Proposal: Can Atheism refute Theism? Atheists to attack, Theists to rebut.

Val · Post by **Val** » Fri Jan 29, 2016 7:40 pm

Anyway, before y'all get bored and wander off, my submission is in, just waiting for Jobar to wipe the sleep from his eyes and work his magic

praxis · Post by **praxis** » Fri Jan 29, 2016 7:40 pm

[quote=""R. Soul""]It's for my benefit apparently. Very benevolent, a whole eight of them before I'm disqualified.

What he doesn't know, 8 is the number of Khorne.

[/quote]Yeah, well, with you it's no holes barred.

subsymbolic · Post by **subsymbolic** » Fri Jan 29, 2016 7:52 pm

[quote=""praxis""]

R. Soul;623825 wrote:It's for my benefit apparently. Very benevolent, a whole eight of them before I'm disqualified.

What he doesn't know, 8 is the number of Khorne.

Yeah, well, with you it's no holes barred.[/QUOTE]

But several bared.

Val · Post by **Val** » Fri Jan 29, 2016 7:55 pm

Well, you will just have to wait and see. I did take my pills but no guarantees.

subsymbolic · Post by **subsymbolic** » Fri Jan 29, 2016 11:25 pm

[quote=""R. Soul""]Well, you will just have to wait and see. I did take my pills but no guarantees.[/quote]

I hope you will be providing logical notation (and holding your interlocutor to the same standard) apparently you can do it using Wikipedia...

Politically Correct · Post by **Politically Correct** » Sat Jan 30, 2016 2:32 am

Right where's the debate?

My opening post PMed to DMB.

Aupmanyav · Post by **Aupmanyav** » Sat Jan 30, 2016 3:08 am

[quote=""Politically Correct""]Thus, we are a finite illusion within infinite resource. God's absolute control over us, his being worth of worship, and his appreciation of our worship while he doesn't even need it, all stems from that model (we being a finite illusion within the infinite energy of God), because what do you give the one that has everything? Quality, not quantity, i.e. worship, love.

It is also implicit that there is nothing but God, before the universe and ever since the universe came about, so what is the purpose of it all? I don't know, maybe it's just a random thought of God to himself, perhaps self appreciation.[/quote]PC, what you are describing is the 'advaita' philosophy of Hinduism. Now 'advaita' comes in two flavors. One which considers Brahman (the infinite) as God, personal (Saguna Brahman, Brahman with attributes); and the other which considers it impersonal (Nirguna Brahman, Brahman without attributes, as yet undeciphered). I follow the latter variety. Being an atheist, do not feel the need to insert a personal God. That way things are easier. Yes, it is implicit that there is nothing other than that infinite, and it has been mentioned in our books over and over again. These are known as 'Mahavakyas' (Greatest Sayings):

- Chandogya Upanishad, SamaVeda: Tat twam asi (You are that).
- Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, Yajurveda: Aham Brahmasmi (I asm Brahman)
- Ishavasya Upanishad, YajurVeda: Sa Aham (I am it)
- Mandukya Upanishad, AtharvaVeda: Ayamatma Brahman (This self is Brahman)
- Mundaka Upanishad, AtharvaVeda: Sarvam Khalu Idam Brahman (All things here are Brahman)

It seems there is nothing new under the sun. As for the purpose, the reason why we are here, we need to know how did we arrive here? That is not known and it does not help to arrive at conclusions. Leave that for the future generations who will know more than us about it - as to whether the universe is eternal or it arose from 'absolute nothing'.

Val · Post by **Val** » Sat Jan 30, 2016 3:16 am

[quote=""Politically Correct""]Right where's the debate?

My opening post PMed to DMB.[/quote]

Erm..... it doesn't work that way.

Val · Post by **Val** » Sat Jan 30, 2016 3:27 am

[quote=""subsymbolic""]

R. Soul;623829 wrote:Well, you will just have to wait and see. I did take my pills but no guarantees.

I hope you will be providing logical notation (and holding your interlocutor to the same standard) apparently you can do it using Wikipedia...[/QUOTE]

You know full well I know fuck all about logic, why are you giving me a hard time!!!!!!!!

