Total Posts:14|Showing Posts:1-14
Jump to topic:

Atheists, can you answer these questions?

Benshapiro
Posts: 4,116
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2014 7:39:38 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Does evolution give us an inherent purpose to populate?

Is evolution an unembodied natural process?

Can anything non-conscious act purposefully?

If not, how can we derive inherent purpose from a purposeless process?

Purpose: "have as one's intention or objective."
Envisage
Posts: 3,648
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2014 7:58:07 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/17/2014 7:39:38 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
Does evolution give us an inherent purpose to populate?

No (not an atheist question)

Is evolution an unembodied natural process?

Probably (again, not an atheist question)

Can anything non-conscious act purposefully?

By definition. No. (Not an atheist question)

If not, how can we derive inherent purpose from a purposeless process?

No idea. (Not an atheist question)

Purpose: "have as one's intention or objective."

Sure
Benshapiro
Posts: 4,116
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2014 8:08:10 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Why does it seem to be a common misconception amongst atheists that we have an inherent purpose to populate?
Iredia
Posts: 1,617
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2014 9:26:30 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I have questions of my own

1) Why the need for 'militancy' as evidenced by atheists being more vocal against religion ?

2) Why don't you think the ID is sufficient to infer God's existence inspite of the lack of evidence that life can arise naturally ?

3) What would it take to convince you there's a God?
"I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness." - Max Planck
Envisage
Posts: 3,648
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2014 9:48:36 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/17/2014 9:26:30 PM, Iredia wrote:
I have questions of my own

1) Why the need for 'militancy' as evidenced by atheists being more vocal against religion ?

Because religion has negative effects on society, influences policy and has significant global effects, as well as facilitating some of the most destructive regimes (ISIS?).

2) Why don't you think the ID is sufficient to infer God's existence inspite of the lack of evidence that life can arise naturally ?

Loaded question, disagree with presupposition (underlined). See my debates on ID for the answer for an IDer, but ID itself doesn't automatically infer God (which ID proponents generally affirm within debates).

3) What would it take to convince you there's a God?

1. The non-cognitive problem of God to be firmly overcome
2. With a primary attribute established (after solving #1), have a valid and sound argument for it (philosophical), or a model that is best explained by it (scientific) (few assumptions, fits well with Occam's razor, good explanatory scope, precise/surprising predictions). So far it looks like arguments from idealism are the best shot, and most definitely not the teleological arguments (from design).

But proving a God is a long way from affirming any religion whatsoever, not even close. So if I because a theist my position would almost certainly remain secular (arguments from idealism seem to be the most likely of all I have seen, if a, and hence I would still oppose religion the same way I do now.

Hope that helps.
Skepticalone
Posts: 7,448
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2014 9:50:24 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/17/2014 7:58:07 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 9/17/2014 7:39:38 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
Does evolution give us an inherent purpose to populate?

No (not an atheist question)

Is evolution an unembodied natural process?

Probably (again, not an atheist question)

Can anything non-conscious act purposefully?

By definition. No. (Not an atheist question)

If not, how can we derive inherent purpose from a purposeless process?

No idea. (Not an atheist question)

Purpose: "have as one's intention or objective."

Sure

+1
Science has taught us that, because we have a talent for deceiving ourselves, subjectivity may not freely reign. - Carl Sagan

The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts. - Bertrand Russell
intellectuallyprimitive
Posts: 1,000
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/18/2014 12:09:08 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/17/2014 7:39:38 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
Does evolution give us an inherent purpose to populate?

Is evolution an unembodied natural process?

Can anything non-conscious act purposefully?

If not, how can we derive inherent purpose from a purposeless process?

Purpose: "have as one's intention or objective."

Perhaps these questions would have more appropriately appealed to a secular audience, rather than exclusively atheists.
Fly
Posts: 2,876
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/18/2014 12:17:19 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/17/2014 9:26:30 PM, Iredia wrote:
I have questions of my own

Your questions actually are for atheists!
1) Why the need for 'militancy' as evidenced by atheists being more vocal against religion ?

