EdwardJCornwell

cbontenbal , 9 months ago to philosophy Dutch

I find myself not understanding the concept of atheism. Who wants to explain it to me in a coherent way for a beginner? With a metaphysical substantiation please, if that is at all possible.

#atheism #theism #philosophy #religion #metaphysics @philosophy

EdwardJCornwell , 8 months ago

@Jakra @philosophy @cbontenbal @davidesalerno68

And this:

'I don’t BELIEVE in the Big Bang, I just accept it as the best, current model.'

Apparently, you don't believe in the big bang, but you believe in the thing it created?

EdwardJCornwell , 8 months ago

@msteenhagen @lack @cbontenbal @spencer @philosophy @Drew @philippsteinkrueger no it doesn't. Isn't the whole of this thread about atheism, which is not believing in something you can't verify? Without sight you wouldn't be able to verify the existence of colour, so to all intents and purposes it wouldn't exist. You'd have to 'believe' in its existence.

EdwardJCornwell , 8 months ago

@lack @cbontenbal @msteenhagen @spencer @philosophy @Drew @philippsteinkrueger You can't verify that colours exist, you can't verify that I exist (and I can't verify that you exist), you can't verify that the world exists, yet here you are conversing with potentially imaginary people in the belief that we do. Believe what you like is my mantra, but don't go around telling other people what to believe.

EdwardJCornwell , 8 months ago

@lack @msteenhagen @cbontenbal @philosophy @philippsteinkrueger @Drew @spencer That verification method only works if you have sight. If you don't, it's not a verification method.

EdwardJCornwell , 8 months ago

@msteenhagen @Drew @philippsteinkrueger @spencer @cbontenbal @lack @philosophy I've been saying that all along about colour.

EdwardJCornwell , 8 months ago

@Jakra @cbontenbal @philosophy @davidesalerno68 Again, your use of the term 'foundation' is synonymous with the term 'belief'.

My point is that everyone believes in something they can't prove, and it would be nice if atheists and religious people just admitted that their world view is as predicated on an unprovable 'foundation' as everyone else's. You're not in a stronger moral position because you 'believe' in science or you 'believe' in a god, it's all just the illusion that works for you.

EdwardJCornwell , 8 months ago

@msteenhagen @Drew @philippsteinkrueger @spencer @cbontenbal @lack @philosophy I'm not entirely sure what your point is here? You seem to be repeating my argument in a way that you think you're explaining something to me? I disagree that the apprehension of colour is in any way related to the apprehension of the divine, colour required at least one person in the room to be equipped with the sensory apparatus to apprehend colour, while the concept of the divine requires only the ability to reason

EdwardJCornwell , 8 months ago

@Jakra @cbontenbal @philosophy @davidesalerno68 I think I addressed that; the choice of atheism or theism is simply the illusion that works for you and allows you to make 'sense' of the world.

BTW, not believing either way is simply agnosticism, it's hardly a radically novel or 'contradictory' position.

EdwardJCornwell , 8 months ago

@lack @msteenhagen @Drew @philippsteinkrueger @spencer @cbontenbal @philosophy You've yet to demonstrate that anything exists external to ourselves, make a start on that and let me know what you come up with.

EdwardJCornwell , 8 months ago

@lack @msteenhagen @Drew @philippsteinkrueger @spencer @cbontenbal @philosophy It's nice to have hobby.

EdwardJCornwell , 8 months ago

@lack
What colour are radio waves? The only reason we are able to build detectors for other parts of the electromagnetic spectrum is that it is a spectrum. If it weren't, you wouldn't even know it was there to build a detector for.
@msteenhagen @cbontenbal @philosophy @philippsteinkrueger @Drew @spencer

EdwardJCornwell , 8 months ago

@lack
And even if you built your detector, the concept of colour still wouldn't have any meaning to you (you'd even need what would amount to extrasensory perception to verify your findings), all you'd be able to say is that there are two readings.
@msteenhagen @cbontenbal @philosophy @philippsteinkrueger @Drew @spencer

EdwardJCornwell , 8 months ago

@SusanHR You are confusing the concept of god with the concept religion. The question of the existence of a god or gods is separate to the concept of a religion, which is a social power structure.
@tetranomos @lack @msteenhagen @Drew @philippsteinkrueger @spencer @cbontenbal @philosophy

EdwardJCornwell , 8 months ago

@SusanHR Why would you accept 'I think therefore I am'? The existence of a thought doesn't prove anything either way about the existence of a thinker.

[email protected] @msteenhagen @Drew @philippsteinkrueger @spencer @cbontenbal @philosophy

EdwardJCornwell , 8 months ago

@lack assuming the existence of an external world doesn't do much to prove its existence though? Acknowledging the fact of its unprovability is a step in the right direction. @msteenhagen @Drew @philippsteinkrueger @spencer @cbontenbal @philosophy