The Song Fight Bulletin Board

Teplin wrote:

fluffy wrote:I don't know everything there is, but I do know that there is no higher power within this universe, and anything outside of this universe is irrelevant. I'd say that makes me not agnostic

Now there's a head scratcher. How can you possibly know that there is no higher power in the universe without knowing everything there is?

Let me rephrase that a bit:

"If there is a higher power within this universe it's done a damned good job of convincing everyone it doesn't exist." The laws of physics are, as far as has been recorded by reliable witnesses, immutable without exception. A higher power would be an exception to that immutability.

Pragmatically it's like the "if a tree falls in a forest" chestnut - whether or not it makes a sound is irrelevant if it has no effect on anything else.

Without any indication that there is a higher power, I will not believe that there is one. I prefer to keep my worldview simple and based on what we do know. We can't make progress if we try to do things based on expectations of things that may or may not happen because of things that aren't predictable.

Science works by forming a hypothesis on what may happen based on a theory which is consistent with previously-determined evidence. The hypothesis is tested. New data either confirms (i.e. strengthens) the hypothesis, or contradicts it, which is also useful because it's more evidence which helps us to determine a stronger theory.

I used to consider myself an agnostic, and thought, "Well, maybe there is something higher that we simply can't prove or disprove." Then I read this wonderful talk by the late, great Douglas Adams, and that helped to crystallize my agnosticism into atheism. (If you don't want to read it for fear that it does the same thing to you, then are your beliefs still worth holding if they can't stand up to such a "test?")

You seem to be misinterpreting what I mean by "higher power". Suppose 10000 years ago, some ultra-advanced beings were flying around in space exploring, and detected life signs on Earth. They decided to investigate, and found human beings living there, in caves or whatnot, basically savages using crude bone and rock tools, etc. In their curiosity, they introduced themselves, told a few fantastic stories, said they might be back later, and flew off again.

From the point of view of the undeveloped humans, they performed miracles and magic, and defied what they understood to be natural. So they recorded their experience as best they could, and through generations, the stories got twisted around and enhanced into myth, and later, sacred texts which formed the basis of religion.

In this scenario, the beings became 'gods' through our limited grasp of science and the universe around us. They didn't defy physical reality, and they existed in the same universe as us. They were just beyond the early humans' (and modern-day humans', too) grasp of physical reality. I'm not saying I believe this to be true, but as there's no evidence for or against it, it's a possibility. I hear what you're saying about observable reality, but what is our observable reality? It's what we have the ability to observe. In order for science to progress, there has to be dreamers who go outside of conventional knowledge and try to do things that conventional knowledge says can't be done. The scientific community has crippled itself, really, by instilling such strict tenets as 'the LAWS of physics'; seriously, WTF do we really know about physics? Gravity, one of the weakest forces, pulls us helplessly toward the earth at 140 mph if we fall off a cliff, yet a small child's magnet can overcome it to pick up a nail. What's an atom? Is it made out of quarks? Has a quark ever been observed? What are quarks made out of? Why does light have particle-wave duality? If there's enough energy in one cubic meter of empty space to power the entire Earth for a day, why are we burning fossil fuels? Etcetera.

I stand behind my comment that all atheists are agnostic. Whether they wish to admit it or not. For someone to say "There is no god!" is just as ridiculous as someone else to say "There is a god!" Neither one knows for sure, cannot know, and probably never will know. That being said, I *very* strongly believe that the concept of a "creator" or "all-powerful" deity is complete wank (like, to a probability of 99.9999999%) but the possibility of a being with these sorts of attributes existing somewhere in the universe is definitely there.

I actually gave myself a headache typing that.

I'm a strong agnostic. I don't know and YOU DON'T KNOW EITHER!

But since I don't believe, I am also an atheist.

fluffy wrote: Let me rephrase that a bit:

"If there is a higher power within this universe it's done a damned good job of convincing everyone it doesn't exist." The laws of physics are, as far as has been recorded by reliable witnesses, immutable without exception. A higher power would be an exception to that immutability.

Well, that's less of a head scratcher, but your rephrase transforms the nature of your statement from a non-agnostic one ("There is absolutely no higher power!") to an agnostic one ("I do not exclude the possibility of a higher power the doesn't want to be known").

Without any indication that there is a higher power, I will not believe that there is one.

Which, combined with your rephrased statement, would make you an agnostic atheist.

I prefer to keep my worldview simple and based on what we do know. We can't make progress if we try to do things based on expectations of things that may or may not happen because of things that aren't predictable.

