Total Posts:89|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

We gotta admit God is the best explanation

Benshapiro
Posts: 3,942
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2015 2:51:47 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
It's Saturday night and I'm a little buzzed. Now is a good time to post. I've read that alcohol stimulates the creative side of the brain.

The biggest reason to believe in God is simple. It's more rational to believe that reality is derivative from mind rather than from mindlessness...

Let's take two competing hypothesis: (1) reality is derivative from mind and (2) reality is derivative from mindlessness.

Let's examine hypothesis (1). What qualities or characteristic would we expect reality to exude if reality was derivative from mind? How would we even determine this in the first place? Let's see what qualities our characteristics our mind exudes:

(1) intelligence
(2) creativity
(3) humor
(4) intelligibility
(5) purposiveness
6) rationality
(7) orderliness
(8) moral aspects
(9) complexity
(10) cohesiveness

(2) what qualities or characteristics would we expect if reality was derivative from mindlessness? Let's examine what we could logically expect:

(1) inable, inept
(2) uncreative, unimaginative
(3) woeful
(4) unintelligible, obscure
(5) aimless
(6) absurd
(7) chaotic, haphazard
(8) unprincipled
(9) plainness
(10) disjointed, fragmented

If we take a look at the universe and our conscious experiences it's much, much more indicative of hypothesis (1). If you argue that these characteristics or qualities weren't representative of mind vs mindless then why not?

In the most concise way possible reality is just too information-rich and indicative of mindfulness rather than mindlessness.
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2015 2:57:53 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/13/2015 2:51:47 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
It's Saturday night and I'm a little buzzed. Now is a good time to post. I've read that alcohol stimulates the creative side of the brain.

The biggest reason to believe in God is simple. It's more rational to believe that reality is derivative from mind rather than from mindlessness...

Let's take two competing hypothesis: (1) reality is derivative from mind and (2) reality is derivative from mindlessness.

Let's examine hypothesis (1). What qualities or characteristic would we expect reality to exude if reality was derivative from mind? How would we even determine this in the first place? Let's see what qualities our characteristics our mind exudes:

(1) intelligence
(2) creativity
(3) humor
(4) intelligibility
(5) purposiveness
6) rationality
(7) orderliness
(8) moral aspects
(9) complexity
(10) cohesiveness

(2) what qualities or characteristics would we expect if reality was derivative from mindlessness? Let's examine what we could logically expect:

(1) inable, inept
(2) uncreative, unimaginative
(3) woeful
(4) unintelligible, obscure
(5) aimless
(6) absurd
(7) chaotic, haphazard
(8) unprincipled
(9) plainness
(10) disjointed, fragmented

If we take a look at the universe and our conscious experiences it's much, much more indicative of hypothesis (1). If you argue that these characteristics or qualities weren't representative of mind vs mindless then why not?

In the most concise way possible reality is just too information-rich and indicative of mindfulness rather than mindlessness.

Baby cancer..............

Your move.
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12
Benshapiro
Posts: 3,942
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2015 3:06:21 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/13/2015 2:57:53 AM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 12/13/2015 2:51:47 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
It's Saturday night and I'm a little buzzed. Now is a good time to post. I've read that alcohol stimulates the creative side of the brain.

The biggest reason to believe in God is simple. It's more rational to believe that reality is derivative from mind rather than from mindlessness...

Let's take two competing hypothesis: (1) reality is derivative from mind and (2) reality is derivative from mindlessness.

Let's examine hypothesis (1). What qualities or characteristic would we expect reality to exude if reality was derivative from mind? How would we even determine this in the first place? Let's see what qualities our characteristics our mind exudes:

(1) intelligence
(2) creativity
(3) humor
(4) intelligibility
(5) purposiveness
6) rationality
(7) orderliness
(8) moral aspects
(9) complexity
(10) cohesiveness

(2) what qualities or characteristics would we expect if reality was derivative from mindlessness? Let's examine what we could logically expect:

(1) inable, inept
(2) uncreative, unimaginative
(3) woeful
(4) unintelligible, obscure
(5) aimless
(6) absurd
(7) chaotic, haphazard
(8) unprincipled
(9) plainness
(10) disjointed, fragmented

If we take a look at the universe and our conscious experiences it's much, much more indicative of hypothesis (1). If you argue that these characteristics or qualities weren't representative of mind vs mindless then why not?

In the most concise way possible reality is just too information-rich and indicative of mindfulness rather than mindlessness.

Baby cancer..............

Your move.

Which point are you refuting? And specific examples aren't representative of which hypothesis is more likely.
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2015 3:55:58 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/13/2015 2:51:47 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
It's Saturday night and I'm a little buzzed. Now is a good time to post. I've read that alcohol stimulates the creative side of the brain.

The biggest reason to believe in God is simple. It's more rational to believe that reality is derivative from mind rather than from mindlessness...

Let's take two competing hypothesis: (1) reality is derivative from mind and (2) reality is derivative from mindlessness.

Let's examine hypothesis (1). What qualities or characteristic would we expect reality to exude if reality was derivative from mind? How would we even determine this in the first place? Let's see what qualities our characteristics our mind exudes:

(1) intelligence
(2) creativity
(3) humor
(4) intelligibility
(5) purposiveness
6) rationality
(7) orderliness
(8) moral aspects
(9) complexity
(10) cohesiveness

(2) what qualities or characteristics would we expect if reality was derivative from mindlessness? Let's examine what we could logically expect:

(1) inable, inept
(2) uncreative, unimaginative
(3) woeful
(4) unintelligible, obscure
(5) aimless
(6) absurd
(7) chaotic, haphazard
(8) unprincipled
(9) plainness
(10) disjointed, fragmented

If we take a look at the universe and our conscious experiences it's much, much more indicative of hypothesis (1). If you argue that these characteristics or qualities weren't representative of mind vs mindless then why not?

In the most concise way possible reality is just too information-rich and indicative of mindfulness rather than mindlessness.

Dude, crackin' open a beer now! As far as the reasoning used in your post: Composition fallacy.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Benshapiro
Posts: 3,942
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2015 4:04:04 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/13/2015 3:55:58 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 12/13/2015 2:51:47 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
It's Saturday night and I'm a little buzzed. Now is a good time to post. I've read that alcohol stimulates the creative side of the brain.

The biggest reason to believe in God is simple. It's more rational to believe that reality is derivative from mind rather than from mindlessness...

Let's take two competing hypothesis: (1) reality is derivative from mind and (2) reality is derivative from mindlessness.

Let's examine hypothesis (1). What qualities or characteristic would we expect reality to exude if reality was derivative from mind? How would we even determine this in the first place? Let's see what qualities our characteristics our mind exudes:

(1) intelligence
(2) creativity
(3) humor
(4) intelligibility
(5) purposiveness
6) rationality
(7) orderliness
(8) moral aspects
(9) complexity
(10) cohesiveness

(2) what qualities or characteristics would we expect if reality was derivative from mindlessness? Let's examine what we could logically expect:

(1) inable, inept
(2) uncreative, unimaginative
(3) woeful
(4) unintelligible, obscure
(5) aimless
(6) absurd
(7) chaotic, haphazard
(8) unprincipled
(9) plainness
(10) disjointed, fragmented

If we take a look at the universe and our conscious experiences it's much, much more indicative of hypothesis (1). If you argue that these characteristics or qualities weren't representative of mind vs mindless then why not?

