The Official CC Debate Thread!

[seanoh]

@applicannot: the world can not not have a beginning. it can not be infinite. what exists must have a first cause. something can not come from nothing. it is illogical. take the example of a rock in a field of grass. let's say one day you stub your toe on it. how did it get there? you can say it was always there for infinity. this is how you i believe, you view the universe, a simplistic one. now, take the example of a watch in a field of grass. it would be ridiculous to say it was there for infinity. why? because of its complexity. our universe can symbolize the watch. what are the odds of the universe being created by random particles clashing into each other? what are the odds of pieces of a watch being shaken in a bag and making itself, not in form but also a watch that works. something did not come from nothing. furthermore, there was a designer behind our universe. you said that we "have to make up something that helps us explain how everything started". i believe it is god. you can say but what comes before him? this is unanswerable because as finite human beings we can not even begin to comprehend the workings of god.

so answering your question:
1. how did god get here?
if the existence of the universe was infinite, there would be no past, present, future. there would be nothing because there must be a cause to have an effect. an effect can not be by itself.

2. if god has always been here, why couldn't the universe?
god is god. humans have limited knowledge. we will never fully understand him. the universe is a thing. since it is a thing, it needs a cause.

i probably repeated a lot of stuff. sorry bout the bad organization.
by the way..how old are you?

also you talk about different religions claiming different gods but what if they were all the same god? the same exact god expect in shape, ideal, and form. i believe society is the one that has corrupted the true god. they shaped and deformed him into what they needed at the time. ie the romans who said god would strike down anyone who dared to defy government.

@whan: i don't believe knowledge=less happiness but = ALWAYS more happiness. consider the the matrix. the people in the matrix do not realize they are being controlled. they are ignorant. in the matrix, when something good happens to someone they only THINK they are happy. It is not true happiness. when you do have knowledge, it is real happiness.

@tomjonesistheman: the purpose of life is to die. that's a direct contradiction. why then do we exist in the first place if our purpose it to die. why not not exist at all?

bring it on athiests/nonbelievers/agnostics..

[seanoh]

@ this could be heaven:
the poem says if god is all powerful but he does not stop the evil in the world, he must be evil. how is that flawed logic?

[ThisCouldBeHeavn]

Not necessarily flawed, but it's certainly a jump considering all the issues in between, like free will and other parts of ethical theory. The point relies on a large host of assumptions.

[applicannot]

Perhaps worth noting here that Christianity and Islam have similar roots => same God.

Yes, but the paths to heaven are at points very different: being a Christian and being a Muslim would not both lead you to the same God.

the world can not not have a beginning. it can not be infinite. what exists must have a first cause. something can not come from nothing. it is illogical.

You have already proved my point. Humans cannot comprehend the infinite. Why can't the world not have a beginning? We already know that SPACE is infinite, and therefore has no beginning or end. In space, there is remarkably little difference between time and space. It is illogical for humans to think that something cannot come from nothing. I'm not saying something can come from nothing. I'm saying that something was already there.

take the example of a rock in a field of grass. let's say one day you stub your toe on it. how did it get there? you can say it was always there for infinity. this is how you i believe, you view the universe, a simplistic one. now, take the example of a watch in a field of grass. it would be ridiculous to say it was there for infinity. why? because of its complexity

Absolutely not. The world has evolved and will continue to evolve. It has done so for more years than we can possibly imagine. That rock is new. Whatever came together to form Earth, or perhaps simply a much smaller planet or even two particles as per the Big Bang Theory, was already here. Was that rock or blade of grass already here? Absolutely not! I should have clarified.

our universe can symbolize the watch. what are the odds of the universe being created by random particles clashing into each other? what are the odds of pieces of a watch being shaken in a bag and making itself, not in form but also a watch that works.

I don't know much about the Big Bang Theory, to which I think you are referring. In that sense, I can't help you here. However, after billions of billions of millions of trillions of years of trying, the probability that it could happen once are probably there. The odds are low, but as with anything, if you repeat it enough times, it will happen. But, I don't know much about the Big Bang Theory and am not wholly sure what to think about it.

something did not come from nothing

Thank you for reiterating this. I'm glad we agree. I don't believe that something came from nothing, if I wasn't clear in my first post. I'm saying that something was already there. Because we are human, we believe that that first something had to GET there. Like you said, isn't it illogical to think that there was no beginning, that everything must COME from somewhere? It's hard to grasp as we WATCH the universe because we are limited to human scope (something you admit later in your post). I say it was already here, NOT that it came from nothing.

furthermore, there was a designer behind our universe. you said that we "have to make up something that helps us explain how everything started". i believe it is god. you can say but what comes before him? this is unanswerable because as finite human beings we can not even begin to comprehend the workings of god.

Let me re-word this for you. "How was the universe just here? This is unanswerable because as finite human beings we cannot even begin to comprehend infinity." To say that God created the Earth is to say that God was already here. Therefore, we actually agree to the same ideology. You just believe in the supreme being and I don't.

1. how did god get here?
if the existence of the universe was infinite, there would be no past, present, future. there would be nothing because there must be a cause to have an effect. an effect can not be by itself.

