions, compose a hypothesis, perform experiments, observe the results and draw a conclusion ... repeat if necessary.

Science(tm) = begin with a conclusion, select data that backs that conclusion, tar dissenters as heretics

It's pretty obvious that Science(tm) resembles religion more than it resembles science.

[#] Sat May 01 2021 10:02:56 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Settled and irrefutable science is NOT the scientific method. 

Anyone who says "the science is settled" is NOT a scientist. Real scientists love to put the process back into gear when new data is discovered.

As for hacks like Tyson and Nye ... those people are entertainers, not scientists.

[#] Sat May 01 2021 10:30:17 EDT from ParanoidDelusions

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

If the atheists are right, I suppose I don't care *which* side of the snap I'm on. Either way it solves the problem of having to live in a world full of idiots. 

But, ironically, in an 80/20 universe, the snap would absolutely remove more stupid people than smart people, just by random chance - for a while afterwards anyhow, you would have a better ratio. 

 

 

Sat May 01 2021 07:50:37 EDT from Nurb432

Thanos was right.

I just dont want to be in the 1/2 that vanishes :) 



 



[#] Sat May 01 2021 10:37:30 EDT from zooer

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

The Georgia Guidestones state that the ideal human population for the world is under 500 million people. 

If you don't know about the Georgia Guidestones:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_Guidestones

 

 



[#] Sat May 01 2021 10:56:36 EDT from ParanoidDelusions

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

The thing about Pascal's wager is that you cannot NOT play that table. 

I think I've figured out how to frame your perspective on it, Arabella... 


It is a lot like the person who looks at the Super Lotto odds and goes, "I'm not playing at all. It is just false hope. Your odds of winning the jackpot are astronomical. You're NOT going to win." 

Compared to the person who puts $2 down and says, "I know... but it is worth it for me to have the dream, the hope... and eventually someone DOES win - but it is NEVER someone who didn't play who wins." 

Atheists are in the first class. 

Theists are in the second group. 

The odds are long, there are lots of different options, the rules are complex... but the child molesting Catholic priest may be betting on the long shot that he picked the right number *and* can actually achieve penance, absolution, forgiveness and salvation. 

The atheist who lives a moral, just and good life is betting on the fact that it doesn't really matter in the end, if the pedo Priest never gets caught and held accountable - the *universe* itself doesn't care.  Not about the Priest, not about the Atheist, and not about the Priest's victims. It is all pointless, and we all end up in the same state... *nothing*. 

I don't pretend that God has any answers to your gender identity - or wants *me* to tell you *my* opinion on it. I think this is a *problem* with modern Christianity and its platform especially in the US. If I believe in a PARTICULAR God - it isn't one that says, "I want you to really focus on issues that alienate people because they don't identify inside with what they are physically on the OUTSIDE. That is the #1 problem in My Kingdom!"


Your gender identity is immaterial to me. But betting on the scenario I describe above - where you're a good person and the predator Priest who gets away with it and holds no guilt ends up having lived HIS ideally fulfilling life with the time that was given to me... 

It is a terrible dismal conclusion on the condition of life that atheism comes to, in my opinion. Successful selfishness and evil is the BEST policy in the universe atheism describes. Live your life solely for the way that is MOST personally pleasing - because we all die in the end, and we only get a limited time, and there is nothing else afterwards. 

That is as inevitable of a logical conclusion to me as that betting against God in Pascal's wager is the *worst* bet on the table, too. 

 

 

Sat May 01 2021 01:42:55 EDT from arabella

I don't care what any of y'all believe.

I absolutely will defend your right to believe it. 

I am atheist.

I am what most people would call Transgender. (My definition of myself is at variance with that)

This thing with Pascal, and gambling...

It seems to me there are for too many outcomes for the religious, to convince me that I'm wrong.

I am unable to understand the need of the religious to believe they will exist after death, in whatever form that takes.

That I think the need for further existence is a vanity should be irrelevant to you, in exactly the same way that your belief I'm damned is irrelevant to me.

I'm not an evangelical atheist, I keep my unbelief (mostly) to myself.

"Mostly" because I'm not ashamed  of it, and will talk about in a relevant setting, but I don't tend to start those conversations.



