If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
That is a seriously badass post miroslav, your one of the quality posters here imo...i actually would like to hear more about wtf your talking about here in your last post. and btw, its the "detail" in it all that gives me my faith...im just not arrogant enough to consider life/existence, etc, is an accident.
thanks mate I know that I threw a lot of stuff out there and was pretty opinionated about it (I guess ultimately we all are), but I know that in the end it's just my own tiny guess and I certainly don't know anything more than anyone else on this stuff... just enjoy pondering it sometimes
That is a seriously badass post miroslav, your one of the quality posters here imo...i actually would like to hear more about wtf your talking about here in your last post. and btw, its the "detail" in it all that gives me my faith...im just not arrogant enough to consider life/existence, etc, is an accident.
Welcome to the matrix. You may like this or you may not, but really it just is what it is. This is logic taken to its fullest extent (why would science produce anything less?), and this is what your life really is like in the atheist existence.
Ignorance is Bliss.
Your summation of free will may be correct as you present it, I actually like the way you describe it a series of networks and cause and effects. But as you mention, the conglomeration of networks gives the PERCEPTION of free will. I FEEL that I am in control of my life. Whether or not that is actually the case, I could care less. For me, and others, the perception of free will is more important then the belief that our fate is predetermined by a diety.
^^ Agreed. Science can explain a lot and religion can't.
But I have to add one more thing. This is not an attack or atheism or a defense of theism, just an examination of the conclusions of the atheist principle. This will be the last time that I'll write all this stuff out; I realize that people are already sick of me. Sorry in advance for how long this will probably be. I hope someone will still read it at some point.
Free Will
If he/she is being logically consistent, the atheist must accept that all aspects of existence, including all the stuff we do, feel, that which we call "free will", "love", etc. is solely explainable by science.
There are some basic paradigms in science which can be utilized to describe something like free will:
cause and effect...statistics...random distributions...probability/uncertainty theories
If there are others that are fundamentally different in nature, let me know.
All of the above-mentioned factors undoubtedly play significant roles in the choices we make and actions we undertake. And they can undoubtedly be used to weave networks of explanations for something approximating free will that defy the human grasp - except that there will not truly be anything "free" within it. And maybe that's fine...maybe we really don't possess free will in the way we think we do, even though most of us (atheists included) like to believe that there really is some core element of our decision making that really is, well...free in some way from the deterministic web - that really is just me; a product of my autonomy as a human being. So, let's take a moment to consider the consequences of this.
So our freedom - and even our perception of it - is an incredibly intricate web of cause and effect, probabilities, randomness down to the tiniest component of existence. It's a web that exists between your body and your environment around you. We are, then, fundamentally deterministically programmed or coded - all parts of us, even the way it may look or feel "free" to you. Nothing you do - the click of the button, the way you just squinted, whatever thought you had - is/was "free" or "your own" in the way we like to think it is. Any variable in this game that you think you control is really under the control of something else, even if you can't see it. Your feelings, experiences, actions, and choices are not original and you are not autonomous.
Your love for your spouse/significant other/etc. is also nothing more or less than an intricate web of neural, chemical, biological processes that all work in harmony to the most detailed degree. The way it makes you "feel" about him/her and the "special" significance you attach to it is only as special as the nature of the complex web of cause and effect, probabilities, randomness that necessarily define the entire experience. Anything pertaining to loaded terms such as "meaning", "beauty", "suffering", "hurt" is produced from the same programming machinery. You could very well start to feel that this is a depressing view of the world and that all emotions are elusory and nothing is really significant in this case...except that even that feeling you had isn't more "significant" or "free" than anything else in science.
"Sanctity" and "preciousness" of human life? Let's not even go there, I trust you get the picture...
Of course, the fun part of all this is that everything I just wrote and continue to write is also finely programmed by the same complex scientific mechanism, even my "musings" about whether or not we have free will. And all of the indignant feelings you have reading this right now and the ranting rebuttals that you will write in response will also be programmed. There is no escaping this and any attempt to argue this away through some illusion of freedom is only to fall deeper into this infinite, mind-defying loop. We're also not having an "argument" anyways.
Welcome to the matrix. You may like this or you may not, but really it just is what it is. This is logic taken to its fullest extent (why would science produce anything less?), and this is what your life really is like in the atheist existence.
The God Debate Rick, what is the evidence of the existence of the God of Abraham?
RICK WARREN: I see the fingerprints of God everywhere. I see them in culture. I see them in law. I see them in literature. I see them in nature. I see them in my own life. Trying to understand where God came from is like an ant trying to understand the Internet. Even the most brilliant scientist would agree that we only know a fraction of a percent of the knowledge of the universe.
Those who believe in god, in whatever form, are quick to point out what science can not yet explain. However, there is countless, tangible proof for what science CAN explain. EVERYONE can witness for themselves the fact that an apple falls towards the center of the earth, regardless of whether they believe on God or not. But I am still waiting for the first piece of evidence that god, any god, exists. Proof that EVERYONE can grasp for themselves, not just "fingerprints" like those above that can only be seen by those that have the "faith".
Well put! That's right on target with where my thoughts have been going... I agree with you that any explanation for these kinds of tricky human phenomena is not likely to be of the traditional religious kind. I actually don't subscribe to organized religion.
