If there were no God

  • Thread starter Thread starter clarkgamble1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sarcelle said:
Atheists can point to the brain instead of the soul as the source of consciousness.
Click to expand...
That is true, and while it is a plausible theory I don’t expect they will ever find anything substantial to support this assertion. Currently the argument is that humans are more conscious than animals, and humans have bigger brains than animals. Therefore the conscience lies in the brain. Not impossible, but not very compelling either.
 
You want a quote from an atheist attesting that the cosmos and all in it is the result of randomness? I quote you. Does that count?
Bradskii said:
You look at cosmological constants as if they were a winning hand: ‘Look, the deal must have been fixed because I got these specific cards which means I win’.

Except that you have decided what wins the hand only after the cards have been dealt.

If someone had said a billion years ago that a winning hand would comprise humanity as it is exactly at this moment and it turned out to be so, then that woukd be a fixed deal. Someone definately dealt the cards in a specific way.

But if we get to this point and say, after the cards have been dealt: ‘This is what we will now define as a winning hand’, then it’s entirely random.
Click to expand...
😎
 
Last edited:
Being here, as we are now, is the result of entirely random forces. Individual aspects of our existence are not. It’s like winning at roulette, which is effectively random. But placing your chips where you may is not.

But that doesn’t prevent me from being impressed at your ability to conjure up an applicable post by me from another thread at such short notice.
 
Bradskii said:
Being here, as we are now, is the result of entirely random forces. Individual aspects of our existence are not. It’s like winning at roulette, which is effectively random. But placing your chips where you may is not.
Click to expand...
Why are physical laws random, but a person’s actions not? Aren’t we just the product of said physical laws? Can randomness result in logic, or chaos in order? I don’t understand how you can both be an atheist and also believe that there is something special and valuable about the human mind.
 
The physical laws are random. And the universe doesn’t care about me. It’s indifferent. But you cannot infer from that that I personally should care less about myself or others. There’s no connection at all.
 
What does it even mean to care about someone when you believe all that they are is essentially a clump of atoms stuck together for no reason? What altruistic deeds can you possibly offer to a collection of spacedust, who’s only purpose is to slowly wither away to eternal nothingness?
 
Gorgias said:
It would create more problems than it would provide answers. You’re attempting to solve for negative experiences, but when you remove God from the equation, you’ve got to provide an explanation for goodness in the universe.
Click to expand...
The negative experiences are only problematic if one assumes an all-loving, all-knowing and all-powerful deity. The positive experiences would only be problematic if one would assume an all-hating, all-knowing and all-powerful deity.

If one does not assume either one, the whole question is moot. As the bumper sticker says: “Guano simply happens.” There is no one who would care about us, either in a positive or a negative fashion. Now this might be hard to swallow for those some, but reality does not care if the explanation is satisfying or not.
 
Theban said:
What does it even mean to care about someone when you believe all that they are is essentially a clump of atoms stuck together for no reason? What altruistic deeds can you possibly offer to a collection of spacedust, who’s only purpose is to slowly wither away to eternal nothingness?
Click to expand...
Don’t you see the difference between a wonderful dinner, or the bare ingredients mixed up a bowl? As for the “clump of atoms stuck together”… do you REALLY need an explanation to show the difference between a house and a pile of bricks?
 
Theban said:
What does it even mean to care about someone when you believe all that they are is essentially a clump of atoms stuck together for no reason? What altruistic deeds can you possibly offer to a collection of spacedust, who’s only purpose is to slowly wither away to eternal nothingness?
Click to expand...
Wow, I hadn’t looked at it like that. So if the universe cares nothing for me then I should consider my wife and family nothing but ‘clumps of atoms’.

I think you’re confusing my wife with a rock.

Look, I know this is tough for you to grasp, but some clumps of atoms have evolved to become conscious parts of the universe. And they evolved up to a point where they fall in love and make babies and get jobs and drink beer and watch footy and cook a pretty decent chille and think Trump is a moron.

But after all that, the universe STILL doesn’t care about me. But I can live with it. Now excuse me while I ask my favourite clump of atoms to get me another beer.
 
Sarcelle said:
An alternative view would be, everything has always existed.

An atheist would say that matter has always existed since the creation of matter and energy cannot come out of nothing. This breaks the first law of thermodynamics.
Click to expand...
Is there some reason you think thermodynamics apply to the beginning of the universe. And if that’s the case, then so does positing a prime mover.
 
I cannot take credit for it.

I think it was Peter Kreeft who said it in one of his books. You should read him. He is brilliant.
 
Bradskii said:
The physical laws are random. And the universe doesn’t care about me. It’s indifferent. But you cannot infer from that that I personally should care less about myself or others. There’s no connection at all.
Click to expand...
That is, indeed, a delicate house of cards you’ve built.
 
I suppose so if you subscribe to the Big Bang theory.

However I am reference an opposing theory called the Steady State theory proposed by Sir Fred Hoyle.

I love ❤️ cosmology.
 
Last edited:
Bradskii said:
Look, I know this is tough for you to grasp
Click to expand...
It is. When I was an atheist I had no problem whatsoever seeing that the logical consequence of a meaningless universe is a meaningless existence. But I am not a perfect logician, though I must say that for me it appears that you are a bit hypocritical in which beliefs you choose and reject.

I really do want to know what you consider to be “moral”, perhaps I wasn’t clear enough on that point. What kind of morality do you believe in that is not dependent on a meaningful universe?
 
Hmm you mentioned conscious and then conscience which are two different things.

Which is which?
 
English is not my first language, I didn’t think there was a difference, sorry. I meant the consciousness.
 
Last edited:
Yes, that’s known as the problem of evil which, believe it or not, predates Christianity.
 
Uh? I’m part of something bigger than myself. Something that doesn’t know I exist. Something that not only doesn’t care about me but literally cannot do so. But that negates any sense I migbt have of myself and all that has evolved (literally) from that?

Let me try a hypothetical: If you got a bang on the head and woke up with zero knowledge of God, then would you consider that your family were no more than ‘clumps of atoms’? Would you consider that a Godless universe had some special place for you?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top