Silkroad Online Forums

Oh ok, so we don't call one a law and one a theory.

Regardless, arguing with stubborn, faith-based theists gets us no where.

I have no proof my brain exists, I've never seen it, yet I still believe I have it. It's no different from believing in anything else, tbh. I've never seen a vulture yet I believe they exist, too. I've never seen a Canadian yet I believe people live over there, too. Sometimes we don't need reasons to believe things, if we start trying to justify everything we will soon find we can't prove anything.

It is both. The fact two bodies attract is a law, the theory attempts to explain it. There is a theory of gravitation as well as general theory of relativity that deals with gravity and how it works. Similar to evolution and its theory. Think of natural selection as a law, a component of evolutionary theory. I was equating the two, I don't know if you skipped my comparison or didn't understand it.

Regardless, arguing semantics gets us no where.

You see, I would agree with that.
BUT
It's distorted views like religion that cause people to do terrible, terrible things. I don't want to generalize or attack any groups, but many groups hate each other, and religion is seen as a justification for violence in so many cases.

Fact is your brain does exist,

You see, I would agree with that.
BUT
It's distorted views like religion that cause people to do terrible, terrible things. I don't want to generalize or attack any groups, but many groups hate each other, and religion is seen as a justification for violence in so many cases.
ALSO, religion pretty much slows down scientific progression, which in turn is the progression of humanity. For instance, stem cells hold the potential to cure paralysis, possibly even cancer, and other various devastating illnesses, but because of 'religion' there is huge controversy that prevents science from progressing, and if it progresses, alternate methods could even be found!
Also, it slows down scientists etc. from discovering our origins and the story of humanity, because so many dumb-ass conservatives preach creationism, and get angry when the theory of evolution becomes more and more scientific fact.

I love how it's always the same people posting the same damn thing they post in the other million religion threads.

My answer to your first question is that there is a reason to believe in a supernatural entity or higher force,generally speaking. There is no reason, however, to believe in the specifics presented by any religion what-so-ever because they lack in evidence.

I read your reply, but you said you wouldn't name the book/story...so, no.

There is a reason to believe because of it's broadness, in my opinion. Unlike established religions and the such too many specifics without evidence are offered, therefore making no room for anything to be added or discredited. Seeing as we are greatly lacking in knowledge concerning our origins, the idea of a higher force is always plausible and nothing has to be fabricated or changed to support this idea.

How about reply to the theory then?

So have you seen your brain or even pictures of it. As far as we know, you might just have a hollow space in the middle of your skull. you might not even be human.

Would that not make it equally likely that there is not a supernatural entity? Saying our understanding is lacking does not make the existence of a supernatural entity any more acceptable or pass as a reason at all. I think that's what he is getting at. What is the reason you say one probably exists? If it is just a "feeling" or "that's just what I believe", fine, just curious to see if there is anything more to it.

There is a reason to believe because of it's broadness, in my opinion. Unlike established religions and the such too many specifics without evidence are offered, therefore making no room for anything to be added or discredited. Seeing as we are greatly lacking in knowledge concerning our origins, the idea of a higher force is always plausible and nothing has to be fabricated or changed to support this idea.

Every time I read one of Fug_Dup's or EvGa's posts in these threads, I have a mindgasm.

I wish there was a "Like" button on these forums because I'd hit it for every one of your posts. Kudos, sirs.

That was the dumbest thing have ever read, Fact is your brain does exist, vultures are real, Canadian do live in Canada, these are fact you cannot deny one way or the other, because of of evidence to back them up. It is not a matter of justification, it is merely wanting to know the facts/truth, and as of right now creationism/thiests have no emirapical/tangible evidence to back up their claim of a invisable man living in the clouds. Have no idea what you wanted to achieve with those 3 example? That people choose to believe they have brains? That they choose to believe Canadians live in Canada, that people choose to believe that vultures are real. Whatever floats your boat. Wether you choose to believe it or not facts are facts and you cannot deny them. 2+2 will always = 4.

