Atheism Part1 (a malleable story of creation)

[hardinmichael1981]

I LOVE your "great mystery" concept.

Preach it, sista!

[HaloBillRod]

The question is are you repeating the blueprints of God, just because he was to the point in the Bible doesn't really mean that he is false! Now science we should love science and the millions of animals they hack up for science of course, we should hail them as our god! The big bang falls in the category of super natural also as the theory says the big bang came from nothing!

[JesusTheOnlyWay777]

You lost me at hello...LOL

[JesusTheOnlyWay777]

Get over yourself!

[GehrimiahThrrapIII]

I think the main question that your comments raise is what is gravity? What powers gravity? Why is gravity?

Real interesting stuff though, love your music.

[waynemccracken]

A bit naive maybe . . ., but for 13 years ago maybe impressive for your age at the time. I was 13 when I had my "epiphany" (my family was methodist).

Also maybe more impressive for SE USA than for a Canadian (a liberal country)

Wayne

Do you read science fiction at all. I just discovered Greg Egan

[Seravat7]

oh wow, yeah, numbers and deuteronomy is where *I* couldn't get past in the bible, also.  It was recommended (by MY godless home) that I read it, just to get a better grasp of English metaphors and idiom.

[TheDesiGirl]

Its very confusing however you look at it because even if you refer to ''the start'' something must have come first or sparked ''the start''? or it would mean something came from nothing at all and whether your athiest or religious there is still no explanation, if God made us who made God? and if it was all down to ''the big bang'' where did anything come from in the first place, something came from nothing at some point, but how?? Thinking about it hurts my brain lol

[hardinmichael1981]

@TheDesiGirl Let's focus on "HOW". If god created the universe and everything else, then HOW? If nature some how creates itself, then HOW?  If everything ultimately came from what at least appears to be nothing, then HOW? "HOW" is a question that at least in principle could be answered someday (perhaps).

[uigrad]

"In Christianity, science is something that is annoying and feared and....."

Whatever do you mean by this? Most of scientific advances that brought us to the modern era came from Christians who were trying to learn more of God and his creation.

Read writings by Kepler, Newton, Pascal, or Boyle, and you'll see that they wrote as much about religion as science.

Many Atheists feel that Christianity has slowed scientific progress, but history shows quite the opposite.

[andsalomoni]

There is no doubt that there have been (and there are) great scientists that were religious. But if we look at the ecclesiastic hierarchies, the matter is quite different. The Church have always tried to eliminate any form of thought and practice that could erode their cultural domination over people.

So, if religious feeling doesn't slow progress, the Catholic Church surely did (Galileo Galilei had to repudiate his discoveries, being menaced of imprisoning or killing by the Catholic Church).

[HaloBillRod]

@uigrad I am a believer in the good Lord and I love science, most of us do!

[hate4uall]

looks like my old cat :)

[djilyaz]

For instance, every cell in your body has a consciousness, and they communicate amongst themselves chemically in a language thousands of times more complex than our speech.

I'm not religious, orthodox religions have become cults, and a way of justifying the oppression, war, murder, of other races/cultures. My religion says I am righteous, and you are not so die! LOL...NOT!!!

[djilyaz]

I appreciate your insight, though I don't agree.

Determinism is basically action reaction, from what I understand, but what was it that caused the first action that eventually became what we know as the universe? What are the odds that the universe happened to take shape like it did?

There had to be an energy applied to the universe for it to take the form it is in. A lot of energy, and a very efficiently distributed.

[D0x2f]

"What are the odds that the universe happened to take shape like it did?" What a stupid question, who cares what the odds are it obviously happened, and the answer to that question according to determinism is that it was a 100% chance... because it was always going to happen that way no matter what.

[djilyaz]

Why is this a stupid question? An Atheist would say that everything is just random.

You could flip a coin, and the probability of it being heads is 50%, Just because it came out heads once doesn't mean that the second time around it's a 100%. That's illogical.

The formation of the universe is more complex than a coin flip.

Probabilities of things happening the way they are is in nature is unlikely. Unless of course their is energy and intent. That energy and intent is ...............?????

[miselaineeous]

Are you asking, "What caused the first cause?"

That's really my whole point. It's beyond our ability to ASK. It's part of "The Great Mystery". It gives us something to be curious and motivated about! :) The word "caused" is past tense, implying that time is involved, yet "What caused the first cuase" is attempting to ask what happened BEFORE TIME EXISTED. We can't fathom the question itself.

Don't plug that gap with "god". Plug it with curiosity.

I also agree with D0x2f. ;)

[djilyaz]

To clarify, the coin flip analogy.