Wrong. We can only go so far in this debate because it quickly turns to things humans cannot possibly understand (therefore leading to circular reasoning, which is at the base of all religious arguments). In infinity, there is time as per the people who live time. If nothing is around to experience it, there is no such thing as time. We experience "time" because we are born, live, degrade, and die, as with all living things. Nonliving things in space experience time because they move and degrade as well, although they degrade not from age (time) but from events (collisions). You're saying that an effect cannot cause itself. In that case, you're still not explaining how God (effect) got here (cause).

2. if god has always been here, why couldn't the universe?
god is god. humans have limited knowledge. we will never fully understand him. the universe is a thing. since it is a thing, it needs a cause.

You (theoretical you) want me to believe in God, but you can't answer the one fundamental question: how did God get here? Humans DO have limited knowledge. I seriously doubt we will ever fully understand the universe. God is a thing as well. It needs a cause. I'm saying this: we're in the same boat. I'm saying the universe was always here. You're saying God was always here. We can't prove it either way. I just don't believe in the supernatural, so we're arguing the same thing. You have an intermediary and I simply don't believe in that.

also you talk about different religions claiming different gods but what if they were all the same god? the same exact god expect in shape, ideal, and form. i believe society is the one that has corrupted the true god. they shaped and deformed him into what they needed at the time. ie the romans who said god would strike down anyone who dared to defy government.

Well, the first religious humans and near-humans were animists, worshiping nature and natural spirits. This really doesn't sound like the Christian God, but okay, let's say the were worshiping it. There were thousands of religions before Judaism, and even more before Christianity. Why wouldn't God manifest himself before the birth of Judaism? Why would he wait tens of thousands of human years? This is where, I find, Christianity gets bumpy: then the Young Earth Creationists believe the world is only 6000 years old, and bam, Christianity has its own brand of pseudoscience to defend itself. Strange. Anyway, I'd like to believe that most Christians AREN'T YECs.

So I agree that the idea of God has been corrupted. Then, what is it that you believe? If you're Christian, how do you reconcile the Bible? The Bible was written by many men. Then, the choosing of the books of the Bible was presided over by Constantine. So, even if the original men were divinely inspired, Constantine ultimately compiled the Bible. And then through translations, we have different versions - some of them startlingly different. But we agree that God has been corrupted. How do YOU know the one true God, and they way he wants you to live? Belief and faith is a big part of it. There is where we will have to agree to disagree. I cannot blindly believe in a supernatural being. I don't really care if this is offensive, but that stopped when Santa Claus went out the window in third grade. I can participate in philosophical discussions, consider science, look at my own beliefs, and mind others, but I can't believe in that. Especially when we've already agreed that the one true God is corrupt.

@whan: i don't believe knowledge=less happiness but = ALWAYS more happiness. consider the the matrix. the people in the matrix do not realize they are being controlled. they are ignorant. in the matrix, when something good happens to someone they only THINK they are happy. It is not true happiness. when you do have knowledge, it is real happiness.

I don't think there is a linear relationship between knowledge and happiness. It's more complex than that. I think life is more blissful if you believe you are going to die and go to heaven and be there for forever joyfully. This was especially true when religion was created/erupted in its full (take your pick, I say created). The people lived long, hard lives. They slaved for more than half the day and were often hungry (the upper class withstanding, but there were few of them). They was considerably less joy in their lives. Surely their lives were better if they thought by living this hard life, they'd be rewarded in the afterlife. This is idealized in Hinduism. You started at the lowest caste, and each time you died, you were reincarnated in a higher caste. Death was the only form of social mobility. So an untouchable could look forward to living the much happier life of an upper class eventually, by bowing his or her head and following the rules socially and spiritually. I think that for some people, life is less blissful without that belief. This was especially true for older civilizations, and for people who live a life of strife.

@tomjonesistheman: the purpose of life is to die. that's a direct contradiction. why then do we exist in the first place if our purpose it to die. why not not exist at all?

I'm pretty sure Tom was joking and you missed it entirely. Regardless, I don't know what the purpose of life is. Rather, I would propose that there isn't one, like the universe has no beginning. I don't really think life has a purpose, over all. Of course, the purpose of an individual life is to reproduce, but that's a pretty pointless purpose of life overall. I'm more interested in my purpose and the purpose of those around me than the purpose of life overall. To say that life has a purpose is to imply that life was compiled for a purpose... and I don't believe that at all. A little nihilist, possibly.

[Wartsandall]

^I'll comment on that later. I need at least 30 minutes though haha. You have good points

O, btw, are you going to the session today? It starts in a couple of hours.

[analogous]

I just don't understand how many of you can believe that the sole purpose of living is to just "reproduce and die." Take a look at the complexity of humans compared to all other creatures on this earth, or universe for that matter. We have the perfect atmosphere and the most vital living conditions. You cannot say we're just another animal because we're not. Humans aren't just made of chemical reactions flickering in your skull, humans have innate desires and unique traits that differentiate them immensely from even the most beautiful of any other earth organism.

