Does God exist? (William Lane Craig vs Peter Atkins debate) (26 Viewers)

[GordoDeCentral]

because nothing can be proven everything is equally believable. how does that work out in finance?

actually finance is the ultimate gauge of human psychology and behavior, and nothing about said behavior(and this applies to everyone regardless fo levels of education) is logical

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Martin]

a certain amount but no certitude and no proof they 'will' as a matter fact evidence points that if anything they will most likely default on paying employees in their last gasp of existence. You and everyone else, puts much faith into many aspects of life, whether you choose to call it that or not doesnt change that fact. Those who have faith in a higher power just like you have established a relationship of trust your inability to understand it doesnt disprove its existence.

sure, and dowsers have unshakable faith in their ability to find water. we convince ourselves of many things and establish said trust thanks to the glorious gift of selection bias.

still, sheik actually does get his salary every month and doesn't just report occasional payment on the rare occasion when the event is emotionally compelling

 

[GordoDeCentral]

sure, and dowsers have unshakable faith in their ability to find water. we convince ourselves of many things and establish said trust thanks to the glorious gift of selection bias.

still, sheik actually does get his salary every month and doesn't just report occasional payment on the rare occasion when the event is emotionally compelling

and believers also do get daily doses of beatitude safe in the knowledge there is meaning and purpose to it all. I woulda thought you woulda made the connection.

 

[Nzoric]

actually finance is the ultimate gauge of human psychology and behavior, and nothing about said behavior(and this applies to everyone regardless fo levels of education) is logical

Thats a too broad assumption even for this thread, since there are entire branches of philosophy dedicated to discussing this. Economics think one thing, natural sciences think another and humanistics are just on a page for them selves.

 

[GordoDeCentral]

Thats a too broad assumption even for this thread, since there are entire branches of philosophy dedicated to discussing this. Economics think one thing, natural sciences think another and humanistics are just on a page for them selves.

its not an assumption its a reality, many talk the talk but very few overcome inherent human fears and weaknesses.

 

[king Ale]

Some of these extreme interpretations didn't really surface until about a century ago give or take and these interpretations only exist where there is conflict to begin with. Take Turkey or Bangladesh (Bangladesh not so much anymore) for example where there isn't much sectarian violence these interpretations don't really exist but prevalent in places like Lebanon, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan where there's plenty sectarian violence, weak & corrupt govt's, absence of law and order, poverty, etc.

Oh don't go there if you are talking about the past century.

Violence has to do with ignorance, lacking of education and tolerance, that goes without saying but what's the use of religions if they can't free their followers from ignorance? In fact, because religious scriptures are full of vague texts, they can be interpreted in the most fallacious ways (on purpose) to feed the naive, uneducated, ignorant parts of the societies with. That's the problem we have in Iran; where violence could be easily justified through religious beliefs. Tragedy happens when the government in charge prevails/rewards this but you know where the question lies? Why such corrupt ideological government can exist in the first place? Isn't it because religion (Islam in this case) prepares the ground for it?

My problem with majority of posts here however is that people tend to hook onto this "religions are the roots of today's turmoils" mindset quite easily. Religions are good for the most part. Religions can make people have better lives, live healthier, do more good. It's not an absolute remedy (what is after all?), but a certain dose of rationality and education will keep people from falling for those wrong interpretations of religious instructions.

Nothing is considered worse in Islam than taking a life, but you can always take a verse and interpret it out of context, then you can easily lead the blind to violence under the name of Islam.

 

[Zé Tahir]

Oh don't go there if you are talking about the past century.

Violence has to do with ignorance, lacking of education and tolerance, that goes without saying but what's the use of religions if they can't free their followers from ignorance? In fact, because religious scriptures are full of vague texts, they can be interpreted in the most fallacious ways (on purpose) to feed the naive, uneducated, ignorant parts of the societies with. That's the problem we have in Iran; where violence could be easily justified through religious beliefs. Tragedy happens when the government in charge prevails/rewards this but you know where the question lies? Why such corrupt ideological government can exist in the first place? Isn't it because religion (Islam in this case) prepares the ground for it?

My problem with majority of posts here however is that people tend to hook onto this "religions are the roots of today's turmoils" mindset quite easily. Religions are good for the most part. Religions can make people have better lives, live healthier, do more good. It's not an absolute remedy (what is after all?), but a certain dose of rationality and education will keep people from falling for those wrong interpretations of religious instructions.

Nothing is considered worse in Islam than taking a life, but you can always take a verse and interpret it out of context, then you can easily lead the blind to violence under the name of Islam.

I don't disagree (minus the part about religious text being vague to the point where violence or persecution can be justified) with you and perhaps the truth lies somewhere in between what we both said.

Also, I'd like point out that most damage to Islam today has come from corrupt clergy who are politically and economically motivated. It's no wonder that Ataturk cleansed Turkey of them. In Musharraf's first speech after coming into power he said he'd be Pakistan's "Ataturk" to which he later really paid the price because no one gets to be someone in Pakistan (at least politically) without the say-so of some 'Islamic' faction (Deobandi, Jamaat-e-Islami, Sipah-e-Sahaba, etc.)

