Religion

DC_DEEP

Sexy Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Posts
8,714
Media
0
Likes
93
Points
183
Sexuality
No Response
Well this seems to be a matter of semantics which I don't seem to understand. Could you please explain the nuanced difference? And if it requires starting with base word definitions I would appreciate a link to the appropriate post(s) which I promise to read (reasonably).
See your above post where you claim you don't believe my statements. Do you see a difference between "I don't believe that ever happened to you" and "That never happened to you."?

The way I see it, the atheist claims with confidence (faith, actually) that god definitely does not exist. The agnostic claims he doesn't know if god exists or not. Those of faith claim he exists. I claim that I don't believe, one way or the other, any of those three basic categories.
 

B_spiker067

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2006
Posts
2,163
Media
0
Likes
3
Points
183
No, that is wrong. I have no problem with believers. I do have a problem with evangelists.
<...>So I gave it too you. Do you really think I care let alone believe your related workspace experiences? No, I don't.

Well, what you believe or don't believe matters not in the least to me. Sorry to break your heart, but your disbelief will not have me crying myself to sleep. I am fully cognizant of the events in my life, I do not require your validation.

The actual quote in context

But you are on like 2or3 threads complaining about believers. You even seem to revel in antagonising workmates and you came here for maybe the same thing. So I gave it too you. Do you really think I care let alone believe your related workspace experiences? No, I don't.
So there you have it proof of your frivolous nature. You quote me as if I am viscerally interested in "giving it to you" when it was a joke saying that you seem to be looking for strife. It seems to validate my impression that the drama at work is significantly one of your own making, though possibly not entirely. :)

Every workplace I've been in seems to have an air of live and let live when it comes to the 'holidays'. So much so that it is sterile. There are no "Happy Hannakah's" or "Merry Christmas" or "What have you" its "Happy Holidays" which roughly translates to "Happy Days Off". Where do you work?
 

B_spiker067

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2006
Posts
2,163
Media
0
Likes
3
Points
183
See your above post where you claim you don't believe my statements. Do you see a difference between "I don't believe that ever happened to you" and "That never happened to you."?

The way I see it, the atheist claims with confidence (faith, actually) that god definitely does not exist. The agnostic claims he doesn't know if god exists or not. Those of faith claim he exists. I claim that I don't believe, one way or the other, any of those three basic categories.

Just frivolous escapism. Like, "I don't acknowledge the concept of God though I'm willing to discuss it.":rolleyes:

P.S. There is a less strict definition of 'believe/'belief' outside of a metaphysical discussion.
 

JustAsking

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2004
Posts
3,217
Media
0
Likes
33
Points
268
Location
Ohio
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
DC's comments about not believing in God yet not calling himself an Atheist make sense to me.

There is no emprical proof that God exists, so the only thing one can do is to either believe God exists or not believe God exists.

Naturally, theists might not only believe God exists but they might also claim that God does exist.

DC chooses not to believe that God exists, but makes no claims about God's actual existence.

So in that, DC is not an Atheist nor is he an Agnostic, he is simply a non-believer.
 

B_spiker067

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2006
Posts
2,163
Media
0
Likes
3
Points
183
DC chooses not to believe that God exists, but makes no claims about God's actual existence.
The only difference between an atheist and a non-believer is that the non-believer doesn't take the time to tell me he is a non-believer? Fine that is just a word definition I've heard before. So for the quibblers I'll add non-believer, atheist, agnostic, theist, and deist because that is really what is important.:smile:
 

JustAsking

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2004
Posts
3,217
Media
0
Likes
33
Points
268
Location
Ohio
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
... When I watch astronomy shows or go to NASA image galleries online I initially feel overwhelmed trying to wrap my mind around such incredible vastness. I just begin to grasp it when it just kind of falls apart leaving me kind of dissolute.

Yes, my very first experience like that was when I was young and trying to get a feeling for where the Universe might be. I remember realizing that if there is only one finite universe that the idea of "where is the universe", or "what is the universe in", is sort of undefined. Trying to visualize it or "grok" it gave me a kind of chill that was similar to a big hit of "loneliness" or something. I can still invoke the feeling when I think about it, but these days it is mitigated by my thinking that this is all in the hands of a loving God.

My second brush with the numinous came when studying physics in college and I began to realize that there were only a few mathematical constructs that seemed to describe pervasive phenomenon in the universe. For example, the wave equation shows up everywhere from sub-atomic phenomenon to galactic phenomenon. There are lots of examples like this. As you peel back layer after layer of physical phenomenon what you discover is an atonishingly beautiful and elegant system. Studying physics does not demystify the universe like some people might think. It simply reveals more and more amazing things that create more and more of a sense of awe.

Here is a good example: Consider that Maxwell's Equations describe all electromagnetic phenomenon (light, radio waves, radiant heat, optics, etc) in the universe and they can fit on a matchbook cover. I don't know what is more amazing; that so few symbols can describe something so complex and pervasive, that something so universal and pervasive can be described by mathematics at all, or that a human being can actually understand something like E&M enough to conceive of such an elegant and comprehensive mathematical formulation.

You don't have to even understand any of the symbols to appreciate how amazing this is. I mean what the heck are we doing when we use mathematics to describe nature, and what does it say about us and nature when such a description works. Or put another way, why can math characterize the universe so well? And why can we do it? After all, we are basically just animated dirt, right?

