Is it possible for atheism to ever be anything more than critical theory?

[ding]

Can you tell me where these things that are not material came from?

Spirits in the material world

Would you say you are a materialist? Specifically that everything in the universe proceeds from material things? Even things like thoughts and beliefs and love and sadness?

I would say you can't get something from nothing no matter how hard you try. Therefore the spiritual comes from the material and not the material coming from the spiritual.

Again I refer you to music. The material composer creates the music that lives on spiritually after the composer materially decomposes. The music did not create the composer.

And that is logically consistent with your belief of atheism.

Do you believe that it is logical for an atheist to believe in anything other than the material world?

Do you believe that all things, including mental aspects and consciousness, are results of material interactions.

 

[edthecynic]

Except that the laws of nature were in place before space and time. Which means that the potential for all of those non-material things you believe in existed before space and time began. Which means that non-material things existed before space and time.

Prove it!

He says it better than I do.

All he does is SPECULATE without proof.
But you knew that already.
There is an actual repeatable experiment that proves energy cannot be created nor destroyed.

 

[edthecynic]

Can you tell me where these things that are not material came from?

Spirits in the material world

Would you say you are a materialist? Specifically that everything in the universe proceeds from material things? Even things like thoughts and beliefs and love and sadness?

I would say you can't get something from nothing no matter how hard you try. Therefore the spiritual comes from the material and not the material coming from the spiritual.

Again I refer you to music. The material composer creates the music that lives on spiritually after the composer materially decomposes. The music did not create the composer.

And that is logically consistent with your belief of atheism.

Do you believe that it is logical for an atheist to believe in anything other than the material world?

Already answered. Why are you playing dumb?

 

[ding]

Except that the laws of nature were in place before space and time. Which means that the potential for all of those non-material things you believe in existed before space and time began. Which means that non-material things existed before space and time.

Prove it!

He says it better than I do.

All he does is SPECULATE without proof.
But you knew that already.
There is an actual repeatable experiment that proves energy cannot be created nor destroyed.

That's all anyone can do, but it makes perfect sense.

Do you believe that all things, including mental aspects and consciousness, are results of material interactions.

 

[ding]

Can you tell me where these things that are not material came from?

Spirits in the material world

Would you say you are a materialist? Specifically that everything in the universe proceeds from material things? Even things like thoughts and beliefs and love and sadness?

I would say you can't get something from nothing no matter how hard you try. Therefore the spiritual comes from the material and not the material coming from the spiritual.

Again I refer you to music. The material composer creates the music that lives on spiritually after the composer materially decomposes. The music did not create the composer.

And that is logically consistent with your belief of atheism.

Do you believe that it is logical for an atheist to believe in anything other than the material world?

Already answered. Why are you playing dumb?

Because I am trying to prove a point and you seem to be the only atheist willing to admit the truth that atheists believe all things, including mental aspects and consciousness, are results of material interactions.

 

[edthecynic]

So you choose to believe there is no creator because why?

Because otherwise I have no idea where you believe these non-material things proceed from if not from something that isn't material.

Which is why I believe you are a materialist.

Your logic only works if you assume there was a beginning to everything. Again, neither of us knows that for a fact.

You can believe what you want. But I am telling you differently. And which of us do you suppose knows me (and my beliefs) better?

Red shift, cosmic background radiation, Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations and the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics confirm there was a beginning.

So I have tons of evidence that points to a beginning.

What evidence do you have that says there wasn't?

And if you have no evidence to believe there was no beginning, why would you choose to believe that when there is tons of evidence to support that there is?

All of those things point to a Big Bang. Which provides scientific evidence that there was no God involved, but a cosmic event that occurred naturally.

And all the matter that was involved in the Big Bang existed before the Big Bang. The best theory I have seen is that the universe is still expanding from the Big Bang. When it stops expanding, it will begin to contract. Eventually, all the matter will come together into one place. The laws of physics say that when this matter reaches a certain mass, the Big Bang will happen again.