The fact that you can think for yourself, develop a conscious, and make decisions based on a number of deciding factors (ex. emotions) shows that there must have been an all powerful being who created you. Science, and atheists for this matter, are searching for something that's not there. It's evident that our universes' origins will probably never be explained but why is it so far-fetched to believe that a supernatural being created me, you and everything around us. This doesn't mean that God physically and mentally influences us now (well, OK, people MAKE him influence us), that just means he started the universe and let science play out its role. Science and Religion don't conflict, they intertwine.

God is just a label. You don't need to imagine God as some devil in the clouds waiting for people to make mistakes so he could send them directly to hell. God could metaphorically stand for anything with unimaginable power, controlling the universe in a seemingly perfect way. Take everything Religion has told you and throw it in the trash; the bible is ridiculous in the most ordinary ways. If there is a heaven i don't even want to be there for eternity, let me rest for pete's sake.

Try to not imagine God associated with Religion. Think for yourself, think of your intricacy, perfection and beauty, truly look at the world around you, and try putting all that in scientific terms; it just doesn't fit.

[Mapleleafs26]

You guys need to check out Blaise Pascal's "Pensees"

[Wartsandall]

^What is it about?

[applicannot]

The fact that you can think for yourself, develop a conscious, and make decisions based on a number of deciding factors (ex. emotions) shows that there must have been an all powerful being who created you.

I don't agree with this at all. However:

God is just a label. You don't need to imagine God as some devil in the clouds waiting for people to make mistakes so he could send them directly to hell. God could metaphorically stand for anything with unimaginable power, controlling the universe in a seemingly perfect way. Take everything Religion has told you and throw it in the trash; the bible is ridiculous in the most ordinary ways. If there is a heaven i don't even want to be there for eternity, let me rest for pete's sake.

This is something I could believe with. I believe I posted (if not, I meant to) that you should try to separate faith and belief from religion. Although I do not personally believe in this, I admire those who do and kind of wish I could believe in it. I'm anti-religious, but certainly not anti-spiritual (although I am not spiritual) and not particularly anti-higher power, if by higher power you mean a force humans don't know or understand, but still a force roughly like gravity rather than a supernatural force.

Try to not imagine God associated with Religion. Think for yourself, think of your intricacy, perfection and beauty, truly look at the world around you, and try putting all that in scientific terms; it just doesn't fit.

To an extent I agree with you. However, science is merely the pursuit of knowledge. So... I don't think it "doesn't fit" for me to want explore the intricacies, perfections, and beauties. Trying to understand the source is different from exploring the actual things, therefore science DOES fit. I've never been much of a science person though, much more philosophical.

Science, and atheists for this matter, are searching for something that's not there.

Completely fair. I say the religious are praying to somebody who isn't there.

[Wartsandall]

^My whole existence goes against your last statement. My comprehension is that this issue will never be resolved. It's all about perception. I suppose we will find out at the end of our lives. My claim is, why not believe in a religion? If we are just going to die without anything further occuring(not that I believe this), why not hold an optimistic point of view? I'd rather believe something lies beyond death than to believe for my entire life, that what I'm living is my final destination, and that upon my death I will solely be a memory.

[Mapleleafs26]

^^^Pascal said a bunch of stuff to about God and man, like "The more intelligent one is, the more men of originality one finds. Ordinary people find no difference between men." He also made Pascal's Triangle.
It's pretty stimulating, and it's like 300 pages of this type of debate

[Wartsandall]

O wow, I'll definitely have to look into it. Thanks for the description!

[ThisCouldBeHeavn]

We already know that SPACE is infinite

Pretty sure most scientists wouldn't agree with that.

[applicannot]

If we are just going to die without anything further occuring(not that I believe this), why not hold an optimistic point of view?

I don't think religion is particularly optimistic, and I don't see religion as a positive factor in life or in the world. That's why I don't believe in any religion.

Pretty sure most scientists wouldn't agree with that.

Really? Well, it's been awhile since I last took a science class that contemplated that. Maybe I'll read up on it.

I think that this issue will be reconciled. The world is slowly but increasingly becoming less religious. Unfortunately, this means that both side of the aisle are getting more polarizing. You have your Richard Dawkins' and you have your fundamentalist Republicans (and your theocratic, autocratic states in the Middle East, and so on and so forth). I do think that sometime in the distant future, religion will be a blimp on the radar. We look back at the Greek Pantheon of over two thousand years ago and study it, but we don't believe it and it's easy to wonder how those people could possibly be devoted to that. Two thousand years from now, we may say the same thing about Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, and the other world religions (although Hinduism proves to be quite enduring). The great monotheistic religions have been opportune, and they have coincided with some great developments in human history. As such, they've endured - but not without significant changes from their original forms. There is no reason to believe that two millenia from now, people will still be Christian. I would haphazard a guess that in two thousand years from now most people will be atheists or agnostics, or will have adopted spiritual, non-specific religions such as the more mystic Hinduism and Buddhism.

[Mapleleafs26]

"I don't see religion as a positive factor in life or in the world"

There's a difference between religion and religious.
Most religions preach good qualities like equality, charity, kindness, etc.
Crazy religious people preach the opposite.
Theoretically, then religion is a positive force, but it is overridden by the extremists that it in part inspires