In the most concise way possible reality is just too information-rich and indicative of mindfulness rather than mindlessness.

Dude, crackin' open a beer now! As far as the reasoning used in your post: Composition fallacy.

Nice. *fist bump*

Composition fallacy how though?
bulproof
Posts: 25,197
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2015 4:08:09 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
The hole wasn't made in the shape of your puddle.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
Benshapiro
Posts: 3,942
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2015 4:16:22 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/13/2015 4:08:09 AM, bulproof wrote:
The hole wasn't made in the shape of your puddle.

What if the puddle was the result of a puddle?
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2015 4:18:29 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/13/2015 4:04:04 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 12/13/2015 3:55:58 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 12/13/2015 2:51:47 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
It's Saturday night and I'm a little buzzed. Now is a good time to post. I've read that alcohol stimulates the creative side of the brain.

The biggest reason to believe in God is simple. It's more rational to believe that reality is derivative from mind rather than from mindlessness...

Let's take two competing hypothesis: (1) reality is derivative from mind and (2) reality is derivative from mindlessness.

Let's examine hypothesis (1). What qualities or characteristic would we expect reality to exude if reality was derivative from mind? How would we even determine this in the first place? Let's see what qualities our characteristics our mind exudes:

(1) intelligence
(2) creativity
(3) humor
(4) intelligibility
(5) purposiveness
6) rationality
(7) orderliness
(8) moral aspects
(9) complexity
(10) cohesiveness

(2) what qualities or characteristics would we expect if reality was derivative from mindlessness? Let's examine what we could logically expect:

(1) inable, inept
(2) uncreative, unimaginative
(3) woeful
(4) unintelligible, obscure
(5) aimless
(6) absurd
(7) chaotic, haphazard
(8) unprincipled
(9) plainness
(10) disjointed, fragmented

If we take a look at the universe and our conscious experiences it's much, much more indicative of hypothesis (1). If you argue that these characteristics or qualities weren't representative of mind vs mindless then why not?

In the most concise way possible reality is just too information-rich and indicative of mindfulness rather than mindlessness.

Dude, crackin' open a beer now! As far as the reasoning used in your post: Composition fallacy.

Nice. *fist bump*

Composition fallacy how though?

In both scenarios you assume characteristics of the parts determine the characteristics of the whole. That's no bueno, amigo.

Plus, I'm curious how you came up with the characteristics of a mind capable of creating the universe to begin with.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Pollux
Posts: 241
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2015 4:21:22 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/13/2015 2:51:47 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
It's Saturday night and I'm a little buzzed. Now is a good time to post. I've read that alcohol stimulates the creative side of the brain.

The biggest reason to believe in God is simple. It's more rational to believe that reality is derivative from mind rather than from mindlessness...

Let's take two competing hypothesis: (1) reality is derivative from mind and (2) reality is derivative from mindlessness.

Let's examine hypothesis (1). What qualities or characteristic would we expect reality to exude if reality was derivative from mind? How would we even determine this in the first place? Let's see what qualities our characteristics our mind exudes:

(1) intelligence
(2) creativity
(3) humor
(4) intelligibility
(5) purposiveness
6) rationality
(7) orderliness
(8) moral aspects
(9) complexity
(10) cohesiveness

(2) what qualities or characteristics would we expect if reality was derivative from mindlessness? Let's examine what we could logically expect:

(1) inable, inept
(2) uncreative, unimaginative
(3) woeful
(4) unintelligible, obscure
(5) aimless
(6) absurd
(7) chaotic, haphazard
(8) unprincipled
(9) plainness
(10) disjointed, fragmented

If we take a look at the universe and our conscious experiences it's much, much more indicative of hypothesis (1). If you argue that these characteristics or qualities weren't representative of mind vs mindless then why not?

In the most concise way possible reality is just too information-rich and indicative of mindfulness rather than mindlessness.

Maybe. So you're asking me to believe in a mind from which my minds and all other minds have sprung. Ok, but now what? How does that help the victims and families of "baby cancer?" How do we utilize this information concerning mind-mind/bubble-in-mind-bubbleness-mind matrix to help us?
Benshapiro
Posts: 3,942
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2015 4:21:25 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/13/2015 4:18:29 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 12/13/2015 4:04:04 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 12/13/2015 3:55:58 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 12/13/2015 2:51:47 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
It's Saturday night and I'm a little buzzed. Now is a good time to post. I've read that alcohol stimulates the creative side of the brain.

The biggest reason to believe in God is simple. It's more rational to believe that reality is derivative from mind rather than from mindlessness...

Let's take two competing hypothesis: (1) reality is derivative from mind and (2) reality is derivative from mindlessness.

Let's examine hypothesis (1). What qualities or characteristic would we expect reality to exude if reality was derivative from mind? How would we even determine this in the first place? Let's see what qualities our characteristics our mind exudes:

(1) intelligence
(2) creativity
(3) humor
(4) intelligibility
(5) purposiveness
6) rationality
(7) orderliness
(8) moral aspects
(9) complexity
(10) cohesiveness

(2) what qualities or characteristics would we expect if reality was derivative from mindlessness? Let's examine what we could logically expect:

(1) inable, inept
(2) uncreative, unimaginative
(3) woeful
(4) unintelligible, obscure
(5) aimless
(6) absurd
(7) chaotic, haphazard
(8) unprincipled
(9) plainness
(10) disjointed, fragmented

If we take a look at the universe and our conscious experiences it's much, much more indicative of hypothesis (1). If you argue that these characteristics or qualities weren't representative of mind vs mindless then why not?

In the most concise way possible reality is just too information-rich and indicative of mindfulness rather than mindlessness.

Dude, crackin' open a beer now! As far as the reasoning used in your post: Composition fallacy.

Nice. *fist bump*

Composition fallacy how though?

In both scenarios you assume characteristics of the parts determine the characteristics of the whole. That's no bueno, amigo.

It's like a recipe that determines the final product. I don't doubt we can agree that a recipe determines the final product.

Plus, I'm curious how you came up with the characteristics of a mind capable of creating the universe to begin with.

A mind capable of creating the universe vs mind in general is synonymous
Benshapiro
Posts: 3,942
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2015 4:23:38 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/13/2015 4:21:22 AM, Pollux wrote:
At 12/13/2015 2:51:47 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
It's Saturday night and I'm a little buzzed. Now is a good time to post. I've read that alcohol stimulates the creative side of the brain.

The biggest reason to believe in God is simple. It's more rational to believe that reality is derivative from mind rather than from mindlessness...

Let's take two competing hypothesis: (1) reality is derivative from mind and (2) reality is derivative from mindlessness.