Nothing in the numerous things you quoted suggest that the matter and energy was created at the time of the Big Bang. In fact, the 1st Law of Thermodynamics states that energy cannot be created or destroyed.

Except that the laws of nature were in place before space and time. Which means that the potential for all of those non-material things you believe in existed before space and time began. Which means that non-material things existed before space and time.

Why are you back tracking now though? You argued that my belief was based upon an assumption of a beginning, right?

Are you arguing that the universe is infinite acting? That it always existed as in forever? The second law of thermodynamics precludes that. The idea of a cyclical universe is dead for precisely that reason. As time approaches infinity, the universe approaches thermal equilibrium. This we do not see.

"Except that the laws of nature were in place before space and time. Which means that the potential for all of those non-material things you believe in existed before space and time began. Which means that non-material things existed before space and time."

And you know this how?

A little birdie told him.

 

[ding]

Can you tell me where these things that are not material came from?

Spirits in the material world

Would you say you are a materialist? Specifically that everything in the universe proceeds from material things? Even things like thoughts and beliefs and love and sadness?

I would say you can't get something from nothing no matter how hard you try. Therefore the spiritual comes from the material and not the material coming from the spiritual.

Again I refer you to music. The material composer creates the music that lives on spiritually after the composer materially decomposes. The music did not create the composer.

And that is logically consistent with your belief of atheism.

Do you believe that it is logical for an atheist to believe in anything other than the material world?

Already answered. Why are you playing dumb?

Let me ask you this question if I said to you that because you are an atheist you believe in the philosophy of materialism, would it bother you?

 

[ding]

Your logic only works if you assume there was a beginning to everything. Again, neither of us knows that for a fact.

You can believe what you want. But I am telling you differently. And which of us do you suppose knows me (and my beliefs) better?

Red shift, cosmic background radiation, Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations and the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics confirm there was a beginning.

So I have tons of evidence that points to a beginning.

What evidence do you have that says there wasn't?

And if you have no evidence to believe there was no beginning, why would you choose to believe that when there is tons of evidence to support that there is?

All of those things point to a Big Bang. Which provides scientific evidence that there was no God involved, but a cosmic event that occurred naturally.

And all the matter that was involved in the Big Bang existed before the Big Bang. The best theory I have seen is that the universe is still expanding from the Big Bang. When it stops expanding, it will begin to contract. Eventually, all the matter will come together into one place. The laws of physics say that when this matter reaches a certain mass, the Big Bang will happen again.

Nothing in the numerous things you quoted suggest that the matter and energy was created at the time of the Big Bang. In fact, the 1st Law of Thermodynamics states that energy cannot be created or destroyed.

Except that the laws of nature were in place before space and time. Which means that the potential for all of those non-material things you believe in existed before space and time began. Which means that non-material things existed before space and time.

Why are you back tracking now though? You argued that my belief was based upon an assumption of a beginning, right?

Are you arguing that the universe is infinite acting? That it always existed as in forever? The second law of thermodynamics precludes that. The idea of a cyclical universe is dead for precisely that reason. As time approaches infinity, the universe approaches thermal equilibrium. This we do not see.

"Except that the laws of nature were in place before space and time. Which means that the potential for all of those non-material things you believe in existed before space and time began. Which means that non-material things existed before space and time."

And you know this how?

A little birdie told him.

Do you believe that emotions like love are anything other than electrochemical reactions in the brain?

 

[edthecynic]

Spirits in the material world

Would you say you are a materialist? Specifically that everything in the universe proceeds from material things? Even things like thoughts and beliefs and love and sadness?

I would say you can't get something from nothing no matter how hard you try. Therefore the spiritual comes from the material and not the material coming from the spiritual.

Again I refer you to music. The material composer creates the music that lives on spiritually after the composer materially decomposes. The music did not create the composer.

And that is logically consistent with your belief of atheism.

Do you believe that it is logical for an atheist to believe in anything other than the material world?

Already answered. Why are you playing dumb?

Because I am trying to prove a point and you seem to be the only atheist willing to admit the truth that atheists believe all things, including mental aspects and consciousness, are results of material interactions.

