Exposing Atheistic Myths

[Half-Life]

The evidence strongly supports the proposition that the universe existed long before life emerged and evolved the ability to detect and interact with matter/energy in the form of sensing its properties and responding to them.

But "the universe" and anything else you mention are all just meaningless words if there are no minds around to observe anything.

That's why materialism hits a brick wall at 100 MPH.

 

[bilby]

The evidence strongly supports the proposition that the universe existed long before life emerged and evolved the ability to detect and interact with matter/energy in the form of sensing its properties and responding to them.

But "the universe" and anything else you mention are all just meaningless words if there are no minds around to observe anything.

That's why materialism hits a brick wall at 100 MPH.

Hitting a brick wall is only a bad thing if you accept materialism. If you genuinely didn't, then you wouldn't have chosen that analogy.

 

[Keith&Co.]

But "the universe" and anything else you mention are all just meaningless words if there are no minds around to observe anything.

how arrogant, to assume that human meaning has to be atrached to a thing to give it value, much less to cause it to even exist. BUT, that is the Xian outlook, this whole vast fascinating universe was created for our benefit, rather than the other way around, or just as two happenstance line items of inventory.

That's why materialism hits a brick wall at 100 MPH.

sez you. Demonstrate? Not so much.

 

[DBT]

The evidence strongly supports the proposition that the universe existed long before life emerged and evolved the ability to detect and interact with matter/energy in the form of sensing its properties and responding to them.

But "the universe" and anything else you mention are all just meaningless words if there are no minds around to observe anything.

That's why materialism hits a brick wall at 100 MPH.

Objective reality and meaning are two different things. An event happens regardless of whether we assign some sort of meaning or significance to that event.

 

[Half-Life]

The evidence strongly supports the proposition that the universe existed long before life emerged and evolved the ability to detect and interact with matter/energy in the form of sensing its properties and responding to them.

But "the universe" and anything else you mention are all just meaningless words if there are no minds around to observe anything.

That's why materialism hits a brick wall at 100 MPH.

Objective reality and meaning are two different things. An event happens regardless of whether we assign some sort of meaning or significance to that event.

What does the phrase "objective reality" mean to you?

 

[Half-Life]

But "the universe" and anything else you mention are all just meaningless words if there are no minds around to observe anything.

how arrogant, to assume that human meaning has to be atrached to a thing to give it value, much less to cause it to even exist. BUT, that is the Xian outlook, this whole vast fascinating universe was created for our benefit, rather than the other way around, or just as two happenstance line items of inventory.

That's why materialism hits a brick wall at 100 MPH.

sez you. Demonstrate? Not so much.

All the scientists are not humans, Keith?

If gorillas had our skills, they would analyze everything through gorilla eyes.

 

[Keith&Co.]

how arrogant, to assume that human meaning has to be atrached to a thing to give it value, much less to cause it to even exist. BUT, that is the Xian outlook, this whole vast fascinating universe was created for our benefit, rather than the other way around, or just as two happenstance line items of inventory.
sez you. Demonstrate? Not so much.

All the scientists are not humans, Keith?

you're the one talking about 'meaning.' I guess i have to assume you mean human. Do you have access to any non-human source of meaning?

If gorillas had our skills, they would analyze everything through gorilla eyes.

Which means what, exactly, with respect to your thesis? Or, your bastardization of Locke's view of Berkeley's theisis?

 

[Half-Life]

you're the one talking about 'meaning.' I guess i have to assume you mean human. Do you have access to any non-human source of meaning?

If gorillas had our skills, they would analyze everything through gorilla eyes.

Which means what, exactly, with respect to your thesis? Or, your bastardization of Locke's view of Berkeley's theisis?

Long story short: no minds around = no way to describe what exists.

Describing something that is independent of all perception is an impossible task.

 

[steve_bank]

Stand in front of a train coming at you and say to yourself 'Train is just a meaningless word, train is just a meaningless word...'



Or 'If I do not look at the train and perceive it it doers not exist.'

Meaning is what we give words

A Hindu story. A msan is listening to a guru lecture. The guru says 'God is in you and god is ineverything'. Full of bliss the man is walking down a road and sees an elephant running yowards him. He thinks to himself 'If god is in me and god is in the 3elphant I have nothing to fear!'.

The elephant comes upon the man bellowing, grabs him with its trunk, and tosses the man aside.

