The problem with saying just prove it, is some things cant be proven.
[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del's_incompleteness_theorems]Godel incompleteness theorems[/url]
Chat Forum
Archbishop Rowan Williams
-
Posted 11 months ago #
-
So back to the 'Prove it' argument.
Well yes but as I said before in this context it is entirely appropriate. If you make a factual claim then you should be able to back it up. Why is that such a problem? If you say that it's a belief of yours but you can't back up it up with any proof then that's fair enough as far as I'm concerned (I can't speak for Mr Woppit) as it is not longer a statement of fact.
Posted 11 months ago # -
Not really. The burden of proof lies with those making the claim
Only if they are trying to convince you that there is a God. That's not the point of this thread though.
I am sticking up for religionists because you lot are accusing them of being stupid. Of course, terribly ironic - you think they're stupid because YOU don't get it
Posted 11 months ago # -
Well yes but as I said before in this context it is entirely appropriate. If you make a factual claim then you should be able to back it up. Why is that such a problem? If you say that it's a belief of yours but you can't back up it up with any proof then that's fair enough as far as I'm concerned (I can't speak for Mr Woppit) as it is not longer a statement of fact
Whats wrong with my argument above that the universe seems to construct more and more complex beings ?
What more do you want ? Surely its a possibility ?
I might be right I might be wrong.
Posted 11 months ago # -
This may already have happened and God may have created the universe in such a way that the sentient beings in the universe are pre disposed to believe in God.
You seem to be starting with the assumption that there is a god, and presenting a circular argument.
The problem with saying just prove it, is some things cant be proven.
Well this seems like a rather convenient get out as by framing the argument in a non-falsifiable way you get to just say "god did it" which just looks closed minded.
I am sticking up for religionists because you lot are accusing them of being stupid.
I haven't accused anyone of being stupid for being a thiest. I have criticised rather stupid arguments and an abundance of logical fallacies but that is something else entirely.
Posted 11 months ago # -
I guess my hang up on that argument is, I can make a statement based on belief, without evidence, but it can still be a fact. As evidence doesn't determine reality, it merely confirms it.
For example; I believe that we will find new species on earth. I cannot back this up with evidence as they haven't been found yet, however my belief is a reality, just without the evidence to confirm it.
Posted 11 months ago # -
For example; I believe that we will find new species on earth. I cannot back this up with evidence as they haven't been found yet, however my belief is a reality, just without the evidence to confirm it.
Your belief that we will find new species of life on earth is simply that a belief, albeit one that is based on previous experience of the rate at which we humans have discovered new species. It will only become a fact once said species is discovered and will be based on the rock solid evidence of someone saying "look at that, that's a previusly undiscovered species of whatever".
Posted 11 months ago # -
I haven't accused anyone of being stupid for being a thiest.
Someone else did up there ^
Posted 11 months ago # -
Then quote them, not me.
Posted 11 months ago # -
Have a little faith, gf.
Posted 11 months ago # -
This may already have happened and God may have created the universe in such a way that the sentient beings in the universe are pre disposed to believe in God.
You seem to be starting with the assumption that there is a god, and presenting a circular argumentNo Im not
Posted 11 months ago # -
If you actually read his editorial which is available on the New Statesman website you will find it is a much more wide ranging piece than an attack on the government policy. It certainly is critical of the state of politics, raises questions about the nature of political opposition, and also has some thoughts on what we should be aiming for in society. It is a very interesting piece,albeit in places quite academic. On this basis I am very comfortable with his invention although I don't agree with everything he says. What certainly does come through is that he is a thoughtful and intelligent man.
Posted 11 months ago # -
Only if they are trying to convince you that there is a God. That's not the point of this thread though.
If you are a Christian then you should be as evangelising is part of the deal
Posted 11 months ago # -
What certainly does come through is that he is a thoughtful and intelligent man
+1.
He certainly understands both sides of the debate much better than some on here.
Posted 11 months ago # -
Rowan Williams, being intelligent, earlier...
Posted 11 months ago # -
but maybe society does need a moderating force to encourage people to be less self-centred and materialistic, and more altruistic.
You're starting to get it.
Posted 11 months ago # -
I'm not religious in any way (not against it, just not my cup of tea), but I have a lot of respect for Rowan Williams after reading his letter to a 6 year old child, Lulu, in The Times.
I couldn't find the original letter, but this is the nearest thing I could find: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/damianthompson/100084843/a-six-year-old-girl-writes-a-letter-to-god-and-the-archbishop-of-canterbury-answers/
I think he's a good man, irrespective of any religious beliefs.Posted 11 months ago # -
The problem with saying just prove it, is some things cant be proven. [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ G%C3%B6del's_incompleteness_theorems]Godel incompleteness theorems
Oh for goodness sake, the relevance of Gödel to a discussion on religion vs atheism is what exactly? It's an interesting bit of logic and I seem to remember he proves it in a rather elegant way, but to argue that it means anything to an argument about whether religion does more good than atheism is stupid.
And to use Gõdel to argue that demanding proof of things is a bad idea is ridiculous given he is most famous for proving things, not to mention how silly it is to say that formal logic means that people shouldn't try and ask for evidence to support things you say.
Ps. Heisenberg would also be just as silly a thing to use to support your argument.
Posted 11 months ago # -
Mr Woppit - Member
Rowan Williams, being intelligent, earlier...
Ah, but his beard is a lot better these days. Shirley a good sign!
Posted 11 months ago # -
I'm am an atheist, scientist and believer in logical, rational thinking.
For this reason, this is hard to fault:
What certainly does come through is that he is a thoughtful and intelligent man.
Whatever your views on (his) religion, I believe that it is a good thing that we still have intelligent, thoughtful, people, whose public position is such that they have a platform - but not one that is corrupted by party politics or a corrosive media.
I don't agree with Rowan Williams' religious views, but I'm certainly prepared to listen to his views on society. I wish more would. That he has been lambasted is a sad reflection of our dumbed down and highly self interested, partisan, fragmented and dysfunctional country.
Posted 11 months ago # -
I’ve read all the comments and this is a brilliant thread, great discussion, healthy debate.
Whoop!!
And wasn’t “He” a “very naughty Boy” I seem to recall.
hahahaPosted 11 months ago # -
Rowan Williams, being intelligent, earlier...
Can't imagine what anyone thought they'd get out of that apart from Dawkins wanting an ego boost.
Posted 11 months ago # -
this thread reminds me of this quote:
one Thursday, nearly two thousand years after one man had been nailed to a tree for saying how great it would be to be nice to people for a change, a girl sitting on her own in a small café in Rickmansworth suddenly realized what it was that had been going wrong all this time, and she finally knew how the world could be made a good and happy place. This time it was right, it would work, and no one would have to get nailed to anything.
Irrespective of the messenger, listen to the message. While I have little truck with organised religion, a lot of people connected with it make a lot of sensible and valid points about our lives.
There's no sense in knocking them because their religious views don't correspond to your own, in the same way that there's no sense in saying that because Dave is a Tory he can't have valid or sensible opinions or ideas.People who continually denigrate those others because of their own religious stance (and there's a lot on this thread) are nothing other than closed minded bigots.
Posted 11 months ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