If I flip the coin and let it land, the probability is 50%.

If I physically place the coin(energy) in the heads position(intent). The probability is 100%.

Miselaineeous, wanna go for some tea and talk philosophy? I'm in NY.

[D0x2f]

Determinism posits that there is no such thing as true random, and that a flip of a coin is "determined" by the current state of its environment and could perhaps be calculated before the coin landed.

(continued in next post)

[D0x2f]

If the coin was flipped again it would be affected by a new set of factors and the outcome would be different. But if we went back in time to before the first flip and let it all play out again, determinism says that the outcome will not change because the environment and all factors of force are the same as before.

[djilyaz]

So you are saying that there is no intelligent design in the universe, I say there is.

Also, do you think selflessness, compassion, benevolence, are irrational.

If you are more powerful than the person next to you kill that person, take his/her resources.

Rape would be justifiable, you need to plant your seeds, pass on your genes, a womans consent is just an obstacle.

The only thing stopping you from committing the most heinous crimes is fear of the punishment from society.

[djilyaz]

Laws and religion is only around to keep people who lack decency, compassion, spirituality, in line.

If you need a law, or a scripture, fear of punishment "hell", to tell you it's wrong to kill, rape, steal, there is something very wrong.

It's really ironc that the athiests, determinists, evolutionists, who oppose reliogion the most, are the main justification to why we need religion, and law. The law is powerful, and godless people only fear power.

Kill a nation Native Americans, god willed it

[D0x2f]

Hey, I'm not saying that religion is a bad thing, simply that it is false. And I can easily imagine a better world without religion, but I can more easily imagine a worse one. The functioning of society is besides the point. I believe that there is no god, society be damned.

[D0x2f]

Yep that's exactly what I believe.

[miselaineeous]

djilyaz - What you're describing is just a semantics issue. It depends on what level you're talking about.

We say the "probability is 50%" simply because we cannot know the outcome until the coin settles down. This use of the term "probability" is only in relation to our limited human conscious perception. Of course if we knowingly place the coin a certain way, we say "the probability is 100%".

It's a statistical use of the word and not referring to a deeper level of cause-effect.

[djilyaz]

Events occurring in nature the way they happen is unlikely unless there is a deliberate force guiding it. You call it "the great mystery", and I like that description. I'd call it the "great intelligence".

You say you are an Athiest, but your views are actually Islamic. If you strip away all the messed up arabic culture. islam encourages science and the study of nature. "the great mystery" is actually one of the names of allah in the koran. The freemasons refer to god as "the great architect".

[miselaineeous]

djilyaz, you're missing the point though. What I refer to as "the great mystery" isn't merely "what we don't understand yet". Humanizing it as an architect, or "great intelligence" is something else altogether.

[djilyaz]

I agree humanizing god, is wrong.

BTW, I think I'm jealeous of your cat. :)

[miselaineeous]

Wait, I typed that wrong though. I meant to say: What I refer to as "the great mystery" IS merely "what we don't understand yet".

[emontyj]

In conclusion, Man worships himself.

All the old testiment of the bible is, is a list of ancenstry. It became a sacred document because everyone worshipped their ancestors for leaving them with great inheritance.

However; there were people who did not have great inheritance. Sooo..

The new testiment was a very popular 'great equalizer' in which rich and poor, good and bad, all end up in heaven in the afterlife.

This idea really made people happy, so it's the most popular religion today.

[emontyj]

I decided to post so that you can understand what god is. It is a mild case of schizophrenia, which everyone has, like a good and bad angel in their head.

What causes people to hear voices in their head is; when brainwaves cross synapses between left and right hemisphere of the brain, (concious thought).

So when you talk to yourself, in your head, the voice of logic and reason, is god.

And the people who study religion, in depth, for their entire lives, conclude:

God is MAN.(or woman)

[emontyj]

Science and religion used to be very close. Even recently, the journey to land on the moon was backed by those who said 'in god we trust'.

Anyway miselaineeous, I like your response to trustyshellback. He/she is making the mistake of assuming that his/her opinion of god is universally known and accepted.

I spent a year with a bible thumper room mate who was constantly trying to make me understand the concept of god, while I attempted to explain that it was only a psychological construct.

[Nodalthree]

And you are correct in the perception of the finite.

Every elementary particle acts and interacts according to it nature flawlessly. it is only our self-relative conceived finite perceptions that abstractly states otherwise. What we perceive as flaws are actually alternate vectors contrary to our perception of what we think should be or what we desire relative to ourselves. (from the book I am trying to write, yes the monkey is trying to write a book why there are 360 degrees in a circle).

