Goddidit Vs Naturedidit

[Hydra009]

Hydra...you've been sniffing too much bug spray.

You just don't get the joke because you are the joke.  :P

[Baruch]

A bit over a year ago, Microsoft had to take off-line their AI disaster, Tay ... so Drew, was that when you were created?  Are you Tay, reinitialized and repurposed? ;-)  I would appreciate you better, if you actually could make a good argument for theism.  When I and others point out the weaknesses of your argument, you don't respond like an AI ... so maybe you are a poo throwing monkey man after all?

[Hydra009]

I appreciate your candor because you're admitting what I've always suggested that weak atheism is just a dodge to avoid making a positive claim.

You make it sound so devious, but it's really just a way to avoid unnecessary conflict with cultists.  You'd get exactly the same approach if most of the world seriously believed in leprechauns and has a history of being vindictive with leprechaun skeptics.

[sdelsolray]

I must be really stirring up a hornets nest even the resident theist is pissed off at me!
...

Again, this one thinks he is important/special and that all should feel lucky just to be able to respond to one of his majestic posts. 

It apparently hasn't occurred to him that others think his claims and arguments simply aren't worth the time.


Repeat material.  He's peddling false equivalence again.  Big time.  It's almost entertaining.  Not quite, but almost.  After 15 years, you'd think he'd be more entertaining, but we can't have everyting.

[Hakurei Reimu]

When did your position become the default one?

When your position failed time and again to produce any sort of fruit whatsoever. When an avenue of explanation continues to fail like yours has, one gets kind of jaded.

[Baruch]

https://philosophynow.org/issues/119/How_I_Solved_Humes_Problem_and_Why_Nobody_Will_Believe_Me

Hope this can be viewed past the reader limit ... but it addresses every poster in this string, even our statistician.

Quote from the article ...
"And the intellectual community of philosophers is just not set up to solve intellectual problems. It is set up to elaborate and develop disputes."

I put a new post, with a link to a 2-part essay that is actual professional theology, relevant to Drew's POV.  I suggest Drew read it (but not the rest of you lunkheads).

[Drew_2017]

Wow, that was a slog. Here's the thing:

For thousands and thousands of years, theist clowns have been claiming up and down that Goddidit for everything from the motions of planets to thunderbolts to the vagaries of fate. Every time that serious scientific investigation has been undertaken for the study of these phenomena, whenever we've ever been able to ascertain that Anythingdidit, it's always been Naturedidit, and never Goddidit.

The theistic track record for claims of Goddidit is so poor that the a priori response to any such claim is always "Bullshit!" and rightly so.

Is Goddidit possible? Certainly. But in view of that claim's past performance, I'm not holding my breath.

You are aware it was an avowed theist who came up with a formula for the motion of planets. He believed it could be calculated because he believed the universe was designed by a creator...Yet in spite of his ass backwards thinking it lead him to the theory of gravitation and how to calculate it.

[Drew_2017]

A bit over a year ago, Microsoft had to take off-line their AI disaster, Tay ... so Drew, was that when you were created?  Are you Tay, reinitialized and repurposed? ;-)  I would appreciate you better, if you actually could make a good argument for theism.  When I and others point out the weaknesses of your argument, you don't respond like an AI ... so maybe you are a poo throwing monkey man after all?

I'd advise ducking just in case...

[Drew_2017]

Of course not, but neither have you. You tie bullshit up in a nice bow and prance it around as if you stumbled upon something grand and magnificent. It is still superstitious nitwitting but you fancy it as intelligent discourse because you favor this idea that  the naturalistic universe "doesn't care" and therefore something that "does" care is a much better belief system....despite the very fact that "it" doesn't care either.

It always cracks me up when an atheist stoops to theology to make an argument.

[Drew_2017]

When your position failed time and again to produce any sort of fruit whatsoever. When an avenue of explanation continues to fail like yours has, one gets kind of jaded.

I disagree its failed. Even today scientists expect to be able to solve problems by applying math and formulas to the universe even though there is no reason to think the universe should be so accommodating. Can you explain why we can extract formulas from a universe created by mindless forces?

[Sorginak]

God is a hypothesis.

The sad fact is that theists have never properly advanced passed the hypothesis stage.

Rather, theists prefer to create a conclusion and then move backwards from that point.

Theists don't science, and that will always be their downfall.

[Ananta Shesha]

Consider panentheism coupled with conservation of energy: God, the pre-universe unified state, unfolded its inherent internal qualities and these became the natural laws.

[Sorginak]

Consider panentheism coupled with conservation of energy: God, the pre-universe unified state, unfolded its inherent internal qualities and these became the natural laws.

More hooey, but why don't you introduce yourself to the forum?

[Ananta Shesha]

More hooey, but why don't you introduce yourself to the forum?

Hooey to youey...sure why not!

[Ananta Shesha]

God is a hypothesis.

The sad fact is that theists have never properly advanced passed the hypothesis stage.

Rather, theists prefer to create a conclusion and then move backwards from that point.

Theists don't science, and that will always be their downfall.

The problem I see is in viewing God as a subjective persona de jour rather than an objectively testable reality. Some theists even go so far as to say "proof of God" is antithesis to faith! Makes me want to pull my hair out.

I like to start with comprehensive definitions and work logically forwards through "creation" from there.