I can only speculate... Atheism is on the rise in the world, so you are going to hear more and more from them; some are militant as a pushback against militant religious folk; some people don't suffer fools well; many people vote according to their religious dogma, and it scares many atheists; the USA in particular seems to be experiencing a "de-Enlightenment" currently because of religion (theocrats), and again scares many. The only other region I can think of that is also going backwards is the Middle East, and that ain't good...
2) Why don't you think the ID is sufficient to infer God's existence inspite of the lack of evidence that life can arise naturally ?

Put very simply, I already have empirical proof that the natural world and natural processes exist; I have no proof that the supernatural and supernatural intervention exists.
3) What would it take to convince you there's a God?
Oh... How about big writing in the sky that everyone can see and understand that declares his lordship or what have you?

That or George Burns (RIP) appearing at my door saying, "Remember me from the movie 'Oh, God'? I wasn't acting..."
"Put up or shut up" time-- my debate with Yassine:

http://www.debate.org...
dee-em
Posts: 8,366
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/18/2014 7:35:30 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/17/2014 8:08:10 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
Why does it seem to be a common misconception amongst atheists that we have an inherent purpose to populate?

Again you confuse atheists with scientists.

Most of us (not all) have an in-built drive to have sex, which evolution has facilitated by making sex pleasurable. Sex in nature very often leads to reproduction (humans have been able to subvert this somewhat). That is how nature ensures the continuation of the species, not intentionally or as an objective, but as a consequence of the process of evolution.

Now an atheist might say one of our "purposes" is to reproduce. We humans are fortunate, certainly within developed countries where birth control is readily available, in that we can often choose when we are ready to start a family. Therefore, for us, reproduction can be a conscious choice. It can be one's intention or objective to raise children when circumstances (eg. financial) are right. The inherent drive to engage in sex is purposeless but the timing of when sex leads to reproduction can be purposeful behaviour in humans.
Fatihah: It's like your mother making spaghetti and after you taste it and don't like it, you say "well my mom must not exist". Not because their is no logical evidence but because she doesn't do what you want.
TheGreatAndPowerful
Posts: 3,012
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/18/2014 9:12:42 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/17/2014 7:39:38 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
Does evolution give us an inherent purpose to populate?

No.

Is evolution an unembodied natural process?

What is an "unembodied natural process?"

Can anything non-conscious act purposefully?

Yes.

If not, how can we derive inherent purpose from a purposeless process?

You can't "derive inherent" purpose. That's a contradiction. If you've derived it, then it's extrinsic, not inherent.

Purpose: "have as one's intention or objective."
SNP1
Posts: 2,446
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/18/2014 9:16:28 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/17/2014 7:39:38 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
Does evolution give us an inherent purpose to populate?

No, it does not, however the species that survive are the ones that are most fit to survive and populate.

Is evolution an unembodied natural process?

It could be, it probably is.

Can anything non-conscious act purposefully?

No.

If not, how can we derive inherent purpose from a purposeless process?

There isn't one.

Purpose: "have as one's intention or objective."

None of these questions are about atheism, and I can already tell that you do not understand evolution, so we will leave it at that.
#TheApatheticNihilistPartyofAmerica
#WarOnDDO
Benshapiro
Posts: 4,116
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/18/2014 9:52:28 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Raise your hand if you've ever given credit to an inherent purpose to populate as the foundation for morality.
dee-em
Posts: 8,366
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/18/2014 5:34:30 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Raise your hands if you think the above is a horribly simplistic and mangled attempt to deride the evolutionary origins of moral behaviour.
Fatihah: It's like your mother making spaghetti and after you taste it and don't like it, you say "well my mom must not exist". Not because their is no logical evidence but because she doesn't do what you want.
Skepticalone
Posts: 7,448
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/18/2014 5:43:31 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/18/2014 5:34:30 PM, dee-em wrote:
Raise your hands if you think the above is a horribly simplistic and mangled attempt to deride the evolutionary origins of moral behaviour.

+1
Science has taught us that, because we have a talent for deceiving ourselves, subjectivity may not freely reign. - Carl Sagan

The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts. - Bertrand Russell