The Black Vault

Belief in God is irrational.



Disprove this.



What I'm doing here is I'm looking to see who has a rudimentary understanding of logic, I'm sure there's a few here at least.
And even if you don't, feel free to discuss the relevant issue by all means.

My favorite disproof that believing in god was not irrational was Thomas Aquinas
it states that: there must exist something in the universe which possesses all properties to the maximum possible degree.QED a perfect being must exist.

Tairaa ,

Belief in God is irrational.

What I'm doing here is I'm looking to see who has a rudimentary understanding of logic,

I love this kind of stuff Tairaa. We are going to see it over and over and over now days. It looks so logical, reasonable, and intelligent.

The problem with it is that if one does not think it through, with a complete set of reasoning/options/facts, it turns out to be dung.

Remember something about logic and reason..particularly about dealing with men of letters...education, Enlightenment, Illumination....we have such men in our government..yet they cannot balance a budget. But they are so reasonable, logical, seemingly intelligent in their debates.................or are they!!??

One thing is become clear to many on a local and state level...about this present Washington DC government in particular. They may seem on the surface to be very logical and reasonable, intelligent, educated et al. But they lack a very fundamental common sense born of experience and peoples can see this in them. Their underwear is showing.

Logic is not the same thing as Wisdom. Thinking peoples know this.

You may be want to think this through before leaning so heavily on your religion of logic.

Logic and Reason is what lead the French intelligences...the Encyclopedias to determine that the French had 20% to much population. They needed to get rid of one in five Frenchmen. And they began mass executions...the guillotine.
This is Enlightenment at work Tiarra and we have this history recorded..intelligence..logic and reason.

There have been more peoples killed and at a faster rate...on this Earth since the French Revolution..in times of Enlightenment..by logic and reason....than in the centuries before.
And it is continuing today.
This is why when I see non believers in sites like this one using the time warp techniques of the Crusades and Inquisition it becomes predictable...as to what they are doing. Ignoring the overview of the whole of history. This is not logical and reasonable ..but it is politic.
And politic is a devout religion/religious belief system. It is Occult in it's attempt to hide or conceal the big picture....with confusion.

Be very careful what one thinks is logic and reason.

Thanks,
Orangetom

Well you didn't get where I was going with that jewel of (un)logic.

But regardless I'll discuss with you what you're talking about. Also in another thread I asked about the Old Testament to which you replied that your bible has it, so I have to ask, being that Jesus was a follower of the old testament do you also take it as "holy" or "sacred" or anything like that? Is it also the word of God?

It looks so logical, reasonable, and intelligent.

I could arguably be reasonable or intelligent, but arguably at best, and it plainly is not logical. Actually I have just decided that rather than play it out and see if anyone caught it, I'll just bring it out right now. My comment was not logical, it has no premises, it is an assertion without backing. The whole point of my argument was to see if any theist would jump on the illogical nature of my statement for obvious ironic shits and giggles. But I realized that it's a faulty test, since anyone who has taken the time to educate themselves about what logic actually is would quickly realize that by attacking that illogical argument I could very well use the same logic they used to refute my argument reciprocally. And therefore doing so would be not in their best interest.

So my test was realistically bound to fail by it's very design.

Remember something about logic and reason..particularly about dealing with men of letters...education, Enlightenment, Illumination....we have such men in our government..yet they cannot balance a budget. But they are so reasonable, logical, seemingly intelligent in their debates.................or are they!!??

Politicians are rarely if ever logical, be reasonable here. That's like saying that a lawyer is comparable with a scientist, one's objective is to win, and the others is to uncover truth. Exactly the same thing between logic and politics. Politicians try to win, someone using logic tries to be right.

Logic is not the same thing as Wisdom. Thinking peoples know this.

Absolutely correct. Not even in the same ball park. It's like shell fish and iron ore. Logic is also not the same thing as reason, though they are more closely related. They can be used synonymously, but in general logic is a specific form of reasoning designed to arrive at reliable inferences through sensible deductions or inductions. Or something like that. I'm sure most places will obviously word it different, but that's what logic is.

You may be want to think this through before leaning so heavily on your religion of logic.

Logic and Reason is what lead the French intelligences...the Encyclopedias to determine that the French had 20% to much population. They needed to get rid of one in five Frenchmen. And they began mass executions...the guillotine.
This is Enlightenment at work Tiarra and we have this history recorded..intelligence..logic and reason.

Given that you're unaware of what logic IS, I feel that you're not in a position to make that inference.

It is by no means a religion. It is no more of a religion than science is, or believing in the laws of probability. That is an asinine statement.