 



[#] Sat May 01 2021 10:59:52 EDT from ParanoidDelusions

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

And... let me be clear... I am not ALL IN on "The Abrahamic God of Denomination X" on the other side of the table. I think Ig is. He has his chips all on a particular group, on a particular *number* in that group, with no spread. He has narrow odds that have a HUGE payoff. 


I've got a bigger spread on a group that is, "mmmmm... COOOOULD BE..." I've played a broader set of odds that has potentially way less, and even bad payoff. 


As an atheist, you're all in on a single number, there is no other group, and the payoff is NOTHING if you win, and knowing you lost if you lose. 


WHA?!? Why? None of the atheists have answered me or been able to dispute this. That is the game atheists play with Pascal's wager. WHY?!?  

 

I think I nailed it... for the same reason that non-lottery players won't play the lottery. "It is a waste of my $2 for false hope." 






[#] Sat May 01 2021 11:17:53 EDT from zooer

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

 

Fri Apr 30 2021 11:12:53 AM EDT from ParanoidDelusions

Care to circle the floor for another waltz of this dance, or are you ready to change the tempo? 

 

You are silly.
No, I don't want to dance with you, because two men dancing together would be GAY and I don't want either of us burning in hell. 

 

If you want to choose to believe that YOUR religion must be the correct one, then do so.  How can your religion be wrong, you have been indoctrinated in it your whole life.

I am not going to change your mind.  If there is a hell, it must be overfilled with souls.  You probably will be in it as well, sitting between two gay men.  

I am sure you masturbated and had pre-marital relations.  (ooooooo, evil!)

Religion is silly.  There is *no* difference between a parent telling their children to be good or Santa won't bring them anything, and a parent telling a child be good or you will spend your afterlife in hell.

 

You don't need religion to be a moral person.

 

 



[#] Sat May 01 2021 11:24:30 EDT from ParanoidDelusions

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I can see that. 

I don't think it is an absolute yet. If there were strong evidence making it an absolute one way or another - I'd pick a side. Neither side has presented convincing evidence in my opinion. It is a matter of "not enough of data to come to a reliable conclusion." 

Prove that the universe is teeming with life as it should be, you'll move me a notch more toward atheist. Continue to fail to come up with ANY evidence of this, as we are able to look further and further into the cosmos, and you'll move me toward theist. 

If aliens show up with evidence that they genetically engineered us in prehistory, and they are vastly superior and claim, "Listen, the atheists are right, there is no God..." 

That would probably convince me. Of course, theists would just go, "Those aren't aliens. Those are DEMONS!" No matter HOW credible the evidence of the alien/demons was.

Because that is how metaphysical faith *works*. I'm OK with THAT, too. 

:) 

 

 

Sat May 01 2021 07:26:32 EDT from Nurb432

I see the point, but to me Agnostics are people that dont have the balls to make a decision. 



 



[#] Sat May 01 2021 11:32:09 EDT from Nurb432

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

But, for us, living a life of a lie ( from our standpoint ), would be a lose. 

 

Id rather live my life as i think is right, even if it turns out to be wrong in the end.

Sat May 01 2021 10:59:52 AM EDT from ParanoidDelusions

As an atheist, you're all in on a single number, there is no other group, and the payoff is NOTHING if you win, and knowing you lost if you lose. 

 



[#] Sat May 01 2021 11:55:53 EDT from ParanoidDelusions

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I think those kind of projections are hogwash. 

The carrying capacity of the Earth for human lives is fluid and strongly influenced by our ability to leverage technology, produce resources and manage waste. 

The first guy predicting an ecological collapse based on human population growth was in the late 1700s. I always forget his name. By the technology of his time, the growth was unsustainable. He was a conservative. He was *right*. 

What he forgot to account for was technology increasing food yields. 

There is some finite point where we can't balance quality of life with actual *physical* space on the planet for more humans - where the psychology of needing physical *space* has been exceeded. We can't have population so dense that we're all shoulder to shoulder on every bit of surface of the whole planet, as an exaggerated example... 

But even then - the answer is technology - and finding MORE space elsewhere. Terraforming the moon into a blue planet with oceans and atmosphere, doing the same to Mars. 