[miselaineeous]

I don't remember how this relates to my video (and I don't feel like watching myself again. :) ... but it just seems like you're saying that Nature flawlessly follows her own laws, and things like my perception of Nature as being "female" may be flawed because it is merely my higher level abstraction of Nature which may be contrary to someone else's higher level abstraction of Nature. (No, I don't really perceive nature as being female. That was just an example). In other words -- I hear ya.

[Nodalthree]

The Absolute of Reality is Existence.

You were quite correct or as correct as one can be when you stated that you did not understand the question.

in that -

The finite cannot comprehend the Infinite.

Let me say abstractly, I can not say exactly, what I mean.

In the attempt to explain you divide the whole of reality and reality becomes abstract and abstractions often lead away from Utopia. The truth of reality Existence is Utopia.

Simple comparisons can destroy the greatest beliefs

[miselaineeous]

The idea of Utopia seems like an oxymoron.

It means a place of perfection, yet I cannot imagine a perfect place. If we understood everything, it may seem perfect to you, but would be torture for me to be devoid of curiosity. If we didn't understand everything, then you surely would not think it was perfect.

[TrustyShellback]

The fool says in his heart, "There is no God." [Psalm 14:1 and Psalm 53:1 NIV]

Lift your eyes and look to the heavens: Who created all these? [Isaiah 40:26 NIV]

Cursed is the one who trusts in man, who depends on flesh for his strength and whose heart turns away from the LORD. [Jeremiah 17:5 NIV]

[miselaineeous]

Trusty, my friend, I will just keep repeating this until you understand that I do not understand:

I don't say "There is no God."

I say, "Please define God. I have no idea what you are talking about when you keep referring to 'God'."

I lift my eyes to the skies all the time. I am both amazed and curious! It is a wonderful journey to be curious.

I'm not turning away from a LORD. I have no idea what a "LORD" is. Can you please also define LORD? :)

[TrustyShellback]

Without a personal relationship with God, you will experience a persistent sense of profound loneliness. If you don't love God, then you will feel a discordant sense of futility. Without God, life is "Utterly meaningless! Everything is meaningless." [Ecclesiastes 1:2 NIV]

[miselaineeous]

trustyshellback - but I don't even understand the definition of "God", let alone have any relationship with God, and I do not "experience a persistent sense of profound loneliness". I do not "feel a discordant sense of futility" and I do see great meaning in life.

So, speak for yourself, Ecclesiastes! ;-)

[TrustyShellback]

"ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE IS NOT EVIDENCE OF ABSENCE." This quotation was uttered by a NASA scientist in regard to the search for intelligent life. But it can be applied also to the search for the ultimate form of intelligent life: God.

[miselaineeous]

trustyshellback - No it can't because "God" cannot be defined. There is nothing to find evidence for, if we don't know what to look for. That is a huge difference that you are overlooking.

[playgrrrr]

also, to put it with the words of sam harris, atheism is not a thing in the same way a-racism is nothing we need an extra club to be in for. 'atheist meetings' sounds so wrong to me. id be really happy if you would take a little time and listen to some of the videos in my profile (the ones of sam harris in particular, on that matter, but theres always more).

thank you for sharing your thoughts through these videos, im gonna continue watching.

[miselaineeous]

Also true.. I certainly don't "need" atheist meetings. Other people may, but in the same way an alcoholic needs support meetings when they're getting alcohol out of their lives. For me to see this in action is just interesting, to say the least. I think it's good for them to meet people who never had a god addiction to begin with.

[playgrrrr]

if you put it this way it looks like it makes some sense. i never thought of religion as sth like an addiction, although the effects it has on some can be very similar. helping people out through such meetings doesnt sound wrong. but i always thought believing or not is more like a decision you reach. much like how you decide other things, after careful evaluation of a number of factors. maybe its hard for me to see it that way because im not used to "irrational" thinking. thank u 4 the replies.

[playgrrrr]

dont call it a godless family. even if its practically the truth, "godless" implies that you were lacking a god.. which is not true. god is not there. but were not lacking him. its more like -believers- lack something. not believing should be the natural state. :|

[miselaineeous]

Yes, very true. I tend to use language that "god fearing" people can understand. There isn't much need to speak about this stuff to other atheists except when we're figuring out how to communicate with religious folks.. know what I mean? Plus, I think when I say "godless home", I'm saying it sorta tongue in cheek. I can have a very dry sense of humor that people don't usually get at first.

[playgrrrr]

lol haha, now that made me laugh (for real) ^^. i like to play with words like that, too, and im often sarcastic. :D

[hosehead29]

i dont see how you would side with a sothern who beleaves in catholisisum..... you seem like your fighting both fronts by saying one thing then sideing with the other side?