Bewildered the man asks the guru where he went wrong. The guru replied 'When the elephant bellowed it was god in the elephant telling the god in you to get out of the way, but you were not listening;.

 

[Half-Life]

Stand in front of a train coming at you and say to yourself 'Train is just a meaningless word, train is just a meaningless word...'



Or 'If I do not look at the train and perceive it it doers not exist.'

Meaning is what we give words

A Hindu story. A msan is listening to a guru lecture. The guru says 'God is in you and god is ineverything'. Full of bliss the man is walking down a road and sees an elephant running yowards him. He thinks to himself 'If god is in me and god is in the 3elphant I have nothing to fear!'.

The elephant comes upon the man bellowing, grabs him with its trunk, and tosses the man aside.

Bewildered the man asks the guru where he went wrong. The guru replied 'When the elephant bellowed it was god in the elephant telling the god in you to get out of the way, but you were not listening;.

That is why God is always perceiving everything. The train DOES NOT EXIST if God is not perceiving it.

You're right on the doorstep with your finger on the doorbell!

 

[Keith&Co.]

Long story short: no minds around = no way to describe what exists.

Yes, you have restated the non-controversial portion of your premise.
Now, just offer some goddamned reason to think that this fact has any bearingbon reality's inventory of things.

Describing something that is independent of all perception is an impossible task.

and you repeated yourself yet with againness.

However, pain can still be perceived by the body independent of a mind.

 

[atrib]

Wrong. The fact is that we cannot demonstrate that the material world exists and is real. In order to assert that the material world is real, and is a product of God's mind or the minds of humans (whatever the fuck that means), you would first have to demonstrate that the material world exists. Which you cannot do. Therefore, at best, you are stuck in the same boat as atheists, and haven't demonstrated anything other than your ability to make up shit, and your lack of understanding of how logical arguments work.

But you guys go a step further and say, "the material world can exist independently of minds," which is something that can not be observed unless we all left our minds outside of our bodies.

You ignored what I was saying, perhaps because you didn't want to acknowledge it, or more likely because you didn't understand it.

You cannot prove that reality exists, independently of minds, or otherwise. You cannot prove that you are not a brain in a vat immersed in a simulation, and you cannot prove that when your mind is unplugged from the simulation, reality will continue to exist. That is your own argument. Since you cannot prove that reality exists independently of your mind, you cannot prove that there is a god around to sustain reality when nobody else is looking. Therefore, your argument for God's existence fails. And you are guilty of presupposing the very premise you have been accusing atheists of presupposing.

This fundamental flaw in your argument cannot be overcome by pointing at atheists and saying "I know I'm wrong, but look over there". That is just an attempt at distraction. Or, you simply don't understand what the fuck you are talking about, and I am incorrect in believing that you actually have a brain that can be used to think.

Based on the fact that you haven't attempted to respond, I will assume you have conceded the argument.

 

[skepticalbip]

you're the one talking about 'meaning.' I guess i have to assume you mean human. Do you have access to any non-human source of meaning?

If gorillas had our skills, they would analyze everything through gorilla eyes.

Which means what, exactly, with respect to your thesis? Or, your bastardization of Locke's view of Berkeley's theisis?

Long story short: no minds around = no way to describe what exists.

Describing something that is independent of all perception is an impossible task.

And yet you have given no reason to accept that something needs to be perceived and described for it to exist. Something needs to be perceived for us to be aware of it but for us to perceive and be aware of something is very different from it existing.

Now we come to a chicken and egg dilemma. Which comes first, our perception and awareness of something or that something existing. How can we perceive and be aware of something that doesn't exist before we are aware of it?

 

[skepticalbip]

Stand in front of a train coming at you and say to yourself 'Train is just a meaningless word, train is just a meaningless word...'



Or 'If I do not look at the train and perceive it it doers not exist.'

Meaning is what we give words

A Hindu story. A msan is listening to a guru lecture. The guru says 'God is in you and god is ineverything'. Full of bliss the man is walking down a road and sees an elephant running yowards him. He thinks to himself 'If god is in me and god is in the 3elphant I have nothing to fear!'.

The elephant comes upon the man bellowing, grabs him with its trunk, and tosses the man aside.

Bewildered the man asks the guru where he went wrong. The guru replied 'When the elephant bellowed it was god in the elephant telling the god in you to get out of the way, but you were not listening;.

That is why God is always perceiving everything. The train DOES NOT EXIST if God is not perceiving it.

