No more so than I can say that Leprechauns do not plant fingerprints at crime scences. However, I see no reason to throw out fingerprint evidence in criminal trials. Do you?
Upvote
0
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
Finding limitations in Naturalism
- Thread starter Heissonear
- Start date
- Status
No more so than I can say that Leprechauns do not plant fingerprints at crime scences. However, I see no reason to throw out fingerprint evidence in criminal trials. Do you?
Avoid facing the past reality (Point 6 an eternal physical realm or physical realm was by a Creator) is not an answer facing a major weakness in Naturalism.
Upvote
0
What use would a limitless method for acquiring knowledge be? What if I had to accept something as true just because someone said it was true? What would be the use of this method?
Upvote
0
Upisoft
CEO of a waterfal
If you call "belief' everything, then certainly. Though people don't call "belief" anything that can be confirmed by independent parties. In your terminology I have "belief" that you exist. In mine, you exists. If you are "just belief", then I don't need to pay any attention to your words. So, can you give me a proof for your existence?
Upvote
0
Point 4
Demanding proof and evidence (from others) but major gaps in evidence exists.
Point 5
No proof or sound answer to the most important question about the natural (universe) - was there a Creator?
Upvote
0
And major gaps exist in our knowledge. Your point?
Is it better to be honest and say that we don't know than to just make something up and believe it in order to have some sort of answer?
Or leprechauns, unicorns, bigfoot, alien spaceships, Zeus, Bacchus, etc.
The real question is why people claim that these things are real to begin with.
Upvote
0
Mr Strawberry
Newbie
This point seems to be trying to claim that working from the available evidence is the same thing as working from no evidence at all. It isn't.
You seem peeved that there is no evidence at all for a creator.
Upvote
0
Quite the opposite. Who you say does not exist you have no evidence for why. Your position is based on faith.
Upvote
0
Split Rock
Conflation of Blathers
Maybe you can answer the question I asked you:
Is not believing in Odin a belief or not?
Upvote
0
Mr Strawberry
Newbie
I know you are trying to avoid stating your position too explicitly but now you have descended into gibberish.
No, I am not the one who wishes to make claims about things without evidence.
You seem to be going off the rails rather rapidly in you naturalism threads now you've moved onto your real agenda.
Upvote
0
Or we can simply say that there is no reason to believe that such an entity exists, and leave it at that. No one is taking an absolute stance that deities do not exist. We are simply pointing out that there is no reason to even bring it up.
Is it a faith belief that Leprechauns do not plant fingerprints at crime scenes?
Upvote
0
Answers have already been given. You just choose to not engage with those answers. But that is hardly our fault.
Edited to add:
But let's spell them out once more, and see whether you finally will
Point 5
No proof or sound answer to most important answer about the natural - was there a Creator?
There is no need for a sound answer. If we cannot answer a question, that is fine. Recognizing that you cannot answer a question is better than making one up.
Point 6
Eternity and eternal things. Have the elements and physical universe always been? Or has it been a person, a being, a Creator who is eternal? Naturalist do not have proof that it is the physical realm.
Again, we don't know. But there is no evidence for the existence of a creator, so the tentative conclusion is that there is none. This may not satisfy you, but what does or does not satisfy you does not influence the evidence. You have two options:
1) Be honest and recognize that there is no evidence for a creator, and thus tentatively conclude that such a creator does not exist. And furthermore recognize that you do not know how the universe started, or whether it started at all.
2) Make something up and pretend it has some kind of truth value.
I prefer to be honest.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Mr Clean
The Universe owes us nothing
- Jun 2, 2013
- 213
- 2
- 54
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
No I can't. All I can do is gather the available knowledge and see where it points to. At this time the data points to only one logical conclusion - that the universe exists because of some natural phenomena. There is no proof of any alternative theory.
So the question then becomes, why should anyone hold any other conclusion but the natural one?
Upvote
0
You present mythology but cannot answer if the physical realm is eternal. Are Naturalist on this forum shallow in Naturalism? Not able to see the bare foundation they stand on? But you demand an answer about mythology?
Upvote
0
Why are you avoiding answering the question? It's pertinent to the issue you seem to want to discuss?
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