I have shown you that the spiritual comes from the physical, but you have been unable to show how the physical comes from the spiritual.

 

[edthecynic]

Spirits in the material world

Would you say you are a materialist? Specifically that everything in the universe proceeds from material things? Even things like thoughts and beliefs and love and sadness?

I would say you can't get something from nothing no matter how hard you try. Therefore the spiritual comes from the material and not the material coming from the spiritual.

Again I refer you to music. The material composer creates the music that lives on spiritually after the composer materially decomposes. The music did not create the composer.

And that is logically consistent with your belief of atheism.

Do you believe that it is logical for an atheist to believe in anything other than the material world?

Already answered. Why are you playing dumb?

Let me ask you this question if I said to you that because you are an atheist you believe in the philosophy of materialism, would it bother you?

Any time YOU set the parameters of anything it bothers me.

 

[ding]

Would you say you are a materialist? Specifically that everything in the universe proceeds from material things? Even things like thoughts and beliefs and love and sadness?

I would say you can't get something from nothing no matter how hard you try. Therefore the spiritual comes from the material and not the material coming from the spiritual.

Again I refer you to music. The material composer creates the music that lives on spiritually after the composer materially decomposes. The music did not create the composer.

And that is logically consistent with your belief of atheism.

Do you believe that it is logical for an atheist to believe in anything other than the material world?

Already answered. Why are you playing dumb?

Because I am trying to prove a point and you seem to be the only atheist willing to admit the truth that atheists believe all things, including mental aspects and consciousness, are results of material interactions.

I have shown you that the spiritual comes from the physical, but you have been unable to show how the physical comes from the spiritual.

That's not important right now. Do you believe that emotions like love are anything other than electrochemical reactions in the brain?

 

[WinterBorn]

You continue to invent what I believe, while denying what I tell you I believe. So you know better than I do?

"You are a materialist because you believe incorporeal things come from material things"? I have not said this at all. You are either inventing or lying. I'll let you choose.

"You are a materialist because you believe incorporeal things come from material things. Whereas I believe all things (material and incorporeal) came from something which is incorporeal. If you believed that that incorporeal things came from incorporeal, then by definition you wouldn't be an atheist because then you would believe in spirit which is not a material thing." Nice of you to decide what I believe. Keep me posted on my own beliefs, willya? The fact is that I do believe in incorporeal things. I do not believe in God. The definition of an atheist is someone who does not believe in God.

You have no logical basis to believe you are more than just material. I have a logical basis for believing I am more than just material. I am sorry this offends you but it is the consequence of believing in no God as you do.

You have no logical basis to believe that God is the only incorporeal thing in the universe. I have a logical basis for allowing that there are things we do not know, yet. I'm sorry this offends you but it is the logical consequence of insisting that your beliefs are the only accurate beliefs.

And that changes the reality that you believe you are more than just atoms how?

This isn't about the existence of God. This is about your illogical belief that you aren't a materialist.

If I believe there are incorporeal things, then the supposition that I am a materialist is inaccurate.

Not if you are an atheist.

I'm not arguing that you don't believe in the existence of incorporeal things. I fully agree that you do believe they exist. But if you are an atheist you must believe incorporeal things originate only from material things. That they don't originated because you are a spiritual being. The very best you can believe is that your spiritual responses are nothing more than evolutionary programing that only exist for evolutionary purposes. That the love or anger or sadness you feel are only because of an electrochemical process firing inside your brain.

I totally get why you are repulsed by this thought but it is the reality of being an atheist. You can't eat your cake and have it too.

"But if you are an atheist you must believe incorporeal things originate only from material things"??

I must? According to whom? Why do you think you get to define who I am? You have done it repeatedly in this thread. Perhaps my beliefs are seen as a threat to yours?

I do not believe that incorporeal things must originate from material things. That is a pretty big stretch from "I don't believe in god".

 

[ding]

Would you say you are a materialist? Specifically that everything in the universe proceeds from material things? Even things like thoughts and beliefs and love and sadness?