Wizofoz · Post by **Wizofoz** » Sat Jan 30, 2016 5:19 am

[quote=""Politically Correct""]Thus, we are a finite illusion within infinite resource. God's absolute control over us, his being worth of worship, and his appreciation of our worship while he doesn't even need it, all stems from that model (we being a finite illusion within the infinite energy of God), because what do you give the one that has everything? Quality, not quantity, i.e. worship, love.

It is also implicit that there is nothing but God, before the universe and ever since the universe came about, so what is the purpose of it all? I don't know, maybe it's just a random thought of God to himself, perhaps self appreciation.[/quote]

Oh Yum!

I DO love word salad!!!

Politically Correct · Post by **Politically Correct** » Sat Jan 30, 2016 7:00 am

[quote=""Wizofoz""]

Oh Yum!

I DO love word salad!!![/quote]

Yeah it's kinda vinegary isn't it!

Zips flies and edges away from Wiz's denture glass.

Politically Correct · Post by **Politically Correct** » Sat Jan 30, 2016 7:09 am

[quote=""R. Soul""]Erm..... it doesn't work that way.[/quote]

I don't know how these debates are set up, but it seems like there's a lot of militant Atheists here that would rather not debate at all.

Therefore l propose we go right here and everyone else hold back and let it roll. Post your OP here.

[quote=""Aupmanyav""]PC, what you are describing is the 'advaita' philosophy of Hinduism. Now 'advaita' comes in two flavors. One which considers Brahman (the infinite) as God, personal (Saguna Brahman, Brahman with attributes); and the other which considers it impersonal (Nirguna Brahman, Brahman without attributes, as yet undeciphered). I follow the latter variety. Being an atheist, do not feel the need to insert a personal God. That way things are easier.[/quote]

Hello again.

I think what you're desribing is the world of infinite potential, e.g. like all possible numbers, they don't have a physical reality, but they have a conceptual reality.

[quote=""Aupmanyav""]'Mahavakyas' (Greatest Sayings):

- Chandogya Upanishad, SamaVeda: Tat twam asi (You are that).
- Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, Yajurveda: Aham Brahmasmi (I asm Brahman)
- Ishavasya Upanishad, YajurVeda: Sa Aham (I am it)
- Mandukya Upanishad, AtharvaVeda: Ayamatma Brahman (This self is Brahman)
- Mundaka Upanishad, AtharvaVeda: Sarvam Khalu Idam Brahman (All things here are Brahman)[/quote]

This seems like the various stages of witnessing, from hearing there's a fire in the woods, then seeing the fire, then being touched by the fire, then being the fire.

I guess it has relevance in interdimensional travel, l'm picturing something like the end of 2001: A Space Odyssey (Kubrick was into eastern mysticism l think), where David Bowman sees the portal, touches the portal, enters the portal, then enters a new reality, and then emerges as part of that new reality (the starchild at the end).

[quote=""Aupmanyav""]as to whether the universe is eternal or it arose from 'absolute nothing'.[/quote]

I had hoped to cover this in my part of this debate ...

Val · Post by **Val** » Sat Jan 30, 2016 7:14 am

Have some respect for the moderator who is sacrificing his personal time to set up this debate, will ya?

Politically Correct · Post by **Politically Correct** » Sat Jan 30, 2016 7:24 am

[quote=""R. Soul""]Have some respect for the moderator who is sacrificing his personal time to set up this debate, will ya?[/quote]

Probably asking too much, but please don't piss your pants. And respect is fine coming from you, lmao.

What is the procedure? I've been told nothing about it. In my experience, these debates get muffled by the type of heckling that has occurred on this thread already (you're telling me to show respect? lo at you).

Val · Post by **Val** » Sat Jan 30, 2016 7:28 am

Oh, when someone gets respect from me, it's of the deep and profound sort. You'll be the first to know when you manage to earn some.

ETA: you wanted a thrust and parry session, with you to rebut, no? So hold yer horses and wait for my opening arguments, then you can knock yourself out.