In regards to your last paragraph: yes, that's essentially where I was headed - that issues like love should theoretically be completely scientific to the atheist. Basically, that even for the atheist there remains a significant hurdle in explaining a significant part of the human experience. That's basically it...I'm not after any kind of a defense of traditional religion.
Every now and then, I find it neat to ponder all this free will stuff and wonder whether science will be able to get us there, the way it's been able to with other things in the past...or if we're dealing with something categorically different here... It's a maddening exercise as well, given that we're "imprisoned" within our own human experience and can't gain the benefit of an outside perspective.
LOL, man i edited my post because I thought I had gone off topic. Oh well, you have another post to respond to .
Because one cannot explain emotional feelings and where they come from does not automatically assume it to be of a religious doctrine. This is exactly the rationality that creationists use to try and discount the origin of species - because we cannot delve further into molecular biology, science proves wrong and God prevails.
We are at a birth for science. For as long as organisms have existed, we've come a long way in understanding our system in such short time. Of course we have those perplexing questions of 'why does gravity exist?' or 'what is this feeling of love?'. The common misconception with atheists is that it is automatically assumed that their dogma dictates that science is all-knowing. However it's deeper than that. Many people are atheists because they see the evidence of science as applicable to everday life. They can use their senses to develop experience.
Don't get me wrong, I often ponder the reasons that you speak of, however I find that intellectual pressure squeezes them into a dark abyss and I'm still left wondering what's 'down' there. Could there be a scientific explanation for love? possibily. But I most certainly wouldn't say it's based off religious beliefs. If gorillas can show signs of affection, what does this say about science? or about God? We do know that pheremones play a role in choosing mates. Could it then potentially give us clues as to why we love?
Then again, perhaps I'm lost in trying to figure out what you're trying to get at. Are you just simply saying that atheists assume issues like love are completely scientific? If so, that goes far beyond physical matter and into consciousness which is something completely subjective. To this day, neuroscientists have not even tipped the iceberg on how we fuse our thoughts and feelings.
Well put! That's right on target with where my thoughts have been going... I agree with you that any explanation for these kinds of tricky human phenomena is not likely to be of the traditional religious kind. I actually don't subscribe to organized religion.
In regards to your last paragraph: yes, that's essentially where I was headed - that issues like love should theoretically be completely scientific to the atheist. Basically, that even for the atheist there remains a significant hurdle in explaining a significant part of the human experience. That's basically it...I'm not after any kind of a defense of traditional religion.
Every now and then, I find it neat to ponder all this free will stuff and wonder whether science will be able to get us there, the way it's been able to with other things in the past...or if we're dealing with something categorically different here... It's a maddening exercise as well, given that we're "imprisoned" within our own human experience and can't gain the benefit of an outside perspective.
My point was: atheists seem to subscribe to notions of "free will" and "love", etc. like everyone else...and yet they can't explain them. They live their lives day to day accepting these human elements without considering the consequences if science really is all that you with which to explain them.
How do you explain love? It's an emotion, it's a feeling that dwells in the consciousness of the mind. However, there could be a scientific explanation for it. The notion that it hasn't been discovered and is therefore undiscoverable scientifically is ludacris.
As for free will, I'm sure there are atheists that are on both sides of the fence on this. I'm one to believe in determinism, and I'm atheist. I believe in determinism though because there are patterns in life that dictate our pathways. Everything from economic trends to psychological patterns can be predicted, therefore, I feel it alleviates us of free will. The room you're in, the mode of transportation you have, etc... all dictate how and what you can do in your life. There is no 'true' free will, unless you lack complete rational thought (much like organisms lower on the totem pole). Do a pack of wild wolves live freely? One could say yes, externally. But intrinsically, how can wolves survive? They must eat, sleep, and reproduce. Would this not break 'free' will? As such it would, and thus we do live in a deterministic world, devoid of free will.
Last edited by Localizer; May 5, 2007, 10:35:34 PM.
nope, never said believing in "God" (in the traditional way I think you mean) gives you all the answers...I'm arguing much deeper than that. But even as an atheist, I think you take your chances and place your faith in something.
I won't rehash it all, seeing as I've already written a small book since early this morning...you're more than welcome to read my other posts if you want.
man i dont wanna start an argument here so i,m closing this thread for good
i said erlier that as individuals we should learn to respect each other views however radical or whatever they are, i take people for who they are as a person i dont look into there beliefs, thats just the way i am and i,ll continue to be that way for a very long time, thats the good thing about this board it opens ur minds to other views and tastes and with that in thought i,ll rest my case and bow down, anyway i,m off to get drunk
We process personal data about users of our site, through the use of cookies and other technologies, to deliver our services, personalize advertising, and to analyze site activity. We may share certain information about our users with our advertising and analytics partners. For additional details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
By clicking "I AGREE" below, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our personal data processing and cookie practices as described therein. You also acknowledge that this forum may be hosted outside your country and you consent to the collection, storage, and processing of your data in the country where this forum is hosted.
I know that I threw a lot of stuff out there and was pretty opinionated about it (I guess ultimately we all are), but I know that in the end it's just my own tiny guess and I certainly don't know anything more than anyone else on this stuff... just enjoy pondering it sometimes
@ all 
Leave a comment: