Does The Sun Really Exist?

[juvenissun]

That is not the question posed by the OP, however, the OP has since clarified that this is what he intended to ask, so I concede the point.

Well, that is what's called "understanding" (the wisdom king Solomon asked for), which is beyond logic.

Conversation between understanding people is much easier, efficient and enjoyable.

 

[Loudmouth]

No.

The reason is not because I don't see it, but because I don't care.

So your apathy determines what does and does not exist?

 

[Loudmouth]

Again, you didn't show me where I did this in this thread. If you are saying "you" in a generic way, then I'm misreading you.

"Can you describe a direct experience you had that seemingly defies conventional explanation and could be evidence for you as to the existence of something supernatural at the very least ?"--itdepends

I thought you were trying to convey the idea that events which defy explanation were evidence of the supernatural. Am I misreading this?

 

[florida2]

No.

The reason is not because I don't see it, but because I don't care.

I am sure you know they exist and I'm sure you care virtually every day.

That area of wavelength is used for tv and radio.

 

[itdepends]

"Can you describe a direct experience you had that seemingly defies conventional explanation and could be evidence for you as to the existence of something supernatural at the very least ?"--itdepends

I thought you were trying to convey the idea that events which defy explanation were evidence of the supernatural. Am I misreading this?

Ah, I gotcha. No, I wasn't trying to convey that an event which defied explanation was evidence for the supernatural lol ... that's not my stance, but I can see perhaps the miscommunication. That's a very blanket type of statement as well that I wasn't trying to convey

I was asking the OP a direct question, to see if he had an anecdote/etc describing a situation HE would consider evidence for the supernatural (presuming he already believed the supernatural existed based on the rest of his posts). In other words, I was asking him specifically and trying to couch the question with the presumption he, specifically, already believed . My qualifiers were an attempt to narrow down the type of anecdote/account/etc.

Can you describe a direct experience you had that seemingly defies conventional explanation and could be evidence for you as to the existence of something supernatural at the very least ? Remove all religious labels, books, bibles, assumptions, and appeals to the same, etc, and state the facts only .... so that someone else can decide for themselves what to call it ? It wouldn't have a standard Occam's Razor type explanation. Do you have anything like that ?

If I was reworking my statement to be a general question open to anyone to include both believers and non, I would have worded it differently. I hope that makes more sense ... because I don't believe any/every gap in understanding = therefore supernatural. But I don't mind investigating, or exploring possibilities, and that's why I don't mind hearing anecdotes to dissect.

 

[juvenissun]

So your apathy determines what does and does not exist?

Are you talking about the existence of God?

 

[Loudmouth]

Are you talking about the existence of God?

Why is it that you can not follow a simple conversation? I was talking about photons that have a wavelength of 12 cm, remember? Here is the question again.

You are incapable of seeing photons with a wavelength of 12 cm. Are you convinced that they exist?

 

[juvenissun]

Why is it that you can not follow a simple conversation? I was talking about photons that have a wavelength of 12 cm, remember? Here is the question again.

You are incapable of seeing photons with a wavelength of 12 cm. Are you convinced that they exist?

I know. You said I don't believe because I don't see. Is that exactly the same reason that you do not believe the existence of God?

 

[Loudmouth]

I know. You said I don't believe because I don't see.

Where did I say that?

I think you do believe in photons with a wavelength of 12 cm even though you can't directly see them. Do you know why? Because you have used a microwave and can observe the effects those non-visible wavelengths have.

A blind man can be convinced that the sun exists in the same way, by allowing him to make observations and comparing those observations to what should be observed if the Sun were real.

Is that exactly the same reason that you do not believe the existence of God?

I do not believe in God because there is no evidence for God.

 

[quilbilly]

I've used a microwave and I don't believe in them foton things you were talking about

There are little guys that look lot like the pilsbury doughboy only real little that come out and heat my lunch

My parents taught me this when I was young and they even showed me pictures from a book

 

[itdepends]

I've used a microwave and I don't believe in them foton things you were talking about

There are little guys that look lot like the pilsbury doughboy only real little that come out and heat my lunch

My parents taught me this when I was young and they even showed me pictures from a book

Why do those little guys dislike Peeps so much ? And it seems like the pink ones in particular are on the bottom of the list :-(

 

[Lethe]

The ducking and weaving back and forth between terrible logic and solipsism is making me ill.

