A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists

Is there a God? If so, what is She like?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

seeds
Posts: 2143
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 9:31 pm

Re: Mr Can doesn't understand.

Post by seeds »

seeds wrote: If you had paid the slightest bit of attention to the conversation between IC and myself, then you would know that not only do I accept that “all” is the Creator’s creation, but also that the horrors you pointed out are essential in helping to maintain the “illusion” of objective reality.

Indeed, the deformed bodies you cited, along with every other “evil” aspect of this world, are precisely what causes you, Hobbes, to doubt God’s existence.

And doubting his existence, as I suggested earlier, is exactly what God wants us to do.
Hobbes' Choice wrote: I don't need mutation for me to doubt what is stupid.
You’re the one who seems to think that by introducing mutated baby bodies into a conversation about God, it therefore proves some kind of atheistic assertion.
Hobbes' Choice wrote: The problem is still yours.
How many times do I have to tell you that I have no problem reconciling the existence of deformed babies (or cancer, or diseases, or anything else you can suggest) with that of the existence of a creative intelligence presiding over the universe?

In which case, the “problem” seems to be yours, not mine.
Hobbes' Choice wrote: "God's Existence" is not a phrase that is even meaningful. It is, as scientist would say. not even wrong. It's simply an empty contentless thought.
If by “scientist” you mean “closed-minded materialistic atheist,” then yes, that is no doubt what the “scientist” you have in mind would say.
_______
seeds
Posts: 2143
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 9:31 pm

Re: Mr Can doesn't understand.

Post by seeds »

seeds wrote: Who told you that all of reality is “non-dual”?
Dontaskme wrote: Knowledge told me, however, the knowledge I am is not who I really am ... for I am always ...with or without the knowledge. I don't know that I am without knowing I am not. BUT the I don't know that, ...that knowing arises in I from nowhere. It's an appearance in I but not I...as knowledge.
Try explaining that to Grandma.

Image

DAM, I appreciated the effort you put-forth in laying out your case for non-duality.

However, from previous encounters, you already know that I am not a fan of the extremes to which you carry the concept of “oneness,” for it seems to be devoid of any meaningful (long-term) purpose for us.

Furthermore, if you can’t even convince people on a philosophy forum of the merits and worth of non-dualistic thought, then what hope is there of convincing the average person?
_______
seeds
Posts: 2143
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 9:31 pm

Re: Mr Can doesn't understand.

Post by seeds »

seeds wrote: “...the element of doubt as to God’s existence and our ultimate destiny is exactly the effect that God is after. For it is that “veil of uncertainty” draped across the threshold of death that makes us want to experience life on this side of the veil, on earth, to its fullest.

And that’s the point! That’s what God wants us to do. He wants us to experience and manipulate the constituents of this level of reality to the fullest degree, unhindered by any overriding awareness of a higher level of reality that might in turn detract from the intensity with which we apply ourselves to this level.
thedoc wrote: This might fit with what you are saying,

Life is not about arriving at the grave, with a well preserved, manicured and maintained body,
But about being broken down, worn out, and used up,
Sliding in sideways, with a drink in one hand and a box of chocolates in the other,
Yelling "Damn what a ride."
Yes doc, that’s an excellent way of viewing it.
_______
seeds
Posts: 2143
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 9:31 pm

Re: Mr Can doesn't understand.

Post by seeds »

seeds wrote: ...the deformed bodies you cited, along with every other “evil” aspect of this world, are precisely what causes you, Hobbes, to doubt God’s existence.

And doubting his existence, as I suggested earlier, is exactly what God wants us to do.
Hobbes' Choice wrote: Your verbal excrescence assumes god, but fails to begin to challenge that assumption.
If my verbal “excrescence” (outgrowth? :? carbuncle? :?) assumes god, then why in the world would I want to challenge my own “carbuncle”? :D - Especially after finding that yours and Dawkins’ carbuncles are so sorely lacking.

(Continued in next post)
_______
seeds
Posts: 2143
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 9:31 pm

Re: Mr Can doesn't understand.

Post by seeds »

_______

(Continued from prior post)
Hobbes' Choice wrote: TO challenge Dawkins, you have to engage with what he has said. Yet nowhere in this thread have to [sic] presented it.
In an alternate forum I indirectly compared Dawkins and his ilk to that of a group of Neanderthals roaming through the woods and stumbling upon a running, 350 horsepower, V8 engine.

After many days of grunting, head scratching, and beating the engine to pieces with clubs and rocks, one of the more intelligent member of the group was somehow able to figure out how it works...

Og say “...fire make shiny thing push down and turn other shiny thing...”

And with that the group moves on, completely satisfied in thinking that they have resolved the mystery of the engine.

The point is that Dawkins is like the above Neanderthal who is satisfied in understanding “how the machine works” while attaching no importance whatsoever in how the machine got there in the first place.

His theories seem to “take for granted” the unthinkably vast array of prerequisite conditions that had to be in place before the “machinery” of evolution (cells/DNA) could even come into existence.

Not the least of which being the unimaginable stability (for billions of years, no less) of the millisecond-by-millisecond precision with which this gigantic orb we are standing on...

Image

...has maintained a perfect axial/orbital relationship with the perfect source of energy that powers the bio-genetic processes taking place on its surface.

