h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

warner:

I don't usually speak 'for many' but I think I can here as it is the overall view of people who have no truck with supernatural beings:

Believe my when I say it's NOT worth sharing. You aren't the first to 'share' it, you, unfortunately, will not be the last.

'We' have no particular problem with people having such beliefs but 'we' would just prefer it if you kept it to yourself, in your homes and your places of worship and then we would all be happy.

Thank you.

Och...folk talking pish is only a minor irritation. Just so long as they don't expect us to take them seriously!

<>

did you converts to islam??

Hi Bob, Ed,

>This is kind of the same as "How do i know my green is your green?"

>I wonder...what *is* it like to be a bat?

That's the kind of perennial problem I was talking about. First one to say 'do we have free will' wins.

Gif

Hi Bob,

>If other people are mimicking everything i do (or if i am mimicking the actions and responses of other people) then would that not look the same on a brain scan?

From a dualist viewpoint, yes. I'm saying that if you think the brain is all there is to consciousness, similar brain scans are good evidence of similar consciousness - after all, there's nothing to consciousness other than brain activity. On the other hand, if you think that the brain is subservient to some undetectable 'soul' that does the thinking and feeling, brain scans are no evidence of thinking or feeling.

Gif

Hi Effers,

>But life *is* fickle, full of vicissitudes.

Not mine. I got myself a pair of devicissituders.

Gif

Hi Ed,

>and I refer everyone once again to the 2003 Reith Lectures

And once again I've bookmarked them with the intent to get around to them.

Gif

>> did you converts to islam?? <<

Some people might say so. I would say that I accepted that it was the truth
and updated my understanding of Christianity.

Then comes ... Which of the 73 'sects' is right, hmm?

I'd probably better go and crawl underneath my stone.
I probably hate it more than you do!

Only 73?

Gif

You say:

>People brought up in a religious environment are told that faith is a virtue - that changing your mind or admitting you are wrong is itself a bad thing. To me, that's just bizarre - changing your beliefs is a vital part of learning. But it's something that religion strives against.<

I agree that faith is seen as a good thing in my family.

I *also* think that admitting you are wrong is a vital part of learning. (I think *I* said that to *you* about 6 months ago...but I didn't copyright it so good luck to you!)

Your statement that 'religion strives against learning/changing your beliefs' sounds like rather a broad brushstroke. We both, atheists and theists alike, need open-mindedness if we are to understand each other's pov. i.e. Many contributors here come across as entrenched in their worldview.

It requires one to think outside of the box when considering whether there could be a parallel or spiritual universe/dimension to existence. I have found there to be more than just a few encouragements to consider this very possibilty. It appears to leave me open to mockery but I do not consider it 'resistant to learning' to continue in what I have learnt, experienced and become convinced of.

I'm always open to being proved wrong. I sincerely mean that. As the Apostle Paul said, if its all a hoax then we believers are to be pitied.

To me the 'existence of God' argument hinges on...is it unreasonable to suppose that there is an unseen spiritual dimension. Can you deride the notion with a '*completely* clear conscience' as it were?
Is believing in a Creator God really, really the same as believing in spaghetti monsters etc.? I'm sure you will answer that it is. *I* say that it is not unreasonable. At the very most, science must lead to a position of agnosticism on this question. You need then to take a leap of faith if you are to adopt the position of atheism...a leap of faith whilst blocking your ears and shouting "Jesus Christ didn't really exist... its all a hoax...answers to prayer are always coincidences, even healings...its perfectly possible for a vast universe to suddenly come into existence out of nothing...music and mathematical laws just happened to be latent in the universe from the big bang..."

I'm not really asking you to change your minds y'all. But lets not get to mudslinging e.g. recently someone accused all religious people of making up sh1t. My request here is for respect for my opinion without derision. When I make a point which answers an atheist objection, 9 times out of 10 I'm accused of obfuscating(spelt a different way each time!) or goalpost moving. Believe me when I say that I always try to answer the questions sincerely(where time allows).

So answer me this: From a scientist's viewpoint, explain exactly how belief in a Creator is totally ridiculous and unsupportable. I respect your opinions here and I want to learn exactly how you have reached you conclusion. I'm listening and ready to learn.

Mikey2

>To me the 'existence of God' argument hinges on...is it unreasonable to suppose that there is an unseen spiritual dimension.<

Hi mikey

Maybe, as you have been asked on many, many, many occasions, you would like to provide some evidence for this 'unseen spiritual dimension'. If you do it would not be unreasonable to suppose it may exist.

The Athiest Bus Campaigns has started...hold very tight please ting ting

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7813812.stm

<>

not at all

just that if you were a true convert to islam and are now spouting christian belief then you would be officialy apostate and it would be open season on you as the sin of being an apostate is punishable by death and any true muslim who killed you would be seen as a virueus muslim indeed

>> the sin of being an apostate is punishable by death <<

The sooner, the better.
Then I would let God decide about ignorant barbarians!

"The pen is mightier than the sword"

Taff,

My ex-wife is welsh. She's from North Wales.
From 'the misty mountains'.

Hi mikey2

Quick question for you: What does reason, (thinking or rationality), have to do with superstition, (religion or faith)?

From your link 3Dots, this quote from the Methodists amused me,

'... suggested it showed there was a "continued interest in God"...'

Surely the atheist bus campaign is actually suggestive of *continuing interest in challenging the likely existence of 'God', and the contextual framework that such a concept rests upon, given the fact there is still no evidence that 'God' exists*.

I'd suggest such statements are just more evidence for religious organisations ability to perform contortions of thinking in order to perpetuate their particular brand of superstition.

Oh and getting back to 'art' I was thinking that one could ask, 'Could it be said that a work of art actually exists?' Yes in the sense of a physical object, eg a painting or a sculture. But I'd suggest that in terms of art itself, the object as 'art' only exists in the minds of people who think within that conceptual framework. Art is basically a way of thinking, eg sometimes concerned with ideas like 'beauty'; sometimes concerned with more philosophical, coneptual issues about how we think about reality. It makes no claims to exist in any absolute sense, in the way things like 'water' oh and 'bricks' can be said to exist.

The conceptual artist, Mark Wallinger once bought a race horse and actually entered it into races; he called it 'A Real Work of Art'. He then sold it. (It may well be dead by now.) And one could maybe say, after he sold it back to a racing owner, it reverted to its original context and ceased to be a work of art. As many who call themselves 'artists' maintain, works of art are fundamentally conceptual objects, only existing within context. This is the fundamental difference between 'art' and 'religion' IMO.

Tal

You asked: >What does reason, (thinking or rationality), have to do with superstition, (religion or faith)?<

Specify one of these nine questions which you'd like my answer to!

Mikey2

p.s. Did you notice my recent big question to all atheists here? It was this: >So answer me this: From a scientist's viewpoint, explain exactly how belief in a Creator is totally ridiculous and unsupportable. I respect your opinions here and I want to learn exactly how you have reached you conclusion. I'm listening and ready to learn.<

Okay, I'll bite. But it's not as if this hasn't been pointed out to you a million times before.

> From a scientist's viewpoint, explain exactly how belief in a Creator is totally ridiculous and unsupportable.<

There's no scientific evidence that God exists.