Let's examine hypothesis (1). What qualities or characteristic would we expect reality to exude if reality was derivative from mind? How would we even determine this in the first place? Let's see what qualities our characteristics our mind exudes:

(1) intelligence
(2) creativity
(3) humor
(4) intelligibility
(5) purposiveness
6) rationality
(7) orderliness
(8) moral aspects
(9) complexity
(10) cohesiveness

(2) what qualities or characteristics would we expect if reality was derivative from mindlessness? Let's examine what we could logically expect:

(1) inable, inept
(2) uncreative, unimaginative
(3) woeful
(4) unintelligible, obscure
(5) aimless
(6) absurd
(7) chaotic, haphazard
(8) unprincipled
(9) plainness
(10) disjointed, fragmented

If we take a look at the universe and our conscious experiences it's much, much more indicative of hypothesis (1). If you argue that these characteristics or qualities weren't representative of mind vs mindless then why not?

In the most concise way possible reality is just too information-rich and indicative of mindfulness rather than mindlessness.

Maybe. So you're asking me to believe in a mind from which my minds and all other minds have sprung. Ok, but now what? How does that help the victims and families of "baby cancer?" How do we utilize this information concerning mind-mind/bubble-in-mind-bubbleness-mind matrix to help us?

Yes

Baby cancer = indicative of what? I'll let you answer that.
Pollux
Posts: 241
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2015 4:32:15 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/13/2015 4:23:38 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 12/13/2015 4:21:22 AM, Pollux wrote:
At 12/13/2015 2:51:47 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
It's Saturday night and I'm a little buzzed. Now is a good time to post. I've read that alcohol stimulates the creative side of the brain.

The biggest reason to believe in God is simple. It's more rational to believe that reality is derivative from mind rather than from mindlessness...

Let's take two competing hypothesis: (1) reality is derivative from mind and (2) reality is derivative from mindlessness.

Let's examine hypothesis (1). What qualities or characteristic would we expect reality to exude if reality was derivative from mind? How would we even determine this in the first place? Let's see what qualities our characteristics our mind exudes:

(1) intelligence
(2) creativity
(3) humor
(4) intelligibility
(5) purposiveness
6) rationality
(7) orderliness
(8) moral aspects
(9) complexity
(10) cohesiveness

(2) what qualities or characteristics would we expect if reality was derivative from mindlessness? Let's examine what we could logically expect:

(1) inable, inept
(2) uncreative, unimaginative
(3) woeful
(4) unintelligible, obscure
(5) aimless
(6) absurd
(7) chaotic, haphazard
(8) unprincipled
(9) plainness
(10) disjointed, fragmented

If we take a look at the universe and our conscious experiences it's much, much more indicative of hypothesis (1). If you argue that these characteristics or qualities weren't representative of mind vs mindless then why not?

In the most concise way possible reality is just too information-rich and indicative of mindfulness rather than mindlessness.

Maybe. So you're asking me to believe in a mind from which my minds and all other minds have sprung. Ok, but now what? How does that help the victims and families of "baby cancer?" How do we utilize this information concerning mind-mind/bubble-in-mind-bubbleness-mind matrix to help us?

Yes


Baby cancer = indicative of what? I'll let you answer that.

Fine. You answer the other, more important question, then.
Benshapiro
Posts: 3,942
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2015 4:33:43 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/13/2015 4:32:15 AM, Pollux wrote:
At 12/13/2015 4:23:38 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 12/13/2015 4:21:22 AM, Pollux wrote:
At 12/13/2015 2:51:47 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
It's Saturday night and I'm a little buzzed. Now is a good time to post. I've read that alcohol stimulates the creative side of the brain.

The biggest reason to believe in God is simple. It's more rational to believe that reality is derivative from mind rather than from mindlessness...

Let's take two competing hypothesis: (1) reality is derivative from mind and (2) reality is derivative from mindlessness.

Let's examine hypothesis (1). What qualities or characteristic would we expect reality to exude if reality was derivative from mind? How would we even determine this in the first place? Let's see what qualities our characteristics our mind exudes:

(1) intelligence
(2) creativity
(3) humor
(4) intelligibility
(5) purposiveness
6) rationality
(7) orderliness
(8) moral aspects
(9) complexity
(10) cohesiveness

(2) what qualities or characteristics would we expect if reality was derivative from mindlessness? Let's examine what we could logically expect:

(1) inable, inept
(2) uncreative, unimaginative
(3) woeful
(4) unintelligible, obscure
(5) aimless
(6) absurd
(7) chaotic, haphazard
(8) unprincipled
(9) plainness
(10) disjointed, fragmented

If we take a look at the universe and our conscious experiences it's much, much more indicative of hypothesis (1). If you argue that these characteristics or qualities weren't representative of mind vs mindless then why not?

In the most concise way possible reality is just too information-rich and indicative of mindfulness rather than mindlessness.

Maybe. So you're asking me to believe in a mind from which my minds and all other minds have sprung. Ok, but now what? How does that help the victims and families of "baby cancer?" How do we utilize this information concerning mind-mind/bubble-in-mind-bubbleness-mind matrix to help us?

Yes


Baby cancer = indicative of what? I'll let you answer that.

Fine. You answer the other, more important question, then.

What's the more important question
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2015 4:42:36 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/13/2015 4:21:25 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 12/13/2015 4:18:29 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 12/13/2015 4:04:04 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 12/13/2015 3:55:58 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 12/13/2015 2:51:47 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
It's Saturday night and I'm a little buzzed. Now is a good time to post. I've read that alcohol stimulates the creative side of the brain.

The biggest reason to believe in God is simple. It's more rational to believe that reality is derivative from mind rather than from mindlessness...

Let's take two competing hypothesis: (1) reality is derivative from mind and (2) reality is derivative from mindlessness.

Let's examine hypothesis (1). What qualities or characteristic would we expect reality to exude if reality was derivative from mind? How would we even determine this in the first place? Let's see what qualities our characteristics our mind exudes:

(1) intelligence
(2) creativity
(3) humor
(4) intelligibility
(5) purposiveness
6) rationality
(7) orderliness
(8) moral aspects
(9) complexity
(10) cohesiveness

(2) what qualities or characteristics would we expect if reality was derivative from mindlessness? Let's examine what we could logically expect:

(1) inable, inept
(2) uncreative, unimaginative
(3) woeful
(4) unintelligible, obscure
(5) aimless
(6) absurd
(7) chaotic, haphazard
(8) unprincipled
(9) plainness
(10) disjointed, fragmented

If we take a look at the universe and our conscious experiences it's much, much more indicative of hypothesis (1). If you argue that these characteristics or qualities weren't representative of mind vs mindless then why not?

In the most concise way possible reality is just too information-rich and indicative of mindfulness rather than mindlessness.

Dude, crackin' open a beer now! As far as the reasoning used in your post: Composition fallacy.

Nice. *fist bump*

Composition fallacy how though?

In both scenarios you assume characteristics of the parts determine the characteristics of the whole. That's no bueno, amigo.

It's like a recipe that determines the final product. I don't doubt we can agree that a recipe determines the final product.

Do we need to use ingredients that taste like barbecue to make barbecue sauce? ;-)

Plus, I'm curious how you came up with the characteristics of a mind capable of creating the universe to begin with.