I don't believe that we need certainty in order to make progress. We do this all the time. If I look outside and it's sunny, and I read a forecast that says no rain is expected, I won't feel the need to take my umbrella when I go outside. Do I know for certain that it won't rain on me? Of course not, maybe a sudden storm blows in and I get rained on. But I made a justifiable judgment call based on the information I had at the time, and that's all anyone can do. We still have a basis for following things that have been reliable and are predictable, even if we admit that we can't know the true nature of our universe for certain. And I think there's great value in the shift of mindset that comes from admitting that.

I used to consider myself an agnostic, and thought, "Well, maybe there is something higher that we simply can't prove or disprove." Then I read this wonderful talk by the late, great Douglas Adams, and that helped to crystallize my agnosticism into atheism. (If you don't want to read it for fear that it does the same thing to you, then are your beliefs still worth holding if they can't stand up to such a "test?")

Yes, I agree with your thoughts about belief and tests. The article was a very interesting read, and enjoyably written. But I didn't find much in it about the value of agnosticism vs. certainty.

Steve Durand wrote:I'm a strong agnostic. I don't know and YOU DON'T KNOW EITHER!

But since I don't believe, I am also an atheist.

Wow, just when you think you know a guy. I've always imagined you as a preacher with a horn in one hand and a bible in the other.

And now this thread has reached the point where people use circular reasoning and get caught up on connotations that aren't commonly held, so I'm going to bow out.

[Edit] Not that I mean to imply that anyone does it on purpose, it's just one of the risks inherent to this sort of conversation.

fluffy wrote:If I'm wrong (and I'm not saying that I am), then whatever higher power is "out there" would not be so petty as to judge me based on not believing in its existence ...

I fully agree. I am often amused by the amount of crap that gets done in the name of some religion or deity, or the amount of crap people impose upon their own (or other people's) private lives to conform to the rules of some religion or please some deity. I really think... if you truly believe God is so awesome and has such amazing powers and created so much stuff... it's awful damn egotistical of you to think God would give half a shit about (for example) whether you eat a certain kind of meat on a certain day, or whom you prefer to fuck, or even whether you kill somebody. Based on those assumptions, I'd proceed to assume God has better shit to worry about.

Welcome to hell. Atheists, you must be feeling a right bunch of nitwits. Oh, and Christians, I'm afraid the Jews were right, sorry.

That bit never gets old.

fluffy wrote:Without any indication that there is a higher power, I will not believe that there is one.

That makes sense.

fluffy wrote:...but I do know that there is no higher power within this universe.

That does not.

Or maybe it does completely. It is truism in the sense that if you have defined a higher power as being outside of this universe (the curator of the fishbowl), so it can not be within this universe, by definition.

Still, not believing that there is one is different from believing that there is not one.

Further, believing there is not one is far different from knowing there is not one.

But yes, on a technicality, you can say with certainty there is nothing "that is greater than, or exists beyond the confines of, the fishbowl" in the fishbowl.

Nothing is true. And that's the truth.

Spud wrote:Or maybe it does completely. It is truism in the sense that if you have defined a higher power as being outside of this universe (the curator of the fishbowl), so it can not be within this universe, by definition.

But yes, on a technicality, you can say with certainty there is nothing "that is greater than, or exists beyond the confines of, the fishbowl" in the fishbowl.

A theoretical solution to the problem:

Step 1: Create a very large fishbowl
Step 2: Climb inside it
Step 3: Or even dangle part of yourself inside it

Hmmm... didn't not mean Step 3 to be as dirty as it now sounds to me.

Märk wrote:I stand behind my comment that all atheists are agnostic. Whether they wish to admit it or not. For someone to say "There is no god!" is just as ridiculous as someone else to say "There is a god!" Neither one knows for sure, cannot know, and probably never will know.

I call that complete wank. I will no sooner believe there is a god than I will believe the universe as we know it is actually a terrarium sitting on some child's desk in an appropriately scaled parallel universe (or something to that effect). Just because one can't disprove something doesn't make it a candidate for reality.

Paco Del Stinko wrote:Nothing is true. And that's the truth.

Yes, but everything isn't true and nothing isn't everything.

Paco Del Stinko wrote:Nothing is true. And that's the truth.

Bullshit.

The Newcastle Knights won the 1997 Grand Final. Don't tell me it isn't true, I saw Darren Albert score in the final minute. It was on the telly and everything. And I still have the commemorative T-shirt.

And while that final try isn't really proof that there is a God - at least if there is, he must be an alright bloke, because he was obviously watching the Rugby League that day.