Why Should I Believe in God?

Single Serving Jack wrote

I like that very much. I wonder what the Christian refutation of it is?

There isn't one.

[nkb]

ubs wrote

It's personal because Smelly is either lieing or being sold a sack of shit.

The poster was responding to things said here with the usual bible quotes and religious assertions. Serpentdove did have a website linked at the foot of his posts, but so do many here.

He was not quoting camera prices or products as is being suggested. The fact that the posts were quickly deleted rather than left for your own examination should tell you all you need to know.

As I already said, I agree with you, in general.

But, now, in addition to making it personal with PC, you're accusing Smelly of being dishonest.

That's the part I'm having trouble with, as I don't understand the motivation to personally attack the mods.

[Professor Chaos]

Damn, someone forgot their meds today.

The spammer even had "originally posted at www.ravingatheists.com" in all of his posts. It was a fucking spammer, batshit, deal with it.

Like nkb said, if you wanted to question this like a grownup, mayhap I would have undeleted all of his posts to show everyone, and talked to you rationally like an adult. But since all the non-crazies around here actually trust me and Smelly, I don't feel the need to do that for them, and you can simply go fuck yourself.

[ubs]

nkb wrote

That's the part I'm having trouble with, as I don't understand the motivation to personally attack the mods.

I will not suck up to a corrupt mod.

[Professor Chaos]

The depths of your insanity never cease to amaze me.

[Choobus]

nkb wrote

That's the part I'm having trouble with, as I don't understand the motivation to personally attack the mods.

It's called douchebaggery. It seems to be very popular with retards, assclowns and, of course, douchebags. Being batshit crazy, however, can lead to unnecessary douchebaggery since only the nutjob knows what version of reality they have got up their arse. To them it makes sense, to everyone else it just looks like the circus is in town.

[Single Serving Jack]

CAPTAIN-OBVIOUS wrote

There isn't one.

Now I understand why you're called Captain Obvious

[nkb]

ubs wrote

I will not suck up to a corrupt mod.

Voicing your concerns without personal attacks is now considered "sucking up"?

Can you please elaborate on what you mean by "corrupt"?

[Professor Chaos]

She means "male."

[Smellyoldgit]

I'm so heartbroken at such a viscious personal attack.
I don't think I can cope any more.

ahhh - Fuck it - a large glass of Taylor's vintage port and I'll ignore the rantings of any ol' mare.

Maybe I'm a fool for thinking we're meant to be in the same team.

[dogpet]

Sternwallow wrote

Ignoring God*, a refreshing break for a few moments, there is still concern over the free will issue. Many people think that being without free will would make any punishment for any crime unjust because there would be no responsibility for one's acts.

Thanks Stern, I'm still interested then . Could we not simply leave the premise of justice out of it? Or at least define it as the best we can come up with to deal with those who are inconvenient. Okeh so the nuisances couldn't help acting according to their want, any more than the collective response could be other than to slap them down.

How would free will arise? If decision making were nothing but balancing all of the influences to a decision and going with the heavy side, that is not free will since it is completely determined. Therefore, to make a decision that is not the sum of the influences requires some impulse outside of your area of contemplation. Since all influences inside your head are accounted for in the simple case, this impulse must come from outside. In that case, the free choice is not yours, having nothing to do with your thought processes except to zap in from outside and make your choice for you.

Quite. I think that's what I said before. But the proponent of free wll will argue that the actual decision making process is free will in action. I don't see how most people could avoid insanity without the illusion of free will. I know I don't have it, but I like to think I'm in control of my mind.

I have found no escape from this confinement of the will to the individual's thought processes and their completely deterministic combination.

We can dull the thought processes to increase the illusion

Even externalizing some decision function, like flipping a coin, does not free you from determinism. When the coin lands (heads), you again use deterministic internal cognition to decide whether to go with it or to ignore it. ("Crap, I want some beer anyway, damnit!")

That's a good way of putting it If we roll a dice we have considered six outcomes, so will can be delayed? I guess you will say the delay was determined.

[Sternwallow]

dogpet wrote

Thanks Stern, I'm still interested then . Could we not simply leave the premise of justice out of it? Or at least define it as the best we can come up with to deal with those who are inconvenient. Okeh so the nuisances couldn't help acting according to their want, any more than the collective response could be other than to slap them down.

Quite right. We simply recognize the inevitable attempt to act justly and proceed. I do think, though, that a lack of free will makes "punishment" nonsense. Certainly we must separate the anti-social from society in ways consistent with the risk to that society should they manage to return to it. I do not think that punishment as such, improves either the perpetrator or the society even though it may make us feel better.

Quite. I think that's what I said before. But the proponent of free wll will argue that the actual decision making process is free will in action. I don't see how most people could avoid insanity without the illusion of free will. I know I don't have it, but I like to think I'm in control of my mind.

Yes, we must maintain the illusion of free will in order to function sanely. I certainly do it whenever I am not talking about free will itself.

We can dull the thought processes to increase the illusion

I think the ordinary way of ignoring the determinism is adequate, though a tall cool one is welcome on almost any excuse.

That's a good way of putting it If we roll a dice we have considered six outcomes, so will can be delayed? I guess you will say the delay was determined.

I would say the determinism is masked by using the external decision aid.

[Gnosital]

Smellyoldgit wrote

Bollox.

If you don't like it - I can post you a picture of a door.

Apparently this is the moderator's answer to every long time atheist poster who doesn't keep her place.

[Gnosital]

Choobus wrote

It's called douchebaggery. It seems to be very popular with retards, assclowns and, of course, douchebags. Being batshit crazy, however, can lead to unnecessary douchebaggery since only the nutjob knows what version of reality they have got up their arse. To them it makes sense, to everyone else it just looks like the circus is in town.

I didn't see a personal attack, I saw a valid question. The personal attacks started with the illustrious "professor" calling names. Then there was the inevitable chorus of male voices chiming in to shut the bitch up.

Oh sorry, I think I've overstepped my bounds, here, so I'll just show myself the door. Again.

Sorry to interrupt the testosterone-fueled self righteous flame-fest.

[ubs]

Heya Gnosi.