Atheism, Rival Conception of God.

[Brimshack]

Nice quote

Some thoughts on meaning...

Consider happening upon two different objects while taking a walk through the woods: A hammer and a hammer shaped branch that has apparently fallen from a tree.

Does the hammer have purpose? Sure it does. It was created for a reason. Does the branch have purpose? Well, it can be used for the same purpose as the hammer, but it was not created in the same sense that the hammer was so it can't have purpose in the same sense. What is the determinate factor? Whether or not the object was created.

The atheist cannot allow himself to see purpose in the universe unless he is willing to ponder the possibility of the existence of a creator.

Aside from the fussy psychologism of the conclusion, it actually contradicts your opening analysis. You draw an interesting distinction in your opening paragraphs only to erase it in your final conclusion.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Does the hammer have purpose? Sure it does. It was created for a reason. Does the branch have purpose? Well, it can be used for the same purpose as the hammer, but it was not created in the same sense that the hammer was so it can't have purpose in the same sense.

Does purpose lurk inside the hammer like a ghost?

The atheist cannot allow himself to see purpose in the universe unless he is willing to ponder the possibility of the existence of a creator.

Purposes do not require a creator. If I use the hammer-shaped branch to drive in a nail, then I am using it for a purpose. I did not need to create the branch for it to have purpose.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Sojourner<><]

Does purpose lurk inside the hammer like a ghost?



Purposes do not require a creator. If I use the hammer-shaped branch to drive in a nail, then I am using it for a purpose. I did not need to create the branch for it to have purpose.


eudaimonia,

Mark

If this is true, then a hammer has no more purpose than a hammer-shaped branch, or a pencil is just as purposeless as a hunk of graphite. And yet, these man made objects have some quality about them that distinguishes them from the natural objects in addition to the fact that they were made - it's that they were made for a reason - a purpose. This quality is what I am grasping at and is what I find to be inherent in a reality that supports life when I consider the possibility that it was made for that purpose - a proposition that requires a maker.

 

[David Gould]

If this is true, then a hammer has no more purpose than a hammer-shaped branch, or a pencil is just as purposeless as a hunk of graphite. And yet, these man made objects have some quality about them that distinguishes them from the natural objects in addition to the fact that they were made - it's that they were made for a reason - a purpose.

Do they? Imagine that we discovered a hammer-shaped object in an archeological dig. Scientists say that the hammer-shaped object looks as though it was used to hammer in nails - it has a purpose.

Then a different group of scientists examine it. They point out that it looks more like as though it was a piece in a wall, and that the hammer shape is an accident. This becomes the consensus - the hammer-shaped object suddenly has no purpose.

Where did the purpose that we originally assigned it go?

My point is that purpose only exists in our minds. It never exists in the objects themselves.

This quality is what I am grasping at and is what I find to be inherent in a reality that supports life when I consider the possibility that it was made for that purpose - a proposition that requires a maker.

In your mind, there is a purpose for reality; in my mind, there is not. If God exists, then the purpose for reality is in his mind. There is no purpose inherent in reality, however, even if it was made by God.

 

[RigalCygnos]

Atheists only excel at autopsies. Everything is without spirit and feeling for them. For explanations of inanimate objects or primordial slime, inquire of them.

Christians excel at life and inspiration. For joy, hope, delight, or love, consult them, or the Holy Bible, New Testament.

"And that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty , that they might bring us into bondage...."Galatians 2:4

 

[quatona]

Atheists only excel at autopsies. Everything is without spirit and feeling for them. For explanations of inanimate objects or primordial slime, inquire of them.

Christians excel at life and inspiration. For joy, hope, delight, or love, consult them, or the Holy Bible, New Testament.

We love you, too.

 

[RigalCygnos]

We love you, too.

Even succinct sarcasm fails to distort truth.


"If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you."~~Jesus Christ

 

[David Gould]

quatona,

You have got it wrong again: we hate Christians. I think you will have to be taken for re-education.

 

[RigalCygnos]

 

[Sojourner<><]

My point is that purpose only exists in our minds. It never exists in the objects themselves.

Fair enough. I think that the object that has purpose is in essence the physical manifestation of an idea. In order to recognize such an idea there must be an intelligent mind. Depending on how intelligent that mind may be, it might even be able to deduce that there must have been some other intelligent mind in order to manifest such an idea.

 

[Brimshack]

Atheists only excel at autopsies. Everything is without spirit and feeling for them. For explanations of inanimate objects or primordial slime, inquire of them.

Christians excel at life and inspiration. For joy, hope, delight, or love, consult them, or the Holy Bible, New Testament.

"And that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty , that they might bring us into bondage...."Galatians 2:4

I think it's safe to say RC's post constituted its own refutation

 

[David Gould]

Fair enough. I think that the object that has purpose is in essence the physical manifestation of an idea.

But the purpose of any particular object can change. If you make a hammer, and I use it to make music, does the object suddenly become the physical manifestation of the new idea?