There have been more peoples killed and at a faster rate...on this Earth since the French Revolution..in times of Enlightenment..by logic and reason....than in the centuries before.
And it is continuing today.
This is why when I see non believers in sites like this one using the time warp techniques of the Crusades and Inquisition it becomes predictable...as to what they are doing. Ignoring the overview of the whole of history.

So because more deaths occur as the earths human population increases means that logic and reasoning is responsible? I'm afraid not dude. This is a post hoc argument.

And what exactly has changed since the Crusades? Or the inquisition that was like, 200 years ago? Well surely God hasn't changed, man said so when he wrote the bible. So what has changed? Surely his ironclad morals haven't changed, why have ours? Why is slavery not allowed anymore even though not only is it never objected to in the bible but it is regulated, there are rules for how much you can buy or sell a human being for, how you can treat and mistreat them. Why is that not allowed anymore? Are we more moral than God is?

It's not a time warp for a never changing omnipotent being, it only is so for us mere mortals who have to exist within an expanse of time.

And I am doing anything but ignoring the whole of history.


Now, aside from argumentation, I would like to just say that the reason for my posting initially was to actually talk about logic pertaining to religion to the first person who caught on to what I was doing. Since I realized that wouldn't happen, I just posted it anyway.

The reason I wanted to specifically talk about logic is that up until quite recently I was unaware of what logic was. Indeed I was unaware that logic was even specific, I had a preconcieved notion of logic that is was simply synonymous with reason or sense. Which isn't the case. Logic has specific rules, it is not at all relative or subjective, and it has been demonstrably shown to reliably reveal truth. Or more effectively to reveal unreliable reasoning in arguments for me. Since I have made this discovery and learnt a bit about it, it has literally revolutionized my thinking, now I don't see things in common sense, I take things apart that I previously had just coined as obvious.

I view religion as a negative as far as one's mind goes, religion teachs you to be closed minded despite what people would like to believe. You cannot question your religion in a real way. It IS truth. There is no alternative, there is no new information, there is the old information that is CORRECT. This is a growth stunting mindset to have. And it's dangerous. This is reflected in statistics, the more secular a society is the less rapes and murders it has, this has been repeatedly demonstrated.

So I am merely trying to pass on something that has revolutionized my thinking, that has opened new doors of reasoning and sense to me, that has expanded me... To others who might be also interested but currently unaware.




However, I'm still willing to argue with you.

the more secular a society is the less rapes and murders it has, this has been repeatedly demonstrated.

Tiarra I'm sorry i have to jump in here, but the more monogamous a society is, the lower it's incidents of violence. It's the nature of social interaction with young males with out mates that cause the majority of the violent crimes in a social structure. If they are married the crime rate goes down; for instance in African cultures with less influence from a church that places pressure on couples to stay married; we get much higher violent crime rates. unfortunately as much as I hate to say it Nancy Reagen is right and we need 'family values'; and at this point fairy tales seem to be the most effective way.

churches historically have a place and need in a proper functioning of a social group.

I just personally happen to think the idea of god is not rational.

Tairaa wrote:Belief in God is irrational.



Disprove this.



What I'm doing here is I'm looking to see who has a rudimentary understanding of logic, I'm sure there's a few here at least.
And even if you don't, feel free to discuss the relevant issue by all means.

There are better ways to see who has a rudimentary understanding of logic.

Which God are you referring to?

Who cares if it's irrational? What does logic have to do with truth?

What kind of logic are you talking about? Scientific logic where actual physics and physical tests, can conclude an outcome, having proven all other posibilities have been ruled out, therefore leaving only one logical answer? Or in the case of a philosofical conclusion, where the logic either assumes facts and conditions are true, such as the complete cronological history? How do we know that the crusades ever happpened, we assume the history is true? There are people today who deny Jews were slaudered in WW2, and that is in our lifetime. In that sense, there is a certain irrational logic, due to accepting and assuming certain facts are true, however the belief of those facts is reasonable.

In our believe of God, it has to assume facts known to us are true. If you can not see it or touch it, have absolute physical proof, the Atheists do not believe in anything other than a absolute, beyond a shawdow of a doubt physical proof. Their delemia is there is not such scientific proof either way to disproove, so IMHO their beliefs are irrational logic. It is not rational to believe God does not exist because science can not proove God exists. The belief in God by most of the world is rational IMHO, because it is not reasonable to assume all other facts we know, are not sufficient to conclude locically a rational conclusion about God.