You're right on the doorstep with your finger on the doorbell!

You need to decide on which argument you want to make. This is back to advocating materialism, that the universe does exist as material substance outside your mind because god is working his ass off keeping it real by constant effort. Why you want a god so dumb that he created a universe that demanded such continued effort on his part rather than a god (like in Genesis) that created eternal material universe that didn't require his continued effort for it to remain existing is rather odd.

 

[DBT]

Objective reality and meaning are two different things. An event happens regardless of whether we assign some sort of meaning or significance to that event.

What does the phrase "objective reality" mean to you?

It's not what it means to me, but what exists indepependently of whatever it may mean to me, you and everyone else...it is what it is and does what it does regardless of our beliiefs about it, hence it is objective. That is the physical world at large. The Universe.

 

[Half-Life]

Objective reality and meaning are two different things. An event happens regardless of whether we assign some sort of meaning or significance to that event.

What does the phrase "objective reality" mean to you?

It's not what it means to me, but what exists indepependently of whatever it may mean to me, you and everyone else...it is what it is and does what it does regardless of our beliiefs about it, hence it is objective. That is the physical world at large. The Universe.

You can not prove it exists independently of minds.

 

[skepticalbip]

It's not what it means to me, but what exists indepependently of whatever it may mean to me, you and everyone else...it is what it is and does what it does regardless of our beliiefs about it, hence it is objective. That is the physical world at large. The Universe.

You can not prove it exists independently of minds.

Equally, you can not prove it doesn't exist.

 

[DBT]

It's not what it means to me, but what exists indepependently of whatever it may mean to me, you and everyone else...it is what it is and does what it does regardless of our beliiefs about it, hence it is objective. That is the physical world at large. The Universe.

You can not prove it exists independently of minds.

You can prove that the world does what it does (properties) regardless of what your wishes happen to be or what you believe about it.

A flame will burn you and a wall will be a barrier to you regardless of your beliefs, or anyone elses. Which is why it is an objective reality.

 

[steve_bank]

Stand in front of a train coming at you and say to yourself 'Train is just a meaningless word, train is just a meaningless word...'



Or 'If I do not look at the train and perceive it it doers not exist.'

Meaning is what we give words

A Hindu story. A msan is listening to a guru lecture. The guru says 'God is in you and god is ineverything'. Full of bliss the man is walking down a road and sees an elephant running yowards him. He thinks to himself 'If god is in me and god is in the 3elphant I have nothing to fear!'.

The elephant comes upon the man bellowing, grabs him with its trunk, and tosses the man aside.

Bewildered the man asks the guru where he went wrong. The guru replied 'When the elephant bellowed it was god in the elephant telling the god in you to get out of the way, but you were not listening;.

That is why God is always perceiving everything. The train DOES NOT EXIST if God is not perceiving it.

You're right on the doorstep with your finger on the doorbell!

I used to have a book of stories from India. You miss the ooint entirely.

In Hindu tradition god is more a level of human awareness or conspicuousness. There is a saying and greeting, 'see the god in you' Not god of Christians but the godliness in all of us.
.

 

[atrib]

It's not what it means to me, but what exists indepependently of whatever it may mean to me, you and everyone else...it is what it is and does what it does regardless of our beliiefs about it, hence it is objective. That is the physical world at large. The Universe.

You can not prove it exists independently of minds.

This is your proposition:
Reality exists all the time because Biblegod is looking at all aspects of reality all the time.

These are the premises your proposition is based on, which are largely left unstated:

• Reality exists and is real.
• Reality cannot exist when nobody is looking.
• Reality does exist when no human is looking.
• Biblegod exists, and Biblegood is looking at all aspects of reality at all times.

Every single premise on the list has to be supported by evidence and demonstrated to be factual before your argument can be treated as valid. You have not done that, or even made an attempt. Therefore, your argument is not valid. This has been pointed out to you before, but you have ignored it, and you just keep repeating your half-witted assertion over and over, like a small child who wants to convince the adults around him that Santa is real.

You have also shifted your (original) argument from
in order to exist, reality needs a mind to observe and perceive it,
to
minds are needed to observe and describe the properties of reality,
which are not the same thing at all.

I don't know if this mistake is deliberate (i.e. you are knowingly bearing false witness), or whether your mistake is innocent (i.e. you are not intelligent enough to make the distinction). I suspect it is a combination of both.