 

[Doveaman]

I'd provide him with a library of books in braille that include all the relevant and applicable scientific findings, studies, data, and research related to the Sun. I would also provide him with access to experts in the various fields relevant to the Sun, should he have any questions about what he was reading...

Counter-question: How would you convince a blind man that God exists?

I'd provide him with a library of books, including the Bible, that include all the relevant and applicable theological findings, studies, data, and research related to the Son. I would also provide him with access to experts in the various fields relevant to the Son, should he have any questions about what he was reading.
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]

 

[Doveaman]

Okay so focus on the intent then ... why convince a blind person the sun exists?

Because he wants to know if it does.

And what would make you stop trying to convince such a person?

If he is unable to make sense of the evidence provided, or if he deliberately refuses to accept the evidence provided. [FONT=&quot]

[/FONT]

 

[Herman Hedning]

I'd provide him with a library of books, including the Bible, that include all the relevant and applicable theological findings, studies, data, and research related to the Son. I would also provide him with access to experts in the various fields relevant to the Son, should he have any questions about what he was reading.
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]

I see what you did there. But anyways, wouldn't that be a pretty certain way of convincing an intelligent person that god does not exist?

 

[Doveaman]

No, it wouldn't.

I think it would be.

The equivalent would be a book that describes the Sun.

The textured map is describing the Sun the blind man cannot see, just as the Bible is describing the God we cannot see.

This is quite different from the raised texture map I am talking about. This map is hooked up to a CCD array. When a photon strikes the CCD array it produces an electrical impulse which is then used to raise a pixel of the textured map. The intensity of the signal determines how high the pixel is raised (through number of hits or binning, take your pick).

What the height of the pixel is describing is still subject to the blind man's interpretation. As far as the blind man is concern, your CCD array may very well be a car battery.

So what empirical measurements are we using to detect God in the same way?

I never said anything about “detect”. I said “prove” or “convince”.

Raised pixels do not prove to the blind man that the sun was detected. All it proves to the blind man is that pixels of a textured map can be raised. He can then interpret those raised pixels however he likes.
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]

 

[Doveaman]

Faith is confidence in someone whom you trust.

Faith is also a belief held in the absence of evidence.

You are describing the dictionary definition.

I’m describing the biblical definition.

I go by the biblical definition.[FONT=&quot]

[/FONT]

 

[Doveaman]

It is highly amusing that this thread has gone on as long as it has.

I’ve seen worst.

I see what you are trying to do here, but like all religious analogies, this one is rubbish. Let me show you why.

Good luck.

1) The real question here is how you would convince several blind people that the sun exists. The best way to determine reality is when several people can experience the phenomena and they all experience the same thing. Put 20 people blind from birth who have never been outside before (admittedly hard to do, but this is a thought experiment) and place them on an island in the South Pacific. In six months they will have a very refined and well agreed upon description of this phenomena we call the sun.

This reminds me of the many people whose experiences of God have resulted in a very refined and well agreed upon description of the Son.

They will not know what it is, but they will know that it is there.

If they don’t know what it is, then they are not convinced it’s the sun, which does not answer the OP.

2) On an individual basis we can actually ask people blind from birth how they "know" there is a sun. So we don't need to ask this question just from a theoretical standpoint, we can actually investigate it.

In both of these cases we end up with this thing called evidence. Evidence is the sole criteria for determining reality. Theories and logic help us understand and make sense of reality, but evidence is the only indicator of the nature of reality.

I agree.

Now what evidence would you present to the blind man to convince him the sun exists?

Thus, your effort to say "blind men understanding the sun is the same as all of us sighted individuals understanding god" falls way wide of the mark. Because, again, evidence is the key and no religion has ever had any evidence of its veracity.

So what evidence would you present to the blind man to convince him the sun exists?

(Bonus question: Why are christians, who use analogies all the time, so bad at them?)

I think it’s a very good analogy, actually. This might explain why you are evading the OP.

 

[Doveaman]

I've used a microwave and I don't believe in them foton things you were talking about

There are little guys that look lot like the pilsbury doughboy only real little that come out and heat my lunch

My parents taught me this when I was young and they even showed me pictures from a book

Ya know, a lot of what we call "evidence" is just information our scientists thought us when we were young and they even showed us pictures from a book.

 

[super animator]

I see what you did there. But anyways, wouldn't that be a pretty certain way of convincing an intelligent person that god does not exist?

And how do you lead to that conclusion?