There is only one sure way to proove it for sure, which is death. Impeding that day would be pretty irrational, since logically I know that day will come by itself. That part of history is pretty much a known fact, we all die, so we all get to rationally find out. In the mean time, most rationally and logically assume facts we know to be true, and live life accordingly until that day comes. We assume our actions in life will be judged on that day as true conditions. Unless you are an Atheist, who have irrational basis of logic.

at1with0 wrote:
Who cares if it's irrational? What does logic have to do with truth?

Ahhh! And what does it? I like what you're saying, and things can be perfectly logical but be entirely false as we both know. Logic isn't a perfect system for determine truth of course, but it is the best that we have. Many will be surprised to learn that the following is logically just fine.

Everyone from China is green,
Shengwei is from China
Shengwei is green.

That's logic. The issue is that the first premise is factually incorrect, which of course means that the building a conclusion off of it will yield an incorrect answer. And indeed, there are logic arguments supporting religion out there that are without logical flaws.



Greeney-

The logic I'm talking about is the science of reasoning, not to be confused with science per se, and entirely different that one's own reasoning.

In our believe of God, it has to assume facts known to us are true. If you can not see it or touch it, have absolute physical proof, the Atheists do not believe in anything other than a absolute, beyond a shawdow of a doubt physical proof. Their delemia is there is not such scientific proof either way to disproove, so IMHO their beliefs are irrational logic. It is not rational to believe God does not exist because science can not proove God exists. The belief in God by most of the world is rational IMHO, because it is not reasonable to assume all other facts we know, are not sufficient to conclude locically a rational conclusion about God.

Respectfully, it is not irrational to disbelieve something for which there is no rhyme or reason to believe in it. You don't believe in the spaghetti monster, or flying teapots etc. You're going to think this example is asinine, but the point isn't to make your belief system sound dumb or silly, I'm not comparing belief in a god with flying teapots. But you haven't seen any good reason to believe in flying teapots, so you dismiss this belief, same with mythological creatures. Why don't you believe in Allah, or the Hindu gods? Why aren't you a Buddhist?

Unless you are an Atheist, who have irrational basis of logic.

How so? Because I do not believe a baseless claim I am irrational? So by your own admission, you're irrational for not believing in the giant spaghetti monster, right?

Respectfully, it is not irrational to disbelieve something for which there is no rhyme or reason to believe in it. You don't believe in the spaghetti monster, or flying teapots etc.

Their is no historical or written accounts of spaghetti monsters and flying teapots, there are thousands of years of written history, archological findings, art, and artifacts, to support a rational belief in God. One can reasonalbly assume all, most, or even some are true to give support to a ratrional decision. That lends plenty of rhyme and reason, and certainly not the same rhelm as spaghetti monsters, or flying teapots.

Everyone from China is green,
Shengwei is from China
Shengwei is green.

Like saying a duck is a bird, but a bird is not a duck. As you state this is a loaded senerio where you set the primary condition based on a untrue fact, so Shengwei must be green by logic. Much the same as all the arguments we have had on the board over all the "Proofs", and the Imaginary God site, 50 proofs God does not exist. The proofs are loaded and engineered for the conclusion, just like Everyone China is green. Is that rational logic, to inject an untruth to make it appear your belief would be irrational, if you based it on that lie? If the Atheist premise is based on lies as a condition, it is irrational by design.

Ok you're coming through kinda scrambled...

What lie do you figure atheism is based on exactly? There is NO evidence to support a God, a do not believe in a God. Where is the lie?

Their is no historical or written accounts of spaghetti monsters and flying teapots,

So? Are you saying that truth is determinable by simple assertion over a period of time? If so, that's not how things work. What people think has no bearing on reality, if everyone in the world right now thought the earth was flat it would not make it so.

there are thousands of years of written history, archological findings, art, and artifacts, to support a rational belief in God.

No, not at all. At best what these things are is evidence that people do believe in God, but certainly not that he's real.

One can reasonalbly assume all, most, or even some are true to give support to a ratrional decision. That lends plenty of rhyme and reason, and certainly not the same rhelm as spaghetti monsters, or flying teapots.

One CAN assume this, but not rationally. This is akin to argumentum ad populum, perhaps one of the most common logical fallacies.

And aside from the number of people believing in an ideology they are all identical, they all lack evidence to support their claim. Why don't you believe in the ancient greek, roman, egyptian gods, why aren't you a wiccan, or a muslim, or a buddhist, or a hindu, why don't you follow the teachings of confucias? You have been taught one ideology and you think that it's the right one. That's all it is. There is no rational or logical indication that you're correct, you simple believe that you are correct blindly.


The difference between you and I is that I don't believe anything blindly, and I don't believe anything that the evidence says is false.