I just feel like injecting here: having higher intelligence does not equate to being more or highly evolved. Evolution has no goal, and intelligence is merely one type of specialization. We value it especially, because it is, after all, OUR speciality. To a cheetah on the other hand, which values speed, we are slow and clumsy. How evolved we are can only be measured in how well we are adapted to our environment. One could make a good case for cockroaches being more evolved than us.
interesting conversation and you make great points. I'm not sure all those who believe in God etc. are trying to convince those who do not. Also, not everyone's thoughts of God are the same... unless "Love" is the underlying definition. I will have to go out and look at the video you were responding too and see what that is about. Enjoyed your discussion 5*
They are prophets they hear voices all the time the god is speaking with them lol.
Christians are very funny believing in God and his "son" Jesus who had some powers like walking on water lol Chris Angel also walks on water and can teleport anywhere also he can float and walk throu walls does that means he is gods son? No he is a magician nothing more.
If you want to prove me wrong, prove the supremacy of the human perspective,which you can't without using circular logic. The fact that you cannot prove the supremacy of the human perspective without begging the question is part of the reason I find it more reliable to depend on an entity whose perspective is supreme BY VERY DEFINITION...aka God.
you believe in an entity that you have no proof in, but yet you can plainly see that on this earth man is the highest evolved creature. proveing the supremacy of the human perspective, well thats why i am an atheist because there has not been proof of anything otherwise, its not me just denying the existance of anything greater, science proves that there is nothing out there, you know how the null hypothesis works so you should see that it is being applyed here: before you run ur tests u assume
I'm not saying that atheists are necessary wrong;I'm stating that the high value atheists place on man's position in the world prevents them from stating they are arguing the null. To truly argue the null, you would have to begin by doubting the supremacy of the human perspective.I doubt this supremacy, because I don't have enough faith to believe that,in the context of the universe,man is enough to validate his own existence.So God's existence is necessary before my existence.
god but in our eyes he does not exist. thats why you dont understand it, you may say that 'mans observation alone is not good enough' but its the best observation that we have, that is as good as it gets because in an atheist's eyes man's observation is the highest degree. and again you cant doubt the supremacy of humans because the facts disprove it already the samething i said in the video. and you say that you dont have enough faith to believe man is enough to validate his on existence but
My argument from a Christian standpoint is that man's observation alone is not enough to determine the nature of the world.You as an atheist (especially in seeing men as having the authority to make God's existence valid or invalid) state that man's observation alone is enough to determine the nature of the world.When you state that man's observation alone is enough to determine the nature of the world,you aren't arguing the null;you're starting with the concept that man's viewpoint is supreme.
"man's observation alone is not enought..." ok heres the thing with that, there is no other view point to get but mans view point. and again your not looking at this from an atheist's perspective, you see it as us having the authority to make ur gods existance valid or invalid, we dont see it like that. you cant look at atheistic views from a christian stand point because that leaves u not understanding how we see the world, you speak as if we know god exsits and we are just choosing to reject
And if you aren't a Muslim you can't fully understand a Muslim. If you aren't a Buddhist you can't fully understand a Buddhist. Etc. Etc. That's obvious. But that in no way means that these religions aren't open to questioning and *GASP* criticism.
Carl Sagon say it best, "You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep seated need to believe"
any evidence leading toward god existing has been discredited long ago. they dont realize that ANY scientist would be THE most famous mutherfucker EVER if they could show ANY evidence of god. to me, its funny and sad at the same time.
I just feel like injecting here: having higher intelligence does not equate to being more or highly evolved. Evolution has no goal, and intelligence is merely one type of specialization. We value it especially, because it is, after all, OUR speciality. To a cheetah on the other hand, which values speed, we are slow and clumsy. How evolved we are can only be measured in how well we are adapted to our environment. One could make a good case for cockroaches being more evolved than us.
Gilmaris 3 years ago
interesting conversation and you make great points. I'm not sure all those who believe in God etc. are trying to convince those who do not. Also, not everyone's thoughts of God are the same... unless "Love" is the underlying definition. I will have to go out and look at the video you were responding too and see what that is about. Enjoyed your discussion 5*
sillysillytom 3 years ago
thanks
DehumanizeTV 3 years ago
WHy are mentally ill people in assylums?