If we don't get to that point before we get too big that technology can't provide a higher capacity on THIS rock - something will happen that tech won't be able to solve that will thin us down - reset us to a level that can be sustained - just like ice caps melting and lowering the salt level in the arctic sea. 

We could just end up extinct. We wouldn't be the first species that were kings of the planet to fall and disappear, and if we go, we won't be the last. 

THAT would also tend to prove atheism, too. If we went entirely extinct without an "end of the world armageddon/revelations" kind of 2nd coming/Tribulation. If we just wink out - then that is probably it. Nothing after - we were just a random result of the universe and there was no special reason for us.  

If the Atheists end up being right - I wish I had dedicated myself to being a shittier, more selfish, more hedonistic person. 

 

Sat May 01 2021 10:37:30 EDT from zooer

The Georgia Guidestones state that the ideal human population for the world is under 500 million people. 

If you don't know about the Georgia Guidestones:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_Guidestones

 

 



 



[#] Sat May 01 2021 12:04:46 EDT from ParanoidDelusions

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Here is the weird dichotomy though, of that... 

If you are RIGHT, you won't KNOW and it won't matter. 

If you are wrong, you'll find out that the life you LIVED was *actually* the lie. 

See... that is what I don't get about the bet - just... let's get away from the spirituality and the metaphysical quality of it. 

From a purely secular GAMBLER'S view... apart from questions of God... 


The bet against God is a *shitty* bet - even if you're doing it because you can't bear living what is to you a *lie*. 

Your response basically comes down to, "I'm doing it for my PRINCIPLES..." 

And I guess my response actually is, "you would be better off with less principle, from the perspective of the gambler's wagers." 


That is kind of my thesis here - and maybe presented that way, it'll make it more palatable and understandable to the Atheists here. 


This is why I find atheist evangelists *annoying*. Even if you're coming to me from a perspective of *principles* - I'd *rather* be LESS principled than you on this bet. 


Because YOUR bet is

"I win, I don't know that my principles were right, it doesn't ultimately matter". 

"I lose, I find out my principles were WRONG, it did ultimately matter, and my life that I thought I was living NOT as a lie, I was actually living as a lie." 

The payouts on your bet *suck*, dude. They do. That is really my singular point. I'm not arguing for God from a Christian perspective, at *all*. 

 

Sat May 01 2021 11:32:09 EDT from Nurb432

But, for us, living a life of a lie ( from our standpoint ), would be a lose. 

 

Id rather live my life as i think is right, even if it turns out to be wrong in the end.

Sat May 01 2021 10:59:52 AM EDT from ParanoidDelusions

As an atheist, you're all in on a single number, there is no other group, and the payoff is NOTHING if you win, and knowing you lost if you lose. 

 



 



[#] Sat May 01 2021 17:37:16 EDT from arabella

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

My reference to Pascal's Wager was simply to point out the complexity of your outcome spread.

I don't understand your need for a win/lose scenario.

I believe I have one life to live, and should live it well, in the here and now, not in hope of a reward in some kind of afterlife, I live as ethical a life as I can, simply because it is what I feel is the proper course.

My gender identity is irrelevant, I mentioned it only because of your earlier assertion regarding LGBT atheists (no doubt you are aware of how I feel about the inclusion of the  "T", but if not please feel free to ask me.)



[#] Sun May 02 2021 06:20:00 EDT from darknetuser

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

THAT would also tend to prove atheism, too. If we went entirely
extinct without an "end of the world armageddon/revelations" kind of

2nd coming/Tribulation. If we just wink out - then that is probably
it. Nothing after - we were just a random result of the universe and

there was no special reason for us.  

If the Atheists end up being right - I wish I had dedicated myself to

being a shittier, more selfish, more hedonistic person. 

Atheists would be right if the only option is a God, gods or animus that is focused on mankind specifically.

Imagine if Zork the skullcrusher build the Universe in order to deploy his favourite pets, the three winged gigantic octopuses, which are to be deployed in a million years, and that everything that happens before that is just Zork preparing the Earth for the arrival of the octopuses. Maybe Zork is planning our extinction because we are a byproduct that stands in the way of his pets.