I would say you can't get something from nothing no matter how hard you try. Therefore the spiritual comes from the material and not the material coming from the spiritual.

Again I refer you to music. The material composer creates the music that lives on spiritually after the composer materially decomposes. The music did not create the composer.

And that is logically consistent with your belief of atheism.

Do you believe that it is logical for an atheist to believe in anything other than the material world?

Already answered. Why are you playing dumb?

Let me ask you this question if I said to you that because you are an atheist you believe in the philosophy of materialism, would it bother you?

Any time YOU set the parameters of anything it bothers me.

Help me help you.

 

[edthecynic]

Red shift, cosmic background radiation, Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations and the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics confirm there was a beginning.

So I have tons of evidence that points to a beginning.

What evidence do you have that says there wasn't?

And if you have no evidence to believe there was no beginning, why would you choose to believe that when there is tons of evidence to support that there is?

All of those things point to a Big Bang. Which provides scientific evidence that there was no God involved, but a cosmic event that occurred naturally.

And all the matter that was involved in the Big Bang existed before the Big Bang. The best theory I have seen is that the universe is still expanding from the Big Bang. When it stops expanding, it will begin to contract. Eventually, all the matter will come together into one place. The laws of physics say that when this matter reaches a certain mass, the Big Bang will happen again.

Nothing in the numerous things you quoted suggest that the matter and energy was created at the time of the Big Bang. In fact, the 1st Law of Thermodynamics states that energy cannot be created or destroyed.

Except that the laws of nature were in place before space and time. Which means that the potential for all of those non-material things you believe in existed before space and time began. Which means that non-material things existed before space and time.

Why are you back tracking now though? You argued that my belief was based upon an assumption of a beginning, right?

Are you arguing that the universe is infinite acting? That it always existed as in forever? The second law of thermodynamics precludes that. The idea of a cyclical universe is dead for precisely that reason. As time approaches infinity, the universe approaches thermal equilibrium. This we do not see.

"Except that the laws of nature were in place before space and time. Which means that the potential for all of those non-material things you believe in existed before space and time began. Which means that non-material things existed before space and time."

And you know this how?

A little birdie told him.

Do you believe that emotions like love are anything other than electrochemical reactions in the brain?

Do you believe a dog is capable of love?

 

[edthecynic]

I would say you can't get something from nothing no matter how hard you try. Therefore the spiritual comes from the material and not the material coming from the spiritual.

Again I refer you to music. The material composer creates the music that lives on spiritually after the composer materially decomposes. The music did not create the composer.

And that is logically consistent with your belief of atheism.

Do you believe that it is logical for an atheist to believe in anything other than the material world?

Already answered. Why are you playing dumb?

Let me ask you this question if I said to you that because you are an atheist you believe in the philosophy of materialism, would it bother you?

Any time YOU set the parameters of anything it bothers me.

Help me help you.

Help yourself first.

 

[ding]

You have no logical basis to believe you are more than just material. I have a logical basis for believing I am more than just material. I am sorry this offends you but it is the consequence of believing in no God as you do.

You have no logical basis to believe that God is the only incorporeal thing in the universe. I have a logical basis for allowing that there are things we do not know, yet. I'm sorry this offends you but it is the logical consequence of insisting that your beliefs are the only accurate beliefs.

And that changes the reality that you believe you are more than just atoms how?

This isn't about the existence of God. This is about your illogical belief that you aren't a materialist.

If I believe there are incorporeal things, then the supposition that I am a materialist is inaccurate.

Not if you are an atheist.

I'm not arguing that you don't believe in the existence of incorporeal things. I fully agree that you do believe they exist. But if you are an atheist you must believe incorporeal things originate only from material things. That they don't originated because you are a spiritual being. The very best you can believe is that your spiritual responses are nothing more than evolutionary programing that only exist for evolutionary purposes. That the love or anger or sadness you feel are only because of an electrochemical process firing inside your brain.

I totally get why you are repulsed by this thought but it is the reality of being an atheist. You can't eat your cake and have it too.