They are prophets they hear voices all the time the god is speaking with them lol.
Christians are very funny believing in God and his "son" Jesus who had some powers like walking on water lol Chris Angel also walks on water and can teleport anywhere also he can float and walk throu walls does that means he is gods son? No he is a magician nothing more.
PhreakStep 3 years ago
omg so true, you just gave me my next public service announcement! woot, thanks and ill give credit to you for simply bringing it up
DehumanizeTV 3 years ago
If you want to prove me wrong, prove the supremacy of the human perspective,which you can't without using circular logic. The fact that you cannot prove the supremacy of the human perspective without begging the question is part of the reason I find it more reliable to depend on an entity whose perspective is supreme BY VERY DEFINITION...aka God.
Pedromose 3 years ago
you believe in an entity that you have no proof in, but yet you can plainly see that on this earth man is the highest evolved creature. proveing the supremacy of the human perspective, well thats why i am an atheist because there has not been proof of anything otherwise, its not me just denying the existance of anything greater, science proves that there is nothing out there, you know how the null hypothesis works so you should see that it is being applyed here: before you run ur tests u assume
DehumanizeTV 3 years ago
that nothing is going to change, and as far as i can see, nothing has
DehumanizeTV 3 years ago
I'm not saying that atheists are necessary wrong;I'm stating that the high value atheists place on man's position in the world prevents them from stating they are arguing the null. To truly argue the null, you would have to begin by doubting the supremacy of the human perspective.I doubt this supremacy, because I don't have enough faith to believe that,in the context of the universe,man is enough to validate his own existence.So God's existence is necessary before my existence.
Pedromose 3 years ago
god but in our eyes he does not exist. thats why you dont understand it, you may say that 'mans observation alone is not good enough' but its the best observation that we have, that is as good as it gets because in an atheist's eyes man's observation is the highest degree. and again you cant doubt the supremacy of humans because the facts disprove it already the samething i said in the video. and you say that you dont have enough faith to believe man is enough to validate his on existence but
DehumanizeTV 3 years ago
My argument from a Christian standpoint is that man's observation alone is not enough to determine the nature of the world.You as an atheist (especially in seeing men as having the authority to make God's existence valid or invalid) state that man's observation alone is enough to determine the nature of the world.When you state that man's observation alone is enough to determine the nature of the world,you aren't arguing the null;you're starting with the concept that man's viewpoint is supreme.
Pedromose 3 years ago
"man's observation alone is not enought..." ok heres the thing with that, there is no other view point to get but mans view point. and again your not looking at this from an atheist's perspective, you see it as us having the authority to make ur gods existance valid or invalid, we dont see it like that. you cant look at atheistic views from a christian stand point because that leaves u not understanding how we see the world, you speak as if we know god exsits and we are just choosing to reject
DehumanizeTV 3 years ago
"You can't look at atheistic views froma christian standpoint because that leaves u not understanding how we see the world"
Is it also true that:
You can't look at Christian views from an atheistic standpoint because that leaves u not understanding how we see the world?
Pedromose 3 years ago
if you think its that hard to understand science and fact then i suppose so
DehumanizeTV 3 years ago
And if you aren't a Muslim you can't fully understand a Muslim. If you aren't a Buddhist you can't fully understand a Buddhist. Etc. Etc. That's obvious. But that in no way means that these religions aren't open to questioning and *GASP* criticism.
QregTheBlueMonkey 3 years ago
Carl Sagon say it best, "You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep seated need to believe"
thickblkpa 3 years ago
all evidence leads to god doesn't exist.
zero evidence goes toward god does exist.
any evidence leading toward god existing has been discredited long ago. they dont realize that ANY scientist would be THE most famous mutherfucker EVER if they could show ANY evidence of god. to me, its funny and sad at the same time.
cozmikzen 3 years ago
Well said dude.
h8uall66 3 years ago
thanks
DehumanizeTV 3 years ago
Exactly... Atheists accept reality for what it is, while theists accept fantasy as reality.
Katalyzt
Katalyzt 3 years ago
thanks for the comment and glad you agree
DehumanizeTV 3 years ago