Naturalism (Atheism) is Irrational 6 of 6 apologetics

THE OTHER SIDE :metaphysics and meaning a paper by russell manion ,
a conversation between a garden variety pop naturalist vs. a real but rare pure naturalist

Here is a transcript to this video, the article my Russel Manion.

http://home.earthlink.net/~gbl111/other.htm




here is a link to the Radio apologia audio archive , note all of this is difficult material so i recommend Koukls stand to reason for intelligent thinkers then this
radio apologia as a next step , here is the link

http://radioapologia.com/

here is a link to ATHEISM IS DEAD blogspot

http://www.atheismisdead.blogspot.com/

Here is a 97 page Class Outline from a 1994 Class on INTRODUCTION TO METAPHYSICS taught by J.P. Morleland.

http://64.233.167.104/custom?q=cache:_WM5PpIsX7oJ:www.str.org/site/DocServer/...

heres the PETER SINGER articel at wikipeida

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Singer

Here is a 2 page paper on Darwinism and Morality and murder.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/science/biology_evolution/article690525...



Here is my own personal web page with many apologetics Links.

http://www.freewebs.com/grandconjunct/

x

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• apologetics
• philosophy
• naturalism
• religion
• epistemology
• metaphysics
• nihilism
• Christianity
• argument
• from
• reason
• evolutionary
• against
• materialism
• physicalism

[grandconjunct]

I just put a link to the Radio apologia audio archive in the ABOUT THIS VIDEO grey box to the right of the video , just click the small blue MORE button , then click links to listen.

[Bluedragon094]

i went through all 6 vids, and i don't quite see the part where atheism is proven irrational. Are you trying to make the point that Atheism is equal to Naturalism? And even deeper, equal to Nihilism? Atheism is simply the disbelief in god or gods, i don't see why it has to have a connection with naturalism/nihilism if this is the point you're making.

[grandconjunct]

all Naturalist are atheists , but not all atheist are naturalists , this video shows the irrationality of believing naturalism . a consistent atheist is then Irrational , and those who believe in non physical metaphysics " the pop recruiters for atheism" also known as "christian atheists" have a metaphysic that suffers from the same critiques they give for god . yes atheists will be offended by this video , "christian atheists " will not .

[grandconjunct]

neil >> Just a fancy way of saying we cannot be 100% sure of anything, so therfore relgion is as valis a science. Weak argument

grand >> thats clearly a dishonest way of summarizing this , Relgious people dont say reason is fallible there atheism is questionable , they say Naturalists have given no good reason to trust a nondesigned material brain that at best only survives via evolution but no reason to believe its designed to find truth , only survive.

[OuroborosChoked]

But you don't know the truth and you can't know the truth. That's kind of what this whole video series demonstrates, especially with this last video. What I mean by that is that the whole paper ends with a grasping at metaphysical straws. Take that part out, and you end with just nihilism.

[spiderpam]

WOW

[dieutombe]

I really don't get the jump from determinism to us lacking knowledge. If knowledge is reliably caused true belief, then determinism is completely consistent with people having knowledge. This video is obviously based on some interalist JTB account of knowledge. Knowledge doesn't need to be based on deontological justification.

[elroy2112]

Who knows you may get angry with one of those sentient robots & "Kill it and be put in prison for life then contemplate if your life had any meaning? But since Humans are just machines made of meat maybe they will figure out how to fix you with a pill or screw driver or something? And release you the next day. If any humans are grieving over the death of the sentient robot we can give them a pill and instantly end the grieving process the same day! The wacky world of Naturalism.

[Alex06CoSonic]

could -> might possibly.

After all, we might succeed in creating sentient robots, eventually...

[Censeo]

You can be consistent and rational even though you believe the world is about six to twelve thousand years old. Though you can't believe in the theory of gravity at the same time because then your world view have conflicting ideas which can't be true at the same time. Then your world view is not consistent.

[Censeo]

All people start with assumptions which are in themselves always irrational, this is not just for atheists. When you make conclusions from assumptions, you are logical. If you have conflicting conclusions, you are even more irrational if you don't discard assumptions to make your world view coherent. The model in your head about the world needs only to be consistent, whatever world view you have, to not be too irrational.

[Area0052]

censeo >>Rationality comes from first being irrational,

Area 52 , Yes Atheism does start with an irrational foundation this is why it ends in irrationality also, despite atheists calling this irrationality end product "rational"

[braino2000]

I don't think naturalists will ever understand that they are failing with every word they say. The fact that we can know truth only points towards the absolute necessity of a God.

[braino2000]

I hope all atheists realize how truely meaningless the naturalist veiw is and the fact that there is NO WAY of making it meaningful. Even if atheism helps humanity "move forward" like they claim, humanity will still be an empty shell. If naturalists get a hold of worldly cultures, human life will eventually be viewed as nothing good or bad at all, humans will be treated like robots, and all they face is death. The naturalist view is simply a disgusting way to look at the world.