[#] Sun May 02 2021 06:46:39 EDT from darknetuser

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

It is like you guys aren't actually reading my posts. 


I beg to differ. It is like you are not reading our posts.

I have included at least three alternate frames that I remember, including:


* You bet for the Christian God, then it turns out that the real god (ie Zork the Skullcrusher) hates you because he hates Christian dogma and you burn in hell, while bastards who spent their lives raping and pillaging are sent to the Zork Valhala.
* You bet for the Christian God, then it turns the Truth is non-theistic instead of Theistic, therefore wasting your life by following theistic dogmas(ie. you dedicated your life to the Roman Church, instead of reaching true illumination and becoming one with the Universe).

[#] Sun May 02 2021 06:57:29 EDT from darknetuser

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

 Belief in Santa, God, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster has MORE
chance of a meaningful payoff under the rules of Pascal's Wager than

*atheism*. It is a simple statement that really exists separate of

the Christian church - no matter HOW badly you want to draw the
conversation in that direction - where it is more comfortable for you

to mount a defense of Atheism. 


Only if you believe that the Truth comes with a God or Animus that DEMANDS your worship in order to grant you a reward in the afterlife.

Now, say I am atheist who spends his life planting and taking care of sunflowers, then I die, and it turns the real God is Yellowy The Goddess of Sunflowers, whose requisite to enjoying an awesome afterlife is liking sunflowers.

From the agnostic point of view, following Christian dogma is not a favourabily stacked bet because you can be a good CHristian, then step on a sunflower and forget to apologize to it, so there is a significative chance that you are a good Chrsitian yet spend eternity being tortured by giant sunflowers in sunflower hell, while the agnostic moron who took the losing bet with no payoff got to both enyoy life and enjoy afterlife.

[#] Sun May 02 2021 07:06:50 EDT from darknetuser

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

2021-05-01 07:26 from Nurb432
I see the point, but to me Agnostics are people that dont have the
balls to make a decision. 


No, we just don't have a compelling reason to follow a view or another, specially because we don't find significative evidence to believe any current dogma of the ones followed by any human is not going to lead you to sunflower hell in the end.

[#] Sun May 02 2021 07:11:39 EDT from darknetuser

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


It is a lot like the person who looks at the Super Lotto odds and
goes, "I'm not playing at all. It is just false hope. Your odds of
winning the jackpot are astronomical. You're NOT going to win." 

Compared to the person who puts $2 down and says, "I know... but it
is worth it for me to have the dream, the hope... and eventually
someone DOES win - but it is NEVER someone who didn't play who
wins." 

Atheists are in the first class. 

Theists are in the second group. 


If the guy playing the lotto never wins, he gets a net loss for all the money hye invested playing, which means the people who didn't play at all ends up in a better possiotion than the guy who played and lost.

I am not going to win the lottery if I don't play it, but maybe I can take my money and place it in a game with better chances, which I could never do if I spend all the money in lottery.

[#] Sun May 02 2021 07:15:32 EDT from darknetuser

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

WHA?!? Why? None of the atheists have answered me or been able to
dispute this. That is the game atheists play with Pascal's wager.
WHY?!?  


I can't answer for militant atheists. As somebody has mentioned, nowadays militant atheism is more of a religion than anything.

However, if you _believe_ the moon is made of cheese, you don't stop believing it because somebody tells you there is a gain to be made for believing it is made of cocaine instead. Belief is belief and it lies beyond reason until there is sufficient evidence. The most you can achieve is to force peolpe to pretend they believe the moon is made of cocaine, but you can't sway their hearts so easily.

[#] Sun May 02 2021 07:25:09 EDT from Nurb432

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Most ( but not all ) Atheists just do the right thing out of nature, because its right.  We dont need to be threatened with endless bad stuff to be good. 

Not saying you do ( or dont ), just the way its worded, that would be one interpretation .

Sat May 01 2021 11:55:53 AM EDT from ParanoidDelusions

.  
If the Atheists end up being right - I wish I had dedicated myself to being a shittier, more selfish, more hedonistic person. 

 



Go to page: First ... 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12