A mind capable of creating the universe vs mind in general is synonymous

How do you know? Perhaps, only intelligence and humor is required of a creator...
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2015 6:43:29 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/13/2015 3:06:21 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 12/13/2015 2:57:53 AM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 12/13/2015 2:51:47 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
It's Saturday night and I'm a little buzzed. Now is a good time to post. I've read that alcohol stimulates the creative side of the brain.

The biggest reason to believe in God is simple. It's more rational to believe that reality is derivative from mind rather than from mindlessness...

Let's take two competing hypothesis: (1) reality is derivative from mind and (2) reality is derivative from mindlessness.

Let's examine hypothesis (1). What qualities or characteristic would we expect reality to exude if reality was derivative from mind? How would we even determine this in the first place? Let's see what qualities our characteristics our mind exudes:

(1) intelligence
(2) creativity
(3) humor
(4) intelligibility
(5) purposiveness
6) rationality
(7) orderliness
(8) moral aspects
(9) complexity
(10) cohesiveness

(2) what qualities or characteristics would we expect if reality was derivative from mindlessness? Let's examine what we could logically expect:

(1) inable, inept
(2) uncreative, unimaginative
(3) woeful
(4) unintelligible, obscure
(5) aimless
(6) absurd
(7) chaotic, haphazard
(8) unprincipled
(9) plainness
(10) disjointed, fragmented

If we take a look at the universe and our conscious experiences it's much, much more indicative of hypothesis (1). If you argue that these characteristics or qualities weren't representative of mind vs mindless then why not?

In the most concise way possible reality is just too information-rich and indicative of mindfulness rather than mindlessness.

Baby cancer..............

Your move.

Which point are you refuting? And specific examples aren't representative of which hypothesis is more likely.

Confirmation bias ? you only looking at the things that exist that we find pleasing.........

It's kind of like the argument, how can you not believe in a creator ? Look at the sunset, puppies, the order of things, tides goes in tide goes out.

Your argument seems to me to be of that kind, except your using abstractions instead of rainbows, sunsets and puppies.
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12
bulproof
Posts: 25,197
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2015 6:56:57 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/13/2015 4:16:22 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 12/13/2015 4:08:09 AM, bulproof wrote:
The hole wasn't made in the shape of your puddle.

What if the puddle was the result of a puddle?
How would that change the shape of your hole?
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
smelisox
Posts: 849
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2015 7:43:36 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/13/2015 4:04:04 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 12/13/2015 3:55:58 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 12/13/2015 2:51:47 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
It's Saturday night and I'm a little buzzed. Now is a good time to post. I've read that alcohol stimulates the creative side of the brain.

The biggest reason to believe in God is simple. It's more rational to believe that reality is derivative from mind rather than from mindlessness...

Let's take two competing hypothesis: (1) reality is derivative from mind and (2) reality is derivative from mindlessness.

Let's examine hypothesis (1). What qualities or characteristic would we expect reality to exude if reality was derivative from mind? How would we even determine this in the first place? Let's see what qualities our characteristics our mind exudes:

(1) intelligence
(2) creativity
(3) humor
(4) intelligibility
(5) purposiveness
6) rationality
(7) orderliness
(8) moral aspects
(9) complexity
(10) cohesiveness

(2) what qualities or characteristics would we expect if reality was derivative from mindlessness? Let's examine what we could logically expect:

(1) inable, inept
(2) uncreative, unimaginative
(3) woeful
(4) unintelligible, obscure
(5) aimless
(6) absurd
(7) chaotic, haphazard
(8) unprincipled
(9) plainness
(10) disjointed, fragmented

If we take a look at the universe and our conscious experiences it's much, much more indicative of hypothesis (1). If you argue that these characteristics or qualities weren't representative of mind vs mindless then why not?

In the most concise way possible reality is just too information-rich and indicative of mindfulness rather than mindlessness.

Dude, crackin' open a beer now! As far as the reasoning used in your post: Composition fallacy.

Nice. *fist bump*

Composition fallacy how though?

I've never understood the American obsession with excessive drinking. Is it to try and forget you're wrong about religion and politics?
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2015 9:13:18 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/13/2015 2:51:47 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
It's Saturday night and I'm a little buzzed. Now is a good time to post. I've read that alcohol stimulates the creative side of the brain.

The biggest reason to believe in God is simple. It's more rational to believe that reality is derivative from mind rather than from mindlessness...

Let's take two competing hypothesis: (1) reality is derivative from mind and (2) reality is derivative from mindlessness.

Let's examine hypothesis (1). What qualities or characteristic would we expect reality to exude if reality was derivative from mind? How would we even determine this in the first place? Let's see what qualities our characteristics our mind exudes:

(1) intelligence
(2) creativity
(3) humor
(4) intelligibility
(5) purposiveness
6) rationality
(7) orderliness
(8) moral aspects
(9) complexity
(10) cohesiveness

(2) what qualities or characteristics would we expect if reality was derivative from mindlessness? Let's examine what we could logically expect:

(1) inable, inept
(2) uncreative, unimaginative
(3) woeful
(4) unintelligible, obscure
(5) aimless
(6) absurd
(7) chaotic, haphazard
(8) unprincipled
(9) plainness
(10) disjointed, fragmented

If we take a look at the universe and our conscious experiences it's much, much more indicative of hypothesis (1). If you argue that these characteristics or qualities weren't representative of mind vs mindless then why not?

In the most concise way possible reality is just too information-rich and indicative of mindfulness rather than mindlessness.

Obviously you are more than a little buzzed. If you were thinking straight you would understand both lists apply to various aspects of the universe. The universe and life on Earth is filled with opposites.
It is a paradox.
http://lonerwolf.com...

No mind created the universe. The universe consists of energy which has always existed. It cannot be created or destroyed.
E=MC2
Ramshutu
Posts: 4,063
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2015 11:24:30 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/13/2015 2:51:47 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
It's Saturday night and I'm a little buzzed. Now is a good time to post. I've read that alcohol stimulates the creative side of the brain.

The biggest reason to believe in God is simple. It's more rational to believe that reality is derivative from mind rather than from mindlessness...

Let's take two competing hypothesis: (1) reality is derivative from mind and (2) reality is derivative from mindlessness.

Let's examine hypothesis (1). What qualities or characteristic would we expect reality to exude if reality was derivative from mind? How would we even determine this in the first place? Let's see what qualities our characteristics our mind exudes:

(1) intelligence
(2) creativity
(3) humor
(4) intelligibility
(5) purposiveness
6) rationality
(7) orderliness
(8) moral aspects
(9) complexity
(10) cohesiveness

(2) what qualities or characteristics would we expect if reality was derivative from mindlessness? Let's examine what we could logically expect:

(1) inable, inept
(2) uncreative, unimaginative
(3) woeful
(4) unintelligible, obscure
(5) aimless
(6) absurd
(7) chaotic, haphazard
(8) unprincipled
(9) plainness
(10) disjointed, fragmented

If we take a look at the universe and our conscious experiences it's much, much more indicative of hypothesis (1). If you argue that these characteristics or qualities weren't representative of mind vs mindless then why not?

In the most concise way possible reality is just too information-rich and indicative of mindfulness rather than mindlessness.