This is something that was foreseen by the Holy Prophet and it's mentioned in the Hadith:

A time will come when nothing will remain of Islam except its name and nothing will remain of the Quran except its inscription. Their mosques will be full but void of guidance. Their divines (Mullahs) will be the worst creatures under the sky; all the evil will be emerged from them and will revert to them

PS: I think I indirectly answered your post here

edit: There's a second part to that Hadith that talks about the righteous among his (Holy Prophet's) people that I'll need to find.

 

[Nzoric]

its not an assumption its a reality, many talk the talk but very few overcome inherent human fears and weaknesses.

What is reality, that the human mind isn't logical? How about you lay out your definition of logics first, since there still isn't a consensus as to what that is.

 

[GordoDeCentral]

where do you see me talk about mind? what is mind? I am talking about the transition of logically constructed(syllogistically) ideas into action which hardly ever takes place. Since you're so intent on escaping vagueness and error maybe you should concern yourself first with properly reading and discerning difference between basic concept such as mind/ideas/behavior.

 

[Nzoric]

where do you see me talk about mind? what is mind? I am talking about the transition of logically constructed(syllogistically) ideas into action which hardly ever takes place. Since you're so intent on escaping vagueness and error maybe you should concern yourself first with properly reading and discerning difference between basic concept such as mind/ideas/behavior.

I apologize for being vague, I thought I'd sum up ideas/behavior as something which springs from the mind. I'll be sure not to do that again, but you still haven't convinced me that you from the angle of economics (or finance to use your term) have documented that the transition of thought to behavior isn't logical.

 

[GordoDeCentral]

I apologize for being vague, I thought I'd sum up ideas/behavior as something which springs from the mind. I'll be sure not to do that again, but you still haven't convinced me that you from the angle of economics (or finance to use your term) have documented that the transition of thought to behavior isn't logical.

ever heard of behavioral finance?

 

[king Ale]

Simply that a loss makes you more unhappy than a gain of the same weight would make you happy or in short, it is easier to make people unhappy than happy.

 

[Linebreak]

a certain amount but no certitude and no proof they 'will' as a matter fact evidence points that if anything they will most likely default on paying employees in their last gasp of existence. You and everyone else, puts much faith into many aspects of life, whether you choose to call it that or not doesnt change that fact. Those who have faith in a higher power just like you have established a relationship of trust your inability to understand it doesnt disprove its existence.

Well said.

 

[AndreaCristiano]

a certain amount but no certitude and no proof they 'will' as a matter fact evidence points that if anything they will most likely default on paying employees in their last gasp of existence. You and everyone else, puts much faith into many aspects of life, whether you choose to call it that or not doesnt change that fact. Those who have faith in a higher power just like you have established a relationship of trust your inability to understand it doesnt disprove its existence.

Bravo Deneb couldnt have said it better

 

[AndreaCristiano]

Oh don't go there if you are talking about the past century.

Violence has to do with ignorance, lacking of education and tolerance, that goes without saying but what's the use of religions if they can't free their followers from ignorance? In fact, because religious scriptures are full of vague texts, they can be interpreted in the most fallacious ways (on purpose) to feed the naive, uneducated, ignorant parts of the societies with. That's the problem we have in Iran; where violence could be easily justified through religious beliefs. Tragedy happens when the government in charge prevails/rewards this but you know where the question lies? Why such corrupt ideological government can exist in the first place? Isn't it because religion (Islam in this case) prepares the ground for it?

My problem with majority of posts here however is that people tend to hook onto this "religions are the roots of today's turmoils" mindset quite easily. Religions are good for the most part. Religions can make people have better lives, live healthier, do more good. It's not an absolute remedy (what is after all?), but a certain dose of rationality and education will keep people from falling for those wrong interpretations of religious instructions.

Nothing is considered worse in Islam than taking a life, but you can always take a verse and interpret it out of context, then you can easily lead the blind to violence under the name of Islam.

This is also a very apt assessment of the discussion on here. Well Said King

 

[JuveJay]

Nothing is considered worse in Islam than taking a life, but you can always take a verse and interpret it out of context, then you can easily lead the blind to violence under the name of Islam.

This open-ended ambiguity is the great success and flaw of organised religion.

 

[AndreaCristiano]

This open-ended ambiguity is the great success and flaw of organised religion.

You act as though this isnt applied in other parts of life

 

[JuveJay]

That's an assumption you make.

 

[AndreaCristiano]

That's an assumption you make.

I'm pretty sure Deneb laid out a well thought out point, alluding to this

 

[Nzoric]

You act as though this isnt applied in other parts of life

Which in the end leads us to the conclusion that religion is? Just like everything else in our society today, a man made structure. If it was pure or divine, it would stand out from the imperfect works of man - no?