[miselaineeous]

What are you talking about? Who's a southern who believes in catholicism? Oh, I've seen you comment on Burnvictim77's videos. He's NOT southern, nor is he Catholic. You must have seen some of his JOKE SATIRE movies with his fake southern accent and taken them seriously. Really??? You've got to be kidding me.

[Sawa137]

beautiful face, beautiful mind...

[killerbandit]

Please marry me.

[yeowyeowyeow]

jesus loves you

[killerbandit]

She is free from your jesus.

[xawesomexelix]

Well I'm an atheist, but I can understand how some atheists are assholes. With me, I side with socrates. I only know that I do not know. I choose to side with logic and reasoning, but who knows, maybe god exists and he's a total asshole hahah. who knows. maybe god is a manmade metaphor for the universe. i just choose not to use faith

[miselaineeous]

amen. ;-)

[TrustyShellback]

"The universe is not stranger than we imagine, it is stranger than we CAN imagine." [NASA: unidentified astronomer]

"There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know." [Donald Rumsfeld]

WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WE DON'T KNOW.

God:

ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE

IS NOT

EVIDENCE OF ABSENCE

[mjdoyza]

Your a lot smarter than you first appear, and thats's a whole lot better than appearing smarter than what you are.

[miselaineeous]

yep.. I use that to my advantage sometimes.. when talking my way out of a ticket and such. lol

[mjdoyza]

And thanks for some thought provoking discussion (with others) on this page. Dont get mad, but for me its better than the vids:)

I'm a typical lazy armchair philosopher but I wikied a few of the philosophical concepts on this page and actually learnt something.

[miselaineeous]

Actually, I'm glad you appreciate my text responses. I sometimes feel like everything on here should be a video response, and I feel bad if I get lazy and just type instead of doing video responses. But like most people it's easier for me to type in coherent sentences than it is to "wing it" on video. :)

[jinitron]

If you've never read the bible, try googling and paste in SkepticsAnnotatedBible

Notated for your convenience.

[firstritestelevision]

God is Love

[miselaineeous]

Do you mean that God is merely a word you use to describe of the feeling that we call "love"?

Or that God passes him/herself through our bodies and changes our chemical balance at opportune moments causing us to have a feeling that we call "love"?

I'm sorry.. it's just that "God is Love" is a bit vague. If we're going to discuss things, let's really COMMUNICATE. :)

[firstritestelevision]

prove that stars are random and then you can prove that there is no heaven. prove that geometry is from man and not from the stars. prove that physical matter is physical and not vibrational...and to top it off figure out how dna is 1 billion times perfect. i never really met a cool atheist but there's hope. every single facet of every single thing any one has ever known is a result of One.

[miselaineeous]

hello firstritestelevision. I would like for you to actually re-think your question.

I believe nothing is random other than perhaps quantum fluctuations which I am far from understanding. (yes, I believe we live in a deterministic universe.) I would love for you to read up on chaos theory just a bit - perhaps I can find a good source for you to read. It explains a lot about how similar-patterns on different scales can emerge from a whole lotta nuthin.

[firstritestelevision]

chaos theory is ok i know they replaced it with complexity. anyhow it really depends on if you think you can come to fact and truth or everything is relativist...because i believe you can prove things to be true and can prove things and then nothing is subjectively important

[miselaineeous]

Chaos theory is actually a subset of complexity..

firstritestelevision, can you please type in complete sentences so that I can follow what you're saying?

What I gather that you mean is that IF we can prove things to be true/false, then nothing is subjectively important.

I thought that your religion dictates that things are true/false, good/evil, etc. If you DO believe things are relative, then we are partially in agreement, but certainly SOME things can be shown to be true or false.

???

[miselaineeous]

I also do not think that humans invented geometry, but more so that we discovered it and only invented our own language to describe it.

Now, if you want to say that God is math, my ears might perk up! :)

[miselaineeous]

I also believe that physical matter IS vibrational. I read about string theory quite a bit.

As for DNA, I haven't read enough about it to speak intelligently! But I will say that just because we don't understand a piece of the puzzle doesn't mean we need to lose "faith" that we will eventually find an explanation. To just explain-it-away with God not only takes away from the excitement, but leaves us with just one more big mystery to solve. --What is God?--

[burnvictim77]

Prove that monkeys aren't from Darwin. Prove that the moon isn't made of Green Cheese. Prove that a milliards and billiards of DNA that cause retardation aren't from God.

[LordMalice6d9]

The only reason, you say you've never meet a "cool" atheist before is becuase you atuomatically have biased view on them and think they are all the same. You turn a blind eye on them and think are all close-minded anti-intellectuals.