God isn't an explanation. An explanation should give credible reasons or justifications as to why things are a particular way rather than any other.

God is, at best, a lack of an explanation; a phrase that can be used as an excuse for not looking for an actual explanation.
JJ50
Posts: 2,144
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2015 11:53:23 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/13/2015 2:51:47 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
It's Saturday night and I'm a little buzzed. Now is a good time to post. I've read that alcohol stimulates the creative side of the brain.

The biggest reason to believe in God is simple. It's more rational to believe that reality is derivative from mind rather than from mindlessness...

Let's take two competing hypothesis: (1) reality is derivative from mind and (2) reality is derivative from mindlessness.

Let's examine hypothesis (1). What qualities or characteristic would we expect reality to exude if reality was derivative from mind? How would we even determine this in the first place? Let's see what qualities our characteristics our mind exudes:

(1) intelligence
(2) creativity
(3) humor
(4) intelligibility
(5) purposiveness
6) rationality
(7) orderliness
(8) moral aspects
(9) complexity
(10) cohesiveness

(2) what qualities or characteristics would we expect if reality was derivative from mindlessness? Let's examine what we could logically expect:

(1) inable, inept
(2) uncreative, unimaginative
(3) woeful
(4) unintelligible, obscure
(5) aimless
(6) absurd
(7) chaotic, haphazard
(8) unprincipled
(9) plainness
(10) disjointed, fragmented

If we take a look at the universe and our conscious experiences it's much, much more indicative of hypothesis (1). If you argue that these characteristics or qualities weren't representative of mind vs mindless then why not?

In the most concise way possible reality is just too information-rich and indicative of mindfulness rather than mindlessness.

Whilst it is just possible that the universe had some sort of intelligent designer, the unpleasant Biblical deity is not a credible creator.
skipsaweirdo
Posts: 1,863
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2015 11:57:05 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/13/2015 9:13:18 AM, Skyangel wrote:
At 12/13/2015 2:51:47 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
It's Saturday night and I'm a little buzzed. Now is a good time to post. I've read that alcohol stimulates the creative side of the brain.

The biggest reason to believe in God is simple. It's more rational to believe that reality is derivative from mind rather than from mindlessness...

Let's take two competing hypothesis: (1) reality is derivative from mind and (2) reality is derivative from mindlessness.

Let's examine hypothesis (1). What qualities or characteristic would we expect reality to exude if reality was derivative from mind? How would we even determine this in the first place? Let's see what qualities our characteristics our mind exudes:

(1) intelligence
(2) creativity
(3) humor
(4) intelligibility
(5) purposiveness
6) rationality
(7) orderliness
(8) moral aspects
(9) complexity
(10) cohesiveness

(2) what qualities or characteristics would we expect if reality was derivative from mindlessness? Let's examine what we could logically expect:

(1) inable, inept
(2) uncreative, unimaginative
(3) woeful
(4) unintelligible, obscure
(5) aimless
(6) absurd
(7) chaotic, haphazard
(8) unprincipled
(9) plainness
(10) disjointed, fragmented

If we take a look at the universe and our conscious experiences it's much, much more indicative of hypothesis (1). If you argue that these characteristics or qualities weren't representative of mind vs mindless then why not?

In the most concise way possible reality is just too information-rich and indicative of mindfulness rather than mindlessness.

Obviously you are more than a little buzzed. If you were thinking straight you would understand both lists apply to various aspects of the universe. The universe and life on Earth is filled with opposites.
It is a paradox.
http://lonerwolf.com...

No mind created the universe. The universe consists of energy which has always existed. It cannot be created or destroyed.
Humans haven't examined all energy in the universe therefore you cannot claim it cannot be destroyed. And the phrase it cannot be created merely reflects what humans are currently capable of not necessarily what is absolutely true. Your argument is circular reasoning. You simply have the position that the universe came from the universe.

E=MC2
ethang5
Posts: 4,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2015 12:44:07 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/13/2015 6:43:29 AM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 12/13/2015 3:06:21 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 12/13/2015 2:57:53 AM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 12/13/2015 2:51:47 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
It's Saturday night and I'm a little buzzed. Now is a good time to post. I've read that alcohol stimulates the creative side of the brain.

The biggest reason to believe in God is simple. It's more rational to believe that reality is derivative from mind rather than from mindlessness...

Let's take two competing hypothesis: (1) reality is derivative from mind and (2) reality is derivative from mindlessness.

Let's examine hypothesis (1). What qualities or characteristic would we expect reality to exude if reality was derivative from mind? How would we even determine this in the first place? Let's see what qualities our characteristics our mind exudes:

(1) intelligence
(2) creativity
(3) humor
(4) intelligibility
(5) purposiveness
6) rationality
(7) orderliness
(8) moral aspects
(9) complexity
(10) cohesiveness

(2) what qualities or characteristics would we expect if reality was derivative from mindlessness? Let's examine what we could logically expect:

(1) inable, inept
(2) uncreative, unimaginative
(3) woeful
(4) unintelligible, obscure
(5) aimless
(6) absurd
(7) chaotic, haphazard
(8) unprincipled
(9) plainness
(10) disjointed, fragmented

If we take a look at the universe and our conscious experiences it's much, much more indicative of hypothesis (1). If you argue that these characteristics or qualities weren't representative of mind vs mindless then why not?

In the most concise way possible reality is just too information-rich and indicative of mindfulness rather than mindlessness.

Baby cancer..............

Your move.

Which point are you refuting? And specific examples aren't representative of which hypothesis is more likely.

Confirmation bias ? you only looking at the things that exist that we find pleasing.........

For some things yes, not not for most. How is the order we find in nature personally pleasing? And even if it is pleasing to us, how does that fact affect its orderliness?

It's kind of like the argument, how can you not believe in a creator ? Look at the sunset, puppies, the order of things, tides goes in tide goes out.

No. He is saying it is more logical to ascribe order to a sentient mind than chaos. How one personally feels about that order is irrelevant to the argument. God is a more logical source of the universe than mindlessness. He's not saying here that God is true, but only that it is more reasonable to believe creation, given the state of what we observe in the universe.

Your argument seems to me to be of that kind, except your using abstractions instead of rainbows, sunsets and puppies.

I think you have either mis-characterized or mis-understood the argument.
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2015 1:05:44 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/13/2015 12:44:07 PM, ethang5 wrote:
At 12/13/2015 6:43:29 AM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 12/13/2015 3:06:21 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 12/13/2015 2:57:53 AM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 12/13/2015 2:51:47 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
It's Saturday night and I'm a little buzzed. Now is a good time to post. I've read that alcohol stimulates the creative side of the brain.

The biggest reason to believe in God is simple. It's more rational to believe that reality is derivative from mind rather than from mindlessness...

Let's take two competing hypothesis: (1) reality is derivative from mind and (2) reality is derivative from mindlessness.