Politically Correct · Post by **Politically Correct** » Sat Jan 30, 2016 7:29 am

I reckon you're being sarcastic from now on, talking about you earning my respect. LOL!

subsymbolic · Post by **subsymbolic** » Sat Jan 30, 2016 7:43 am

[quote=""R. Soul""]

subsymbolic;623845 wrote:
R. Soul;623829 wrote:Well, you will just have to wait and see. I did take my pills but no guarantees.
I hope you will be providing logical notation (and holding your interlocutor to the same standard) apparently you can do it using Wikipedia...

You know full well I know fuck all about logic, why are you giving me a hard time!!!!!!!!

[/QUOTE]

Sorry, my bad, musical notation. It must be hard being a Rhodesian piano tuner's mate.

Val · Post by **Val** » Sat Jan 30, 2016 7:44 am

Eh? I dont give two shits about what you think about me. You're a nil on a contract as far as I'm concerned until you demonstrate otherwise, and you shall have the opportunity to attempt exactly that in our debate.

Val · Post by **Val** » Sat Jan 30, 2016 7:45 am

[quote=""subsymbolic""]

R. Soul;623853 wrote:
subsymbolic;623845 wrote:
R. Soul;623829 wrote:Well, you will just have to wait and see. I did take my pills but no guarantees.
I hope you will be providing logical notation (and holding your interlocutor to the same standard) apparently you can do it using Wikipedia...
You know full well I know fuck all about logic, why are you giving me a hard time!!!!!!!!

Sorry, my bad, musical notation. It must be hard being a Rhodesian piano tuner's mate.[/QUOTE]

It's all the fucking ivory dust. It attracts chinese woo peddlers.

subsymbolic · Post by **subsymbolic** » Sat Jan 30, 2016 7:58 am

[quote=""R. Soul""]

subsymbolic;623876 wrote:
R. Soul;623853 wrote:
subsymbolic;623845 wrote:
I hope you will be providing logical notation (and holding your interlocutor to the same standard) apparently you can do it using Wikipedia...
You know full well I know fuck all about logic, why are you giving me a hard time!!!!!!!!
Sorry, my bad, musical notation. It must be hard being a Rhodesian piano tuner's mate.

It's all the fucking ivory dust. It attracts chinese woo peddlers.[/QUOTE]

They are just trying to clean up your fucking mess:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5wbImAzUUk

Val · Post by **Val** » Sat Jan 30, 2016 8:02 am

Bollocks. The results of my coproballistics remain deliberately fenestrated as a means to protect my privacy.

Aupmanyav · Post by **Aupmanyav** » Sat Jan 30, 2016 8:33 am

[quote=""Politically Correct""]I think what you're describing is the world of infinite potential, e.g. like all possible numbers, they don't have a physical reality, but they have a conceptual reality.[/quote]Reality is very confusing. What is physical and what is not physical? Is the ray of light physical or non-physical. A sub-atomic particle, substance or a blob of energy, wave or particle? In India, we treat reality in a quantum way - 'maya', anicca', 'anatta', 'illusion', etc.

subsymbolic · Post by **subsymbolic** » Sat Jan 30, 2016 8:46 am

[quote=""Aupmanyav""]

Politically Correct;623863 wrote:I think what you're describing is the world of infinite potential, e.g. like all possible numbers, they don't have a physical reality, but they have a conceptual reality.

Reality is very confusing. What is physical and what is not physical? Is the ray of light physical or non-physical. A sub-atomic particle, substance or a blob of energy, wave or particle? In East, we treat reality in a quantum way - 'maya', anicca', 'anatta', 'mithya', etc.[/QUOTE]

A ray of light is physical. Wave or particle, matter or energy, it's all physical. Ask Ozy.

It's conflating physical stuff with spirit stuff that causes the confusion; energy isn't spiritual.

subsymbolic · Post by **subsymbolic** » Sat Jan 30, 2016 8:47 am

[quote=""R. Soul""]Bollocks. The results of my coproballistics remain deliberately fenestrated as a means to protect my privacy.[/quote]

We know what you are up to in there:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3iermyP1TU

Val · Post by **Val** » Sat Jan 30, 2016 8:54 am

He drew a smiley jesus face! Beautiful fine tuning by god!