Does God exist? (William Lane Craig vs Peter Atkins debate) (88 Viewers)
- Thread starter Dinsdale
- Start date
To be sure, there is a certain gap here. I think you could justify a lot of moral values based on the early man's life, from "first principles" if you will. But not everything has a convincing argument based on that, so there is stuff we need to "fill in". Take something contemporary like privacy laws. There's no explanation going back to the stone age why this is so.
Maybe this will make more sense to you. I've read a couple of books about religion that discuss the morality argument, and I've seen a few debates about this. So I'm not impressed with these people despite their titles and experience, because their arguments aren't up to the same standard as those that I've read and thought about already.
Maybe this will make more sense to you. I've read a couple of books about religion that discuss the morality argument, and I've seen a few debates about this. So I'm not impressed with these people despite their titles and experience, because their arguments aren't up to the same standard as those that I've read and thought about already.
I don't get what you're trying to say and where you're coming from. Do you mean that 'basic' moral values are hardwired into the human brain by evolution?
I'm not impressed by them either, but I acknowledge that they have put more thought into it than I have, like I also acknowledge that you know more about this subject than me because I have never read books about it and this is the first time I've seen this type of discussion. So if you say there are arguments on a higher level than theirs from the video, I believe you. But I find it very hard to believe that one of them would make such an obvious, basic logical error like the one you mentioned.
I'm not impressed by them either, but I acknowledge that they have put more thought into it than I have, like I also acknowledge that you know more about this subject than me because I have never read books about it and this is the first time I've seen this type of discussion. So if you say there are arguments on a higher level than theirs from the video, I believe you. But I find it very hard to believe that one of them would make such an obvious, basic logical error like the one you mentioned.
yep yep. I'm not saying that they are (because I can't prove it), but as a means to explain where morality comes from, it's a pretty compelling explanation.
And the interesting thing is that altruistic behavior has also been found in the animal kingdom. Now animals don't have a reasoning ability, so it must be "built in".
And the interesting thing is that altruistic behavior has also been found in the animal kingdom. Now animals don't have a reasoning ability, so it must be "built in".
True, it is a very plausible hypothesis. But don't you think that there is a difference between behaviour that is avoided by society because it is not beneficial and behaviour that is morally wrong? (morally wrong behaviour is probably always also not beneficial for society, but it doesn't go the other way round)
And where do you think this difference comes from?
And where do you think this difference comes from?
Well, do you consider setting your own house on fire morally wrong? Do you consider raping a child morally wrong? I can't give an exact definition of moral, but I can feel there is a difference between those 2 examples (I'm not saying that I'm sure there is).
Something that I find rather odd is that a lot of self-proclamed atheists are defending their beliefs with a seemingly emotional involvement (I'm not talking about anyone in particular). I belief that god does not exist myself, but I'm openly listening to and trying to understand any arguments a theist comes up with. And once again, the existence of god has nothing to do with how people practice religion and the results of their practice.
Something that I find rather odd is that a lot of self-proclamed atheists are defending their beliefs with a seemingly emotional involvement (I'm not talking about anyone in particular). I belief that god does not exist myself, but I'm openly listening to and trying to understand any arguments a theist comes up with. And once again, the existence of god has nothing to do with how people practice religion and the results of their practice.
That depends. If you set your house on fire or make your own car disappear to scam the insurance company, it's immoral. If you set your house on fire just for fun and noone (except yourself, possibly) is affected, how can that be wrong? Ah, but here's the rub. "Society" wouldn't encourage you to set your house on fire because the fire could (and often does) spread to your neighbor's house, in which case someone else would be affected, and morality would kick in again. Not to mention the large amounts of CO2 the combustion would release into the atmosphere (pollution hurts everyone) and the smoke might affect people in the area.
Well, that's not specific to atheists, is it? Unless you're saying that religious people tend to approach questions about their own faith with stoic calm, I think we know that's not always the case.
It is the predicate. If the priest told the people that okay, we've checked and we now know that there is no god. Just continue living your lives as you have until now and everything is fine. Then what is the purpose of this church exactly?
Well, that's not specific to atheists, is it? Unless you're saying that religious people tend to approach questions about their own faith with stoic calm, I think we know that's not always the case.
It is the predicate. If the priest told the people that okay, we've checked and we now know that there is no god. Just continue living your lives as you have until now and everything is fine. Then what is the purpose of this church exactly?
From a purely philosphical point of view, I choose to believe that there exists a higher power. The massive improbability that all of this was created by mere chance is the reason I believe in a divine power. The whole theory of evolution does not seem reasonable to me; it has endless loopholes and question marks theoretically.
On the topic of morailty, if you didn't fear god and had the chance to steal loads of money from someone knowing for sure that you wouldn't get caught, would you do it? A god fearing man wouldn't. He knows that the consequences to his actions go beyond the law, reputation, and respect. His consequences come after his death and he fears he will be eternally punished.
I think the largest issue with Athiests is their extreme ego. The way they think is completely empty of humbleness, they believe they are the greatest(humans) and nothing will ever have the right to tell them what to do. They believe that they possess irrefutable logic and anyone that simply mentions the word "worship' would be a blow to their ego and pride.
To me, another piece of evidence that has convinced me is intelligent design. The human body is a very good example, DNA is afterall a design; it is a very intricate, detailed, and intelligent design. How can something so intelligent come by chance? DNA carries information, where does this information come from? Who invented it? God is the only logical answer here, not evolution.
Look infront of you, you will see a computer screen so intelligently designed and manufactured. You would obvously know that it is man made; that it is designed by people. It didn't just appear out of the blue. It's the same with nature. Nature's intelligent design suggests that there must have been a creator, a higher power capable of manufacturing such intelligent design.
On the topic of morailty, if you didn't fear god and had the chance to steal loads of money from someone knowing for sure that you wouldn't get caught, would you do it? A god fearing man wouldn't. He knows that the consequences to his actions go beyond the law, reputation, and respect. His consequences come after his death and he fears he will be eternally punished.
I think the largest issue with Athiests is their extreme ego. The way they think is completely empty of humbleness, they believe they are the greatest(humans) and nothing will ever have the right to tell them what to do. They believe that they possess irrefutable logic and anyone that simply mentions the word "worship' would be a blow to their ego and pride.
To me, another piece of evidence that has convinced me is intelligent design. The human body is a very good example, DNA is afterall a design; it is a very intricate, detailed, and intelligent design. How can something so intelligent come by chance? DNA carries information, where does this information come from? Who invented it? God is the only logical answer here, not evolution.
Look infront of you, you will see a computer screen so intelligently designed and manufactured. You would obvously know that it is man made; that it is designed by people. It didn't just appear out of the blue. It's the same with nature. Nature's intelligent design suggests that there must have been a creator, a higher power capable of manufacturing such intelligent design.
Complete and utter bullshit. Noone has ever demonstrated that "god fearing" people live lives that are more moral, steal less, cheat less, behave better. Just because you want this to be true doesn't mean it is.
Instead, you have stories like this:
http://pressesc.com/news/80931072007/atheist-doctors-more-likely-care-poor-religious-ones
Instead, you have stories like this:
http://pressesc.com/news/80931072007/atheist-doctors-more-likely-care-poor-religious-ones