Its actually quite the opposite, they are so intelligent that they need proof and evidence to come a conclusion that there is a god instead of merely spirituality and faith.

[firstritestelevision]

well there you go bringing up religious issues whether or not someone is cool...i really dont think its about that. i think cool people aren't so obsessed with religious issues. i'm talking about something else so dont freak out ya fukin bigot

[LordMalice6d9]

Sorry, please pardon my brashness, I jumped to conclusions which makes me no different than certain other impulsive people. Its just that I have encountered before alot of religous people who atuomatically jump to conclusions and judge people just becuase of other beliefs that other people have escpecially toward Atheists. I think that that is not right, everyones beliefs should be respected despite the conflictions

It's obvious to me that we live in a diverse world for a reason

[stevesincali]

I felt like you were just getting warmed up and then the video ended - WTF?

Thought the Sunday gatherings of people talking about "the mystery" was a neat idea, though. I'm really looking forward to the rest of this series.

Something very hypnotic about the way you speak, too, or the way your ideas flow. Hard to describe. Love the sense of awe that comes through; the passion for ideas, clarity and truth is inspiring.

Anyway, thank you for this Elaine and looking forward to the next one!

[miselaineeous]

I WAS just getting warmed up, but the 10 minute youtube limit was up and that's all I had time to upload before i passed out.. I can't do these every day, but I'll get to the next part when I have the time and am mentally with it. glad to hear there are people impatiently waiting though! that is inspiration.

[CousinoMacul]

I love philosophy, but I hate philosophers! :-P

[miselaineeous]

LOL

[burnvictim77]

You liked the word "incipient" back then!

[miselaineeous]

lol.. i only say it twice... right?

[burnvictim77]

That's two times too many!

[miselaineeous]

hey! what did "incipient" ever do to YOU?

[gremlinn7]

I'd love to hear more Singularity discussion. Consciousness and engineered longevity are great starting points. That could lead into topics on AI and transhumanism.  Maybe keep the philosophy going thinking about ultimate teleology in the universe. Bring on the futurism!

[miselaineeous]

I will definitely talk about all of this...a lot.. except the singularity. I've been a futurist and an "extropian" for 16 years, but i'm not a singulitarian.. :)

[thinkeatingmachine]

I like the "I don't understand the question" bit. Are you going to name the title of the book "Miselaineeous Philosophy"? Looking forward to seeing more videos! As for"There is some great mystery to the Universe", I share Einsteins view when he says "The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious." I wonder if we find out what the mystery is whether or not we would find the universe to be so beautiful. Did I just defend ignorance? Dammit. I might as well just stop now. ; )

[miselaineeous]

Miselaineeous Philosophy! now that's an idea! lol. i've been struggling over a title. :D

[bitbutter]

"I wonder if we find out what the mystery is whether or not we would find the universe to be so beautiful. "

I think so. Dawkins makes a great case that we would, perhaps even more so for understanding it better, in 'unweaving the rainbow'.

[bitbutter]

"I don't understand the question" a really good answer.

You seem like the kind of person who'd have an opinion on Kurzweil's writings. Are you planning to talk about his ideas at all? eg. the singularity ("the Rapture for nerds" haha)

[miselaineeous]

I've always rejected the idea of a singularity.. at least in the time frame people always talk about it in.. as if it's right around the corner. And as much as I WANT to be a Kurzweil fan (I have a k2000 synth, and i met him.. he's really nice) I made the mistake of waiting until AFTER I read On Intelligence (a very up-to-date book on brains) to read Spiritual Machines. I couldn't get past chapter 1 cuz it seemed so outdated - neural net this, neural net that. I promise to try again though!! :)

[bitbutter]

As far as i can tell, 'The Singularity is Near' is up to date in the research it talks about (as far as i can tell).

I really enjoyed the essays in 'Are we spiritual machines?', kurzweil pwns a selection of creationists and AI skeptics. But I was saddened when i figured out that i had bought a book published by the discovery institute :(

[miselaineeous]

published by DI? weird! Well, I do need to read his books.. so many people want to talk with me about his stuff, mainly the singularity. It's something I've never given more than 5 minutes of thought. I just should have read it years ago, instead of trying to swallow it now, in 2008. Or maybe I should buy his newest book and read that first??

[bitbutter]

"Or maybe I should buy his newest book and read that first?"

I reckon you can get a pretty good feel for what his big ideas are, and for the the main lines of evidence supporting his predictions, by reading through a few online articles. I should be honest: His new book sometimes goes into more detail about the support for his hypothesis than I have the patience for :)