Let's examine hypothesis (1). What qualities or characteristic would we expect reality to exude if reality was derivative from mind? How would we even determine this in the first place? Let's see what qualities our characteristics our mind exudes:

(1) intelligence
(2) creativity
(3) humor
(4) intelligibility
(5) purposiveness
6) rationality
(7) orderliness
(8) moral aspects
(9) complexity
(10) cohesiveness

(2) what qualities or characteristics would we expect if reality was derivative from mindlessness? Let's examine what we could logically expect:

(1) inable, inept
(2) uncreative, unimaginative
(3) woeful
(4) unintelligible, obscure
(5) aimless
(6) absurd
(7) chaotic, haphazard
(8) unprincipled
(9) plainness
(10) disjointed, fragmented

If we take a look at the universe and our conscious experiences it's much, much more indicative of hypothesis (1). If you argue that these characteristics or qualities weren't representative of mind vs mindless then why not?

In the most concise way possible reality is just too information-rich and indicative of mindfulness rather than mindlessness.

Baby cancer..............

Your move.

Which point are you refuting? And specific examples aren't representative of which hypothesis is more likely.

Confirmation bias ? you only looking at the things that exist that we find pleasing.........

For some things yes, not not for most. How is the order we find in nature personally pleasing? And even if it is pleasing to us, how does that fact affect its orderliness?

It's kind of like the argument, how can you not believe in a creator ? Look at the sunset, puppies, the order of things, tides goes in tide goes out.

No. He is saying it is more logical to ascribe order to a sentient mind than chaos. How one personally feels about that order is irrelevant to the argument. God is a more logical source of the universe than mindlessness. He's not saying here that God is true, but only that it is more reasonable to believe creation, given the state of what we observe in the universe.

That order among things includes..............baby cancer, just saying.

You know there is this argument that goes something like humans are complex, complexity either came by Intelligent design or chance, not chance therefore ID.

1) First it's a false dillema, just like you described this argument, its not ID vs CHANCE its ID vs Absent ID. It's a false dillema to say either product of mind or chaos. It's mind vs absent mind.

2) Secondly that complexity argument just assumed complexity in of it's self mean't ID, it didn't consider that complexity can come by mind or absent mind. Different kinds of complexity and how they came about, and not all need to have ID.

Like wise with this argument, your just assuming order therefore mind, you have have not considered order that comes by without mind. Different kinds of order, not all need a mind.

3) Thirdly our data is biased, our data is such that necessary preconditions of our own existence must be the case, other wise we would not exist in the first place.

So certain "orders" must be the case, I don't think humans can survive for example if gravity was to just change randomly to much stronger to much weaker tearing all our atoms apart.


Your argument seems to me to be of that kind, except your using abstractions instead of rainbows, sunsets and puppies.

I think you have either mis-characterized or mis-understood the argument.

I am convinced without a certain level of critical thinking ability all intelligent life forms will think to themselves in some way, you know just looking at all this stuff (insert characterization here)...........................I think it was all part of a plan.

Its understandable, they can only look at things throw their own narrow perspective, and through that very narrow perspective things are going to LOOK LIKE it was all set up.

This hole suits me quite well....................says the puddle.

Look at all this "order"................yeah baby cancer, BUT the order, the order I tell you.
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,580
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2015 2:07:20 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/13/2015 12:44:07 PM, ethang5 wrote:
At 12/13/2015 6:43:29 AM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 12/13/2015 3:06:21 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 12/13/2015 2:57:53 AM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 12/13/2015 2:51:47 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
It's Saturday night and I'm a little buzzed. Now is a good time to post. I've read that alcohol stimulates the creative side of the brain.

The biggest reason to believe in God is simple. It's more rational to believe that reality is derivative from mind rather than from mindlessness...

Let's take two competing hypothesis: (1) reality is derivative from mind and (2) reality is derivative from mindlessness.

Let's examine hypothesis (1). What qualities or characteristic would we expect reality to exude if reality was derivative from mind? How would we even determine this in the first place? Let's see what qualities our characteristics our mind exudes:

(1) intelligence
(2) creativity
(3) humor
(4) intelligibility
(5) purposiveness
6) rationality
(7) orderliness
(8) moral aspects
(9) complexity
(10) cohesiveness

(2) what qualities or characteristics would we expect if reality was derivative from mindlessness? Let's examine what we could logically expect:

(1) inable, inept
(2) uncreative, unimaginative
(3) woeful
(4) unintelligible, obscure
(5) aimless
(6) absurd
(7) chaotic, haphazard
(8) unprincipled
(9) plainness
(10) disjointed, fragmented

If we take a look at the universe and our conscious experiences it's much, much more indicative of hypothesis (1). If you argue that these characteristics or qualities weren't representative of mind vs mindless then why not?

In the most concise way possible reality is just too information-rich and indicative of mindfulness rather than mindlessness.

Baby cancer..............

Your move.

Which point are you refuting? And specific examples aren't representative of which hypothesis is more likely.

Confirmation bias ? you only looking at the things that exist that we find pleasing.........

For some things yes, not not for most. How is the order we find in nature personally pleasing?

What order?

And even if it is pleasing to us, how does that fact affect its orderliness?

It's kind of like the argument, how can you not believe in a creator ? Look at the sunset, puppies, the order of things, tides goes in tide goes out.

No. He is saying it is more logical to ascribe order to a sentient mind than chaos.

Why is it more logical?

How one personally feels about that order is irrelevant to the argument. God is a more logical source of the universe than mindlessness. He's not saying here that God is true, but only that it is more reasonable to believe creation, given the state of what we observe in the universe.

The universe is indeed being observed, yet there is no evidence whatsoever for any gods, so how is it logical or reasonable to jump to the conclusion of God?

Your argument seems to me to be of that kind, except your using abstractions instead of rainbows, sunsets and puppies.

I think you have either mis-characterized or mis-understood the argument.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
ethang5
Posts: 4,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2015 3:06:46 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/13/2015 1:05:44 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 12/13/2015 12:44:07 PM, ethang5 wrote:
At 12/13/2015 3:06:21 AM, Benshapiro wrote:

It's Saturday night and I'm a little buzzed. Now is a good time to post. I've read that alcohol stimulates the creative side of the brain.

The biggest reason to believe in God is simple. It's more rational to believe that reality is derivative from mind rather than from mindlessness...

Let's take two competing hypothesis: (1) reality is derivative from mind and (2) reality is derivative from mindlessness.

Let's examine hypothesis (1). What qualities or characteristic would we expect reality to exude if reality was derivative from mind? How would we even determine this in the first place? Let's see what qualities our characteristics our mind exudes:

(1) intelligence
(2) creativity
(3) humor
(4) intelligibility
(5) purposiveness
(6) rationality
(7) orderliness
(8) moral aspects
(9) complexity
(10) cohesiveness

(2) what qualities or characteristics would we expect if reality was derivative from mindlessness? Let's examine what we could logically expect:

(1) inable, inept
(2) uncreative, unimaginative
(3) woeful
(4) unintelligible, obscure
(5) aimless
(6) absurd
(7) chaotic, haphazard
(8) unprincipled
(9) plainness
(10) disjointed, fragmented

If we take a look at the universe and our conscious experiences it's much, much more indicative of hypothesis (1). If you argue that these characteristics or qualities weren't representative of mind vs mindless then why not?

In the most concise way possible reality is just too information-rich and indicative of mindfulness rather than mindlessness.