Anyway, it was this kind of awe that brought me back to thinking there was a Creator. So yes, studying physics made a believer out of me.

You alluded to what is sometimes called The Anthropic Principle, where it seems as if the universe was precisely tuned so as to be able to support organic life. I don't actually buy that as any kind of "proof of Design" because there are plenty of other naturalistic explanations for why that is so. What does it for me is the elegance and consistency of it all. For me its not a logical argument at all, but more like a feeling that this could only have been designed by a loving God at its most fundamental level.
 

B_spiker067

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2006
Posts
2,163
Media
0
Likes
3
Points
183
Yes, my very first experience like that was when I was young and trying to get a feeling for where the Universe might be. I remember realizing that if there is only one finite universe that the ...

So very well put.

I remember seeing this collections of vector line integrals on guy's shirt leaving the library.

God said, " [Maxwell's equations placed here]" and there was light.

I so wanted that t-shirt, still do. Maybe I'll get the evil genie to do me a solid ;-)

[edit: I take it back it was actually in the differential form of the equations]
 

JustAsking

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2004
Posts
3,217
Media
0
Likes
33
Points
268
Location
Ohio
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Yeah, but what is faith based on?
Wow, that's an interesting question. I think faith is based on nothing empirical or logical.

Webster's says: "firm belief in something for which there is no proof : complete trust"

Both of those definitions are good. The second one is the one that is the most useful for me. Belief in God by itself is not very useful. In fact, in the Bible even Satan believes in God. Trust in God's Grace is the most important thing.
 

JustAsking

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2004
Posts
3,217
Media
0
Likes
33
Points
268
Location
Ohio
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
So very well put.

I remember seeing this collections of vector line integrals on guy's shirt leaving the library.

God said, " [Maxwell's equations placed here]" and there was light.

I so wanted that t-shirt, still do. Maybe I'll get the evil genie to do me a solid ;-)

The differential form is even more elegant. I had a T-shirt with that on it. I happened to be wearing it in a Greek pizza shop one day (in the northeast, the Greeks make the best pizzas) and the Greek pizza guy, asked me why he couldn't read it. Then he figured it was a fraternity.
 

B_spiker067

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2006
Posts
2,163
Media
0
Likes
3
Points
183
Wow, that's an interesting question. I think faith is based on nothing empirical or logical.

Webster's says: "firm belief in something for which there is no proof : complete trust"

Both of those definitions are good. The second one is the one that is the most useful for me. Belief in God by itself is not very useful. In fact, in the Bible even Satan believes in God. Trust in God's Grace is the most important thing.

Hmm, I'm wondering if reductionist are someday going to try to reduce it to a handful of genes?

Is there a group or another website of like minded people JA. I don't know like Free Masons or something? :)
 

B_spiker067

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2006
Posts
2,163
Media
0
Likes
3
Points
183
The differential form is even more elegant. I had a T-shirt with that on it. I happened to be wearing it in a Greek pizza shop one day (in the northeast, the Greeks make the best pizzas) and the Greek pizza guy, asked me why he couldn't read it. Then he figured it was a fraternity.

Gyros! I love Gyro's and the sauce and the lamb's fat fried fries. And coke. Those and good company makes for good times.

Used eat them at a restaurant called, get this, Zorba's. Half expect the Mex-American Anthony Quinn to walk in sometimes.
 

JustAsking

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2004
Posts
3,217
Media
0
Likes
33
Points
268
Location
Ohio
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Oh yes, I left something out about the Maxwell thing that demonstrates my point. Maxwell was working on a formulation for describing fluid flow in pipes when Faraday came to him with his drawings of magnetic and electric fields. He had done the iron filing thing with paper and a magnet, and the grass seed thing with paper and a charged cat or something.

Anyway, Maxwell looks at the drawings and immediately recognizes that his math for fluid flow also describes magnetic and electric fields. So people start messing with the equations and out pops the idea that electromagnetic energy can move across empty space. Yes, Maxwell's fluid flow math is suggesting radio waves and light. A few years later, Hertz confirms the existence of radio waves. I don't know, perhaps I am just a total nerd or something, but doesn't that grab anyone here as amazing? That fluid flow and magnetic fields are similar somehow and that animated dirt in the form of a human can figure that out so well that stuff starts coming out of the math suggesting all kinds of things that were not known at the time the fomulation was created.

There is a quote from Einstein that goes something like: The most incomprehensible thing about the universe is that we might be able to comprehend it.
 

B_spiker067

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2006
Posts
2,163
Media
0
Likes
3
Points
183
Oh yes, I left something out about the Maxwell thing that demonstrates my point. Maxwell was working on a formulation for describing fluid flow in pipes when Faraday came to him with his drawings of magnetic and electric fields. He had done the iron filing thing with paper and a magnet, and the grass seed thing with paper and a charged cat or something.
...

I hope people hit this thread. I believe alot of what you have explained is accessible and should definitely be something to ponder. And no I had no idea that EM field mathematics described liquid flow equally. You just give me too many things to look into.
 

JustAsking

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2004
Posts
3,217
Media
0
Likes
33
Points
268
Location
Ohio
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
I hope people hit this thread. I believe alot of what you have explained is accessible and should definitely be something to ponder. And no I had no idea that EM field mathematics described liquid flow equally. You just give me too many things to look into.
It turns out Maxwell created the math for Vector Fields which include fluid flow and EM fields. This stuff is applicable all over the place.