A purpose of an object can only be determined by its use - the hammer can be used to hammer in nails, or it can be used to provide a thumping beat.

My argument is that if God exists then he is not using anything on earth in any way that we can detect. As such, there is no way that we can detect purpose. And that means that purpose cannot be used as an argument for God's existence.

In other words, for us to see purpose, we would have to see God. And that would mean that using purpose as an argument for God's existence would be superfluous, as his existence would be evident.

In order to recognize such an idea there must be an intelligent mind. Depending on how intelligent that mind may be, it might even be able to deduce that there must have been some other intelligent mind in order to manifest such an idea.

The idea, again, can only be seen in use. Without use - or evidence of use - no idea can be seen.

Think of the hammer-shaped object. Was it the physical manifestation of an idea? In who's mind was the idea: the viewing scientists, not any creator of it.

 

[Brimshack]

Fair enough. I think that the object that has purpose is in essence the physical manifestation of an idea. In order to recognize such an idea there must be an intelligent mind. Depending on how intelligent that mind may be, it might even be able to deduce that there must have been some other intelligent mind in order to manifest such an idea.

Again, this is in direct contradiction to your initial analysis. As your tree/hammer dictinction clearly shows some purposes are not created, at least not with the object itself, but rather recognized as a possible property of an object. It is possible that all the world too is actually created as you suggest, but there is no sense in which such a position could be said to be deduced from the recognition of purpose in an object. Even with hammers, the inference is inductive, at best.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Atheists only excel at autopsies. Everything is without spirit and feeling for them. For explanations of inanimate objects or primordial slime, inquire of them.

Christians excel at life and inspiration. For joy, hope, delight, or love, consult them, or the Holy Bible, New Testament.

Christians may very well excel at these, but not armchair psychologizing, apparently.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Eudaimonist]

And yet, these man made objects have some quality about them that distinguishes them from the natural objects in addition to the fact that they were made - it's that they were made for a reason - a purpose.

What "quality" would that be? Yes, we may deduce that a hammer was created by an intelligent being, but this is mainly due to our experience with creating tools. It's a judgment call on our part, not some quality intrinsic to the hammer, aside from the tell-tale signs of intelligent creation. It seems like you want it to be something more than this.

Would artificially created diamonds have some "quality" unlike naturally occuring diamonds? Let's say these were truly excellent reproductions.

I'll grant that hammers are created and hammer-shaped branches are uncreated (at least to be hammers). However, nothing in the universe seems to be created for a purpose, except for those things that human beings have themselves created for their own purposes.

This quality is what I am grasping at and is what I find to be inherent in a reality that supports life when I consider the possibility that it was made for that purpose - a proposition that requires a maker.

Okay, but I see things differently. I don't see why reality requires an "inherent quality" in order to support life. Life merely sprung up in satisfactory conditions. ~99.9999999% (or so) of the universe seems to be inhospitable for life.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Tenka]

Atheists only excel at autopsies. Everything is without spirit and feeling for them. For explanations of inanimate objects or primordial slime, inquire of them.

Christians excel at life and inspiration. For joy, hope, delight, or love, consult them, or the Holy Bible, New Testament.

Bollocks.

 

[RigalCygnos]

I think it's safe to say RC's post constituted its own refutation

Bollocks.

Good grief, Tenka, extra effort to misspell my nick! How sweet.

Superb responses. And highly characteristic. Such perfection of the techniques of debate, distortion, and prejudice.

Thanks for the compliments. I am highly recommended by the caliber of my opponents.

 

[Sojourner<><]

What "quality" would that be? Yes, we may deduce that a hammer was created by an intelligent being, but this is mainly due to our experience with creating tools. It's a judgment call on our part, not some quality intrinsic to the hammer, aside from the tell-tale signs of intelligent creation. It seems like you want it to be something more than this.

Actually I think you pretty much nailed this one. It's the evidence of intelligent thought that distinguishes the hammer from the hammer-shaped branch. The evidence isn't found within the composition of the object but in the form and function of the whole.

 

[The Nihilist]

I'm not sure what you mean by form, exactly, but I'd be real careful when talking about the function of a thing. Keep in mind that a thing's function is whatever it is used for, and so might not even really be anything at all.

On a side note, let me announce my triumphant return to the internet. My wireless was down for maybe a week, and I was too lazy to fix it until today. I'm sure everyone has missed being mercilessly ridiculed, so I'll do my best to make up for lost time.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Good grief, Tenka, extra effort to misspell my nick! How sweet.

Superb responses. And highly characteristic. Such perfection of the techniques of debate, distortion, and prejudice.

Thanks for the compliments. I am highly recommended by the caliber of my opponents.

If fish swim only to the level of the bait, whose fault is that? The fish, or the fisherman?

The point is, whether the bait was intentional or not, a low-caliber post invites low-caliber responses even from high-caliber people. You cannot say that an entire group of people lack "spirit or feeling" and expect no offense to be taken or displayed.


eudaimonia,

Mark