Baby cancer..............

Your move.

Which point are you refuting? And specific examples aren't representative of which hypothesis is more likely.

Confirmation bias ? you only looking at the things that exist that we find pleasing.........

For some things yes, not not for most. How is the order we find in nature personally pleasing? And even if it is pleasing to us, how does that fact affect its orderliness?

It's kind of like the argument, how can you not believe in a creator ? Look at the sunset, puppies, the order of things, tides goes in tide goes out.

No. He is saying it is more logical to ascribe order to a sentient mind than chaos. How one personally feels about that order is irrelevant to the argument. God is a more logical source of the universe than mindlessness. He's not saying here that God is true, but only that it is more reasonable to believe creation, given the state of what we observe in the universe.

That order among things includes..............baby cancer, just saying.

You are being illogical. Baby cancer is just emotive TO YOU. Cancer and babies operate on known predictable order. That is why we can diagnose and treat it. The OP is not saying that only things WE LIKE happen because God made the universe.

Viruses do not suddenly begin behaving differently just because their host is a baby. The OP is also talking about physically testable things like gravity, electron clouds, chemistry, and magnetism. It is much more reasonable to think these things, we even sometimes call "laws" of the universe, are the product of a sentient mind than the product of mindlessness. That seems logical and intuitive to me.

You know there is this argument that goes something like humans are complex, complexity either came by Intelligent design or chance, not chance therefore ID.

1) First it's a false dillema, just like you described this argument, its not ID vs CHANCE its ID vs Absent ID. It's a false dillema to say either product of mind or chaos. It's mind vs absent mind.

Wrong. The OP is comparing two explanations and finding one of them more reasonable. It did not imply that those two were the only options, or that either of them were unreasonable. Just that one of them, given what we observe in the real world, is more logical.

2) Secondly that complexity argument just assumed complexity in of it's self mean't ID, it didn't consider that complexity can come by mind or absent mind. Different kinds of complexity and how they came about, and not all need to have ID.

You are still missing the argument because you so want it to be ID. Even if complexity can come by mind or absent mind, it remains more logical to ascribe order to mind than to mindlessness.

And the OP said order, not complexity. Chaos can be complex, so please don't unnecessarily substitute terms.

Like wise with this argument, your just assuming order therefore mind, you have , have not considered order that comes by without mind. Different kinds of order, not all need a mind.

The OP did not say order cannot come about by mindlessness. He only said it is more reasonable to believe order comes about by mind. And in the real world, we find that this is generally true.

It is because this is true that we can have a program like SETI. It is how we know that a thief has been in our home and the clutter is not due to the pet cat. It's how we know how close an asteroid will pass by the Earth 20 years hence. Its how we found elements we previously did not know existed. It is why societies work.

So he isn't assuming anything. He's only saying that order is more likely from mind than from mindlessness. Therefore it is more reasonable to believe solutions involving mind.

3) Thirdly our data is biased, our data is such that necessary preconditions of our own existence must be the case, other wise we would not exist in the first place.

How is rationality necessarily for our existence? Or purpose? The OP did not tie the conditions we observe to our existence. Even if there were no humans in the universe, the universe would still show signs of information and order that would make mind a more reasonable explanation for its existence.

So certain "orders" must be the case, I don't think humans can survive for example if gravity was to just change randomly to much stronger to much weaker tearing all our atoms apart.

No, but humans don't NEED gravity to exist. Why make it change mid stream? Could not life have started and evolved in a condition of no gravity? And it isn't gravity holding our atoms together.

Your argument seems to me to be of that kind, except your using abstractions instead of rainbows, sunsets and puppies.

I think you have either mis-characterized or mis-understood the argument.

I am convinced without a certain level of critical thinking ability all intelligent life forms will think to themselves in some way, you know just looking at all this stuff (insert characterization here)...........................I think it was all part of a plan.

But the OP said nothing about a "Plan". It only said it is more reasonable to believe order is from mind. Can you deal with that instead of inventing arguments to defeat?

Its understandable, they can only look at things throw their own narrow perspective, and through that very narrow perspective things are going to LOOK LIKE it was all set up.

Do you think the SETI program is a waste? Would you cancel it?

This hole suits me quite well....................says the puddle.

The argument said nothing about how well anything suits us.

Look at all this "order"................yeah baby cancer, BUT the order, the order I tell you.

You must have a really strange definition of "universal order" if you think that baby cancer contradicts it.
ethang5
Posts: 4,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2015 3:15:33 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/13/2015 2:07:20 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 12/13/2015 12:44:07 PM, ethang5 wrote:
At 12/13/2015 6:43:29 AM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 12/13/2015 3:06:21 AM, Benshapiro wrote:

It's Saturday night and I'm a little buzzed. Now is a good time to post. I've read that alcohol stimulates the creative side of the brain.

The biggest reason to believe in God is simple. It's more rational to believe that reality is derivative from mind rather than from mindlessness...

Let's take two competing hypothesis: (1) reality is derivative from mind and (2) reality is derivative from mindlessness.

Let's examine hypothesis (1). What qualities or characteristic would we expect reality to exude if reality was derivative from mind? How would we even determine this in the first place? Let's see what qualities our characteristics our mind exudes:

(1) intelligence
(2) creativity
(3) humor
(4) intelligibility
(5) purposiveness
6) rationality
(7) orderliness
(8) moral aspects
(9) complexity
(10) cohesiveness

(2) what qualities or characteristics would we expect if reality was derivative from mindlessness? Let's examine what we could logically expect:

(1) inable, inept
(2) uncreative, unimaginative
(3) woeful
(4) unintelligible, obscure
(5) aimless
(6) absurd
(7) chaotic, haphazard
(8) unprincipled
(9) plainness
(10) disjointed, fragmented

If we take a look at the universe and our conscious experiences it's much, much more indicative of hypothesis (1). If you argue that these characteristics or qualities weren't representative of mind vs mindless then why not?

In the most concise way possible reality is just too information-rich and indicative of mindfulness rather than mindlessness.

Baby cancer..............

Your move.

Which point are you refuting? And specific examples aren't representative of which hypothesis is more likely.

Confirmation bias ? you only looking at the things that exist that we find pleasing.........

For some things yes, not not for most. How is the order we find in nature personally pleasing?

What order?

Hydrodynamics. Chemistry. Rate of falling bodies. Osmosis. The seasons. Should I go on?

And even if it is pleasing to us, how does that fact affect its orderliness?

It's kind of like the argument, how can you not believe in a creator ? Look at the sunset, puppies, the order of things, tides goes in tide goes out.

No. He is saying it is more logical to ascribe order to a sentient mind than chaos.

Why is it more logical?

Because that is what we find in reality. Qualities like what the OP listed are by far more often sourced from mind than from mindlessness.

How one personally feels about that order is irrelevant to the argument. God is a more logical source of the universe than mindlessness. He's not saying here that God is true, but only that it is more reasonable to believe creation, given the state of what we observe in the universe.

The universe is indeed being observed, yet there is no evidence whatsoever for any gods, so how is it logical or reasonable to jump to the conclusion of God?