I'm done with this thread cuz another will pop up in a week. But I leave with one more thing.

They thought the world was flat for thousands of years. Great Job scientists.

I have no proof my brain exists, I've never seen it, yet I still believe I have it. It's no different from believing in anything else, tbh. I've never seen a vulture yet I believe they exist, too. I've never seen a Canadian yet I believe people live over there, too. Sometimes we don't need reasons to believe things, if we start trying to justify everything we will soon find we can't prove anything.
The point of my entire analogy was to purposefully allude to something which we take as common place knoweldge. Ask most people and they will say their brain exists. Ask most people and they will say that both vultures and Canadians exist. But how many of them people actually know that they exist? Sure, texts books will tell me they are real and all of the scientific studies, much like EvGa stated, "prove" that they exist. But how do I know of their validity? How do I, as a simple human being, know that I have a brain? Should I simply take someone elses word for it? Most people do, right? Most common day people have no proof of their brain except for the simple idea of "well, someone else told me I had one, so I must". If you asked me to prove I have one, I couldn't without splitting my skull open. Do you see where I am alluding to?

The whole idea I'm trying to make with these obviously stupid anaoligies (because both of you seemed to miss the pint I was trying to convey and took my literally) is that the premise of belief that we develop, be it "evolutionism" (I didn't even know that was a word) and some sort of spiritual belief, is based solely around the ideas that others tell us. Science claims that a lot of theories are valid, but how do I actually know they are? Without actually reviewing the study and making observations myself upon the theory subjects, I have no real proof that it is valid. For all I know it could be a very exhilarated plot to trick me into believing something. Or maybe, it is real. But unless I see mars for myself, how do I as an individual know that mars is real?
The same applies to religion. People believe in the idea of a lord without any proof. They have stories and teachings that talk of his existence, but when did we ever have proof that a particular lord exist? Simple fact is, we don't. Maybe a lord does exist, maybe it's just a scam. Without proof, I simply don't know. I can only make my judgements upon the ideas in which people present to me, much like science.

Do you see where I'm headed with this? I have no way to know that evolution exists, nor do I have any way to know that a particular lord exists. The fact is, most people simply don't have proof that these things exist. But in this world, who has time to prove that every little thing that we haven't witness yet exists? Who has time to visit Canada to see if Canadian exists? Who has time to go to Africa to see if Rhinos are actually real? No one does. So taking someone elses word, in most cases, is good enough. As long as other people deemed it to be correct, for what reasons we will never know, than it's acceptable for us to believe it.

No one can prove a god exists, nor do most people who think evolution has happened actually have proof themselves. But the point is, it doesn't matter. Because if it did matter, and if people were required to prove a lord exists to verify it's existence, than I will start making you prove to me that Canadians exist. And until you do, I think they too are just a lie for the weak minded

tl;dr The basis of real world proof varies greatly between different objects, be it that of a faith, that of my brain or the theory of evolution. Most of us will never see proof for most scientific theories, yet believe them blindly anyway. And if this is the case, what justifiable reason do you have to doubt the existence of anything else?

I know, I have probably worded myself very poorly here. I know the point I'm trying to make, but I'm not that intelligent and I'm not good with words. If you think what I'm typing makes no sense, than please refrain from pointing it out. I already know it may not make sense, I'm just hoping you catch the general idea of what I'm trying to convey.

It doesn't matter whether you are theist or atheist. When you are about to die, in the future, you'd choose to call for god's help and not a doctor, or you'd "hope" you could go to "heaven" to meet your lost relative (spirits, ghosts).

The issue I have with your logic is that there are mountains of empirical evidence supporting the theory of evolution.

Just like there are mountains of evidence proving Canadians exist, that rhinos exist, that we do in fact have a brain.

Your reasoning of "I haven't seen it, so it could possibly be untrue" is flawed in so many ways. Choosing to ignore the evidence isn't a stance on the topic, it's plain ignorance. I don't mean that as a personal attack, but that's how it is.