"But if you are an atheist you must believe incorporeal things originate only from material things"??

I must? According to whom? Why do you think you get to define who I am? You have done it repeatedly in this thread. Perhaps my beliefs are seen as a threat to yours?

I do not believe that incorporeal things must originate from material things. That is a pretty big stretch from "I don't believe in god".

Where do incorporeal things originate from then if not material things?

 

[ding]

All of those things point to a Big Bang. Which provides scientific evidence that there was no God involved, but a cosmic event that occurred naturally.

And all the matter that was involved in the Big Bang existed before the Big Bang. The best theory I have seen is that the universe is still expanding from the Big Bang. When it stops expanding, it will begin to contract. Eventually, all the matter will come together into one place. The laws of physics say that when this matter reaches a certain mass, the Big Bang will happen again.

Nothing in the numerous things you quoted suggest that the matter and energy was created at the time of the Big Bang. In fact, the 1st Law of Thermodynamics states that energy cannot be created or destroyed.

Except that the laws of nature were in place before space and time. Which means that the potential for all of those non-material things you believe in existed before space and time began. Which means that non-material things existed before space and time.

Why are you back tracking now though? You argued that my belief was based upon an assumption of a beginning, right?

Are you arguing that the universe is infinite acting? That it always existed as in forever? The second law of thermodynamics precludes that. The idea of a cyclical universe is dead for precisely that reason. As time approaches infinity, the universe approaches thermal equilibrium. This we do not see.

"Except that the laws of nature were in place before space and time. Which means that the potential for all of those non-material things you believe in existed before space and time began. Which means that non-material things existed before space and time."

And you know this how?

A little birdie told him.

Do you believe that emotions like love are anything other than electrochemical reactions in the brain?

Do you believe a dog is capable of love?

Yes. My turn.

Do you believe that emotions like love are anything other than electrochemical reactions in the brain?

 

[ding]

You have no logical basis to believe you are more than just material. I have a logical basis for believing I am more than just material. I am sorry this offends you but it is the consequence of believing in no God as you do.

You have no logical basis to believe that God is the only incorporeal thing in the universe. I have a logical basis for allowing that there are things we do not know, yet. I'm sorry this offends you but it is the logical consequence of insisting that your beliefs are the only accurate beliefs.

And that changes the reality that you believe you are more than just atoms how?

This isn't about the existence of God. This is about your illogical belief that you aren't a materialist.

If I believe there are incorporeal things, then the supposition that I am a materialist is inaccurate.

Not if you are an atheist.

I'm not arguing that you don't believe in the existence of incorporeal things. I fully agree that you do believe they exist. But if you are an atheist you must believe incorporeal things originate only from material things. That they don't originated because you are a spiritual being. The very best you can believe is that your spiritual responses are nothing more than evolutionary programing that only exist for evolutionary purposes. That the love or anger or sadness you feel are only because of an electrochemical process firing inside your brain.

I totally get why you are repulsed by this thought but it is the reality of being an atheist. You can't eat your cake and have it too.

"But if you are an atheist you must believe incorporeal things originate only from material things"??

I must? According to whom? Why do you think you get to define who I am? You have done it repeatedly in this thread. Perhaps my beliefs are seen as a threat to yours?

I do not believe that incorporeal things must originate from material things. That is a pretty big stretch from "I don't believe in god".

Do you believe that emotions like love are anything other than electrochemical reactions in the brain?

 

[edthecynic]

The one where Alexander Vilinken said the laws of nature existed before space and time was 3 minutes long.

Would that not make Nature your God?

I believe in God, only I spell it Nature.
- Frank Lloyd Wright

 

[ding]

The one where Alexander Vilinken said the laws of nature existed before space and time was 3 minutes long.

Would that not make Nature your God?

I believe in God, only I spell it Nature.
- Frank Lloyd Wright

Not exactly but I do understand why you would think I do. The painter cannot be the painting. I'm not a big fan of pantheism. My turn.

Do you believe that love can ever be anything more than electrochemical processes firing in the brain?