He first concluded that there was a mind, and then from that concluded there was a God. Qualities like what the OP listed are by far more often sourced from mind than from mindlessness. And speak for yourself, the universe is replete with evidence of God.

Your argument seems to me to be of that kind, except your using abstractions instead of rainbows, sunsets and puppies.

I think you have either mis-characterized or mis-understood the argument.
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,580
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2015 3:45:08 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/13/2015 3:15:33 PM, ethang5 wrote:
At 12/13/2015 2:07:20 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 12/13/2015 12:44:07 PM, ethang5 wrote:
At 12/13/2015 6:43:29 AM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 12/13/2015 3:06:21 AM, Benshapiro wrote:

It's Saturday night and I'm a little buzzed. Now is a good time to post. I've read that alcohol stimulates the creative side of the brain.

The biggest reason to believe in God is simple. It's more rational to believe that reality is derivative from mind rather than from mindlessness...

Let's take two competing hypothesis: (1) reality is derivative from mind and (2) reality is derivative from mindlessness.

Let's examine hypothesis (1). What qualities or characteristic would we expect reality to exude if reality was derivative from mind? How would we even determine this in the first place? Let's see what qualities our characteristics our mind exudes:

(1) intelligence
(2) creativity
(3) humor
(4) intelligibility
(5) purposiveness
6) rationality
(7) orderliness
(8) moral aspects
(9) complexity
(10) cohesiveness

(2) what qualities or characteristics would we expect if reality was derivative from mindlessness? Let's examine what we could logically expect:

(1) inable, inept
(2) uncreative, unimaginative
(3) woeful
(4) unintelligible, obscure
(5) aimless
(6) absurd
(7) chaotic, haphazard
(8) unprincipled
(9) plainness
(10) disjointed, fragmented

If we take a look at the universe and our conscious experiences it's much, much more indicative of hypothesis (1). If you argue that these characteristics or qualities weren't representative of mind vs mindless then why not?

In the most concise way possible reality is just too information-rich and indicative of mindfulness rather than mindlessness.

Baby cancer..............

Your move.

Which point are you refuting? And specific examples aren't representative of which hypothesis is more likely.

Confirmation bias ? you only looking at the things that exist that we find pleasing.........

For some things yes, not not for most. How is the order we find in nature personally pleasing?

What order?

Hydrodynamics. Chemistry. Rate of falling bodies. Osmosis. The seasons. Should I go on?

Sorry, but it appears you've merely tossed out some random words without any explanation. If you're now asking if you should go on with the explanation, then please do so.

As an aside, you are free to offer explanations at any time without asking for my consent.

And even if it is pleasing to us, how does that fact affect its orderliness?

It's kind of like the argument, how can you not believe in a creator ? Look at the sunset, puppies, the order of things, tides goes in tide goes out.

No. He is saying it is more logical to ascribe order to a sentient mind than chaos.

Why is it more logical?

Because that is what we find in reality.

Where do find what in reality? What are you talking about?

Qualities like what the OP listed are by far more often sourced from mind than from mindlessness.

That makes no sense at all, it is a meaningless statement due simply to the fact that each characteristic from both lists are of the mind. Being mindless means to be without mind, which would mean none of the characteristics from either list would exist.

How one personally feels about that order is irrelevant to the argument. God is a more logical source of the universe than mindlessness. He's not saying here that God is true, but only that it is more reasonable to believe creation, given the state of what we observe in the universe.

The universe is indeed being observed, yet there is no evidence whatsoever for any gods, so how is it logical or reasonable to jump to the conclusion of God?

He first concluded that there was a mind, and then from that concluded there was a God.

That is called jumping to conclusions. The former has no indication whatsoever the existence of the latter nor even refers to it in any way.

Qualities like what the OP listed are by far more often sourced from mind than from mindlessness. And speak for yourself, the universe is replete with evidence of God.

You've already attempted to make your case of evidence for God in another thread.

Your argument seems to me to be of that kind, except your using abstractions instead of rainbows, sunsets and puppies.

I think you have either mis-characterized or mis-understood the argument.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
Pollux
Posts: 241
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2015 3:59:12 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
Maybe. So you're asking me to believe in a mind from which my minds and all other minds have sprung. Ok, but now what? How does that help the victims and families of "baby cancer?" How do we utilize this information concerning mind-mind/bubble-in-mind-bubbleness-mind matrix to help us?

Ben, you have ignored my question enough. I've brought it to your attention several times.

It's the first one. Go to the first question mark and then back up to the capital letter.

Stop dodging.
ethang5
Posts: 4,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2015 4:09:08 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/13/2015 3:45:08 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 12/13/2015 3:15:33 PM, ethang5 wrote:

How is the order we find in nature personally pleasing?

What order?

Hydrodynamics. Chemistry. Rate of falling bodies. Osmosis. The seasons. Should I go on?

Sorry, but it appears you've merely tossed out some random words without any explanation.

Explanation of what? I asked you a question, you asked a question instead of answering mine. My answer was Hydrodynamics. Chemistry. Rate of falling bodies. Osmosis. The seasons.

Sorry, but it appears you've merely tossed out some random words...

Did you expect sounds? Flashing lights?

If you're now asking if you should go on with the explanation, then please do so.

Wait for it. Don't move from your computer. Its coming.....

As an aside, you are free to offer explanations at any time without asking for my consent.

Thanks.

And even if it is pleasing to us, how does that fact affect its orderliness?

It's kind of like the argument, how can you not believe in a creator ? Look at the sunset, puppies, the order of things, tides goes in tide goes out.

No. He is saying it is more logical to ascribe order to a sentient mind than chaos.

Why is it more logical?

Because that is what we find in reality.

Where do find what in reality? What are you talking about?

When you figure what the "it" in your question above refers to, get back to me.

Qualities like what the OP listed are by far more often sourced from mind than from mindlessness.

That makes no sense at all, it is a meaningless statement due simply to the fact that each characteristic from both lists are of the mind. Being mindless means to be without mind, which would mean none of the characteristics from either list would exist.

Exactly.

How one personally feels about that order is irrelevant to the argument. God is a more logical source of the universe than mindlessness. He's not saying here that God is true, but only that it is more reasonable to believe creation, given the state of what we observe in the universe.

The universe is indeed being observed, yet there is no evidence whatsoever for any gods, so how is it logical or reasonable to jump to the conclusion of God?

He first concluded that there was a mind, and then from that concluded there was a God.

That is called jumping to conclusions.

Not if there is a logical process between his premise and his conclusion. Anyway, he did not jump from his idea of order in the universe to a conclusion about God. There were steps in between.

The former has no indication whatsoever the existence of the latter nor even refers to it in any way.

Because he is not trying to make a case for God here. He is simply saying that it is more reasonable to ascribe order to mind than to mindlessness.

Qualities like what the OP listed are by far more often sourced from mind than from mindlessness. And speak for yourself, the universe is replete with evidence of God.

You've already attempted to make your case of evidence for God in another thread.

Yes, we shouldn't overtax you here too.

Your argument seems to me to be of that kind, except your using abstractions instead of rainbows, sunsets and puppies.

I think you have either mis-characterized or mis-understood the argument.