Master Mind Posted October 27, 2012 Share Posted October 27, 2012 So me saying that your claim has no basis is the evidence means that I'm making a positive claim? No, I'm just saying your claim is very weak. The post you quoted was referring to subjective reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VICanucksfan5551 Posted October 27, 2012 Share Posted October 27, 2012 You said it would be nice if there was meaning. That's making or at least strongly implying a positive claim. You said objective right in the post I quoted... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Mind Posted October 28, 2012 Share Posted October 28, 2012 ...how? One could say "it would be nice if...." for plenty of things that the person isn't dismissing off hand. For example, is someone saying "it would be nice if it rained today" making a claim that it isn't going to rain? No, the other post you quoted. The one addressed to another poster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VICanucksfan5551 Posted October 29, 2012 Share Posted October 29, 2012 This seems to more of an argument about how things are read now instead of the topic at hand. I'd rather not be searching through every post trying to find something specific that was said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Mind Posted October 29, 2012 Share Posted October 29, 2012 It was literally only a few posts back... /topic/334632-religion-cannot-be-proven-by-worldly-sciences/page__st__1890#entry10957990">http://forum.canucks...0#entry10957990 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VICanucksfan5551 Posted October 29, 2012 Share Posted October 29, 2012 The way you used "it would be nice if" was clearly making a claim that there isn't a meaning, but it would be nice if there was. Yes that post in the link was for a different poster, but one of your posts, that I also quoted, said objective right in it, therefor referring to an objective meaning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Mind Posted October 29, 2012 Share Posted October 29, 2012 I already addressed that with an example to the contrary. I was referring to that post, not my post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kryten Posted October 29, 2012 Share Posted October 29, 2012 http://youtu.be/FnSEt2BCcRs If any of you haven't watched this before, you really should find the time to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted October 29, 2012 Share Posted October 29, 2012 So that it lasts more than 80 or so years. Living our lives to the fullest is great while we're alive, but if we can't remember it, we wouldn't know how great it was. It would be no different than never being born. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VICanucksfan5551 Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 Looks like there was a bit of a miscommunication. As for your example, it depends on the context. Regardless, are you saying that you are not dismissing the possibility of an objective meaning in life? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Mind Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 Why does it need to last more than 80 +/- years? We're here for that long, may as well make the most of it while we here. No? Beyond that it's about giving your offspring the best chance they can so they can live their 80+/- years...and on, and on... That's a lot different than never being born. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Mind Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 That is correct. It's possible, but I have yet to be shown any evidence that would lead me to that conclusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VICanucksfan5551 Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 If you acknowledge it as a possibility, then we are pretty much on the same page. There is no way to find any evidence anyway. Which is why I'm not convinced about there not being a creator. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nevlach Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 But you believe in the possibility without evidence to back it up, while I hold the null hypothesis until the possibility can be substantiated. There is no way to find any evidence anyway. Which is why I'm not convinced about there not being an invisible magic neon dinosaur that lives in my backyard that cannot be detected through physical means Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VICanucksfan5551 Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 Even though there is no direct evidence better arguments can be made for the existence of a divine intelligence/creator than can be made for an invisible magic neon dinosaur. I mean I think it's more intellectually honest to say one is an agnostic with regards to a god but I wouldn't say the same for some one who is agnostic about an invisible dinosaur haha. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nevlach Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 I'd say that's only because the invisible magic neon dinosaur is defined relatively specifically, as compared to a generalized intelligent creator. When a theist starts defining their deity in more detail, they run into some of the same problems as one positing my pet dinosaur. Anyways, I was trying to point out that his statement could also apply to an infinite number of things he doesn't believe in, so it's effectively meaningless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Mind Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 But you believe in the possibility without evidence to back it up, while I hold the null hypothesis until the possibility can be substantiated. There is no way to find any evidence anyway. Which is why I'm not convinced about there not being an invisible magic neon dinosaur that lives in my backyard that cannot be detected through physical means Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 If we're dead, we wouldn't know if we left our offspring a good chance. If we can't think after death, then we would be in the same state as before birth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Mind Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 So? How does that change anything? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 You say our meaning is to give our offspring the best chance. We wouldn't know anything if we're dead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.