Atheist Club. Begin.

[Amaris]

Once something is believed upon that requires no physical properties, no examination, and no expectation of manifestation under any circumstances, it can never be disproven, because it exists in the realm of fantasy. In the realm of fantasy, it can be attributed any property and personality, any number, any power, any motivation.

Strictly speaking this is not true, a God who creates a universe with a set of laws can't break them...at least not within that universe. God as omniscient? Not possible, breaks the uncertainty principle. So Earth in 6 days? I think not...

RAMA

You're applying logic to a fantasy.

 

[RAMA]

Once something is believed upon that requires no physical properties, no examination, and no expectation of manifestation under any circumstances, it can never be disproven, because it exists in the realm of fantasy. In the realm of fantasy, it can be attributed any property and personality, any number, any power, any motivation.

Strictly speaking this is not true, a God who creates a universe with a set of laws can't break them...at least not within that universe. God as omniscient? Not possible, breaks the uncertainty principle. So Earth in 6 days? I think not...

RAMA

You're applying logic to a fantasy.

Religion is fine when it only claims to be faith, its not fantasy...its faith. But claim some reality, one that effects billions over the centuries (and the Bible DOES), then you are subject to the same scientific method as anything else.

RAMA

 

[The Boy Who Cried Worf]

Once something is believed upon that requires no physical properties, no examination, and no expectation of manifestation under any circumstances, it can never be disproven, because it exists in the realm of fantasy. In the realm of fantasy, it can be attributed any property and personality, any number, any power, any motivation.

Strictly speaking this is not true, a God who creates a universe with a set of laws can't break them...at least not within that universe. God as omniscient? Not possible, breaks the uncertainty principle. So Earth in 6 days? I think not...

RAMA

Totally off subject, anyone ever tell you you look just like Bas Rutten RAMA.

 

[Amaris]

Strictly speaking this is not true, a God who creates a universe with a set of laws can't break them...at least not within that universe. God as omniscient? Not possible, breaks the uncertainty principle. So Earth in 6 days? I think not...

RAMA

You're applying logic to a fantasy.

Religion is fine when it only claims to be faith, its not fantasy...its faith. But claim some reality, one that effects billions over the centuries (and the Bible DOES), then you are subject to the same scientific method as anything else.

RAMA

What I'm talking about is that you cannot logically disprove something that is fantasy, because it has no logical requirements. Faith has no logical requirements. You cannot disprove faith, because it does not follow logic.

 

[ShamelessMcBundy]

If you could reason with religious people, there'd be no religious people.

 

[KJbushway]

true^

 

[Goliath]

You're applying logic to a fantasy.

So do millions of Dungeons & Dragons players.

In fact--in my experience, fantasy role-players are far more likely to argue about logic and scientific plausibility than science-fiction gamers. Or gamers in any other genre, for that matter. I don't remember ever having an argument about what was logically consistent or scientifically plausible while playing Call of Cthulhu, for example.

I think there's an important point about the psychology of religion buried somewhere in this otherwise random observation. But I'm not quite sure what it is.

 

[RAMA]

You're applying logic to a fantasy.

Religion is fine when it only claims to be faith, its not fantasy...its faith. But claim some reality, one that effects billions over the centuries (and the Bible DOES), then you are subject to the same scientific method as anything else.

RAMA

What I'm talking about is that you cannot logically disprove something that is fantasy, because it has no logical requirements. Faith has no logical requirements. You cannot disprove faith, because it does not follow logic.

One problem, when discussing the issue with theists, that's not adequate for them..it would be simple to argue that, but in reality, it doesn't work. If they are up for it, you have to explain why this result is so.

RAMA

 

[The Boy Who Cried Worf]

You're applying logic to a fantasy.

Religion is fine when it only claims to be faith, its not fantasy...its faith. But claim some reality, one that effects billions over the centuries (and the Bible DOES), then you are subject to the same scientific method as anything else.

RAMA

What I'm talking about is that you cannot logically disprove something that is fantasy, because it has no logical requirements. Faith has no logical requirements. You cannot disprove faith, because it does not follow logic.

True although that is why at least among academic theologians God has become more of a scientific hypothesis these days which is why the Cosmological and Design arguments are making such a comeback. They still fail as proofs, but at least people are trying to ground them in reality.

 

[ShamelessMcBundy]

To once again quote Bill Maher: "Faith means making a virtue out of not thinking."

 

[Goliath]

If you could reason with religious people, there'd be no religious people.

Actually, that's not true. Religious people often reason quite rigorously.

The problem, in my opinion, is that they reason from faulty premises, which lead them to absurd conclusions.

 

[The Boy Who Cried Worf]

You're applying logic to a fantasy.

So do millions of Dungeons & Dragons players.

In fact--in my experience, fantasy role-players are far more likely to argue about logic and scientific plausibility than science-fiction gamers. Or gamers in any other genre, for that matter. I don't remember ever having an argument about what was logically consistent or scientifically plausible while playing Call of Cthulhu, for example.

I think there's an important point about the psychology of religion buried somewhere in this otherwise random observation. But I'm not quite sure what it is.

Well if you don't understand why a +3 Vorpal sword of demon slaying works better on a Glabrezu than it does a Baazetu there is just no hope for you.

 

[Captain_Nick]

To once again quote Bill Maher: "Faith means making a virtue out of not thinking."

Excellent! I really resonate with this. Although not in the way the speaker intended, I daresay.

 

[Gepard]

So, just to be clear, we're all getting together and patting each other on the back for how how much better we are than those stupid religious people, right?

 

[ShamelessMcBundy]

^^^We're having an old-fashioned orgy before the Christians shut us down. By gar, it's been a while.

If you could reason with religious people, there'd be no religious people.

Actually, that's not true. Religious people often reason quite rigorously.

The problem, in my opinion, is that they reason from faulty premises, which lead them to absurd conclusions.

Religion is dangerous because it allows human beings who don't have all the answers to think that they do.

 

[Captain_Nick]

Religion is dangerous because it allows human beings who don't have all the answers to think that they do.

Religion might be an excuse some people use for that sort of behaviour. Science and reason is another such excuse.

 

[ShamelessMcBundy]

At least science and reason can be proven.

 

[Captain_Nick]

What on earth does that mean. You are using it as an excuse to ponce around proclaiming your superiority. You aren't supoerior. You know as little as the rest of us do. And I can prove that.

 

[KJbushway]

^ for the most part.

 

[Arrqh]

Religion might be an excuse some people use for that sort of behaviour. Science and reason is another such excuse.

So... you're saying that reason enables people to be unreasonable?