All of which Dawkins’ seems to take as a “given” foundation upon which his theories are then based.

Image

Therefore, the “challenge” for Richard Dawkins is that before he can assume that his ideas stand as some kind of definitive (God-eliminating) statement about reality, he needs to clearly and logically resolve some pressing issues:

One, he needs to explain how a tiny kernel of compressed matter was somehow “impregnated” with every possible ingredient necessary to create all of reality as we understand it (i.e., the Big Bang theory).

Two, he needs to explain from whence the kernel came from.

And three, he needs to explain how an alleged explosion of disparate quantum particles could somehow manage – by sheer chance – to magically blend together into a state of order that defies comprehension.

Until Dawkins has made sense of those key issues, then he will always appear (to me) as being like the above mentioned Neanderthal - walking away with a smug assumption that a deep mystery has been resolved.
_______
Last edited by seeds on Thu Nov 12, 2020 5:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Harbal
Posts: 9557
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: Mr Can doesn't understand.

Post by Harbal »

seeds wrote:_______

(Continued from prior post)
Hobbes' Choice wrote: TO challenge Dawkins, you have to engage with what he has said. Yet nowhere in this thread have to [sic] presented it.
In an alternate forum I indirectly compared Dawkins and his ilk to that of a group of Neanderthals roaming through the woods and stumbling upon a running, 350 horsepower, V8 engine.

After many days of grunting, head scratching, and beating the engine to pieces with clubs and rocks, one of the more intelligent member of the group was somehow able to figure out how it works...

Og say “...fire make shiny thing push down and turn other shiny thing...”

And with that the group moves on, completely satisfied in thinking that they have resolved the mystery of the engine.

The point is that Dawkins is like the above Neanderthal who is satisfied in understanding “how the machine works” while attaching no importance whatsoever in how the machine got there in the first place.

His theories seem to “take for granted” the unthinkably vast array of prerequisite conditions that had to be in place before the “machinery” of evolution (cells/DNA) could even come into existence.

Not the least of which being the unimaginable stability (for billions of years, no less) of the millisecond-by-millisecond precision with which this gigantic orb we are standing on...


...has maintained a perfect axial/orbital relationship with the perfect source of energy that powers the bio-genetic processes taking place on its surface.

All of which Dawkins’ seems to take as a “given” foundation upon which his theories are then based.



Therefore, the “challenge” for Richard Dawkins is that before he can assume that his ideas stand as some kind of definitive (God-eliminating) statement about reality, he needs to clearly and logically resolve some pressing issues:

One, he needs to explain how a tiny kernel of compressed matter was somehow “impregnated” with every possible ingredient necessary to create all of reality as we understand it (i.e., the Big Bang theory).

Two, he needs to explain from whence the kernel came from.

And three, he needs to explain how an alleged explosion of disparate quantum particles could somehow manage – by sheer chance – to magically blend together into a state of order that defies comprehension.

Until Dawkins has made sense of those key issues, then he will always appear (to me) as being like the above mentioned Neanderthal - walking away with a smug assumption that a deep mystery has been resolved.
_______
You make a very compelling argument, seeds, but we are still left with the fact that Dawkins is highly intelligent and you are not so I think the scales are slightly tipping in Dawkins' favour. It's a very close thing though.


[Edited by iMod]
User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8364
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: Mr Can doesn't understand.

Post by Hobbes' Choice »

seeds wrote:_

Blah, blah, balh, confused puzzled blah....

Until Dawkins has made sense of those key issues, then he will always appear (to me) as being like the above mentioned Neanderthal - walking away with a smug assumption that a deep mystery has been resolved.
_______
I think Dawkins is way ahead of you. He's made sense of those issues and others a long time ago. I think the problem lies with your understanding of them, or lack of understanding I should say.


If you need some help, I'm glad to take them one at a time, and explain them to you.
thedoc
Posts: 6473
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 4:18 pm

Re: A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists

Post by thedoc »

Hobbes' Choice wrote:
thedoc wrote:
Hobbes' Choice wrote: others about which he can have no experience of.
What 'Beliefs' are you claiming that IC can have no experience of?
Who said anything about you?
Who said anything about belief?
Ah! no answer, just as I expected.
User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8364
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists

Post by Hobbes' Choice »

thedoc wrote:
Hobbes' Choice wrote:
thedoc wrote:
What 'Beliefs' are you claiming that IC can have no experience of?
Who said anything about you?
Who said anything about belief?
Ah! no answer, just as I expected.
Poor confused little boy.
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 9956
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: Mr Can doesn't understand.

Post by attofishpi »

Harbal wrote:
seeds wrote:_______

(Continued from prior post)
Hobbes' Choice wrote: TO challenge Dawkins, you have to engage with what he has said. Yet nowhere in this thread have to [sic] presented it.
In an alternate forum I indirectly compared Dawkins and his ilk to that of a group of Neanderthals roaming through the woods and stumbling upon a running, 350 horsepower, V8 engine.

After many days of grunting, head scratching, and beating the engine to pieces with clubs and rocks, one of the more intelligent member of the group was somehow able to figure out how it works...

Og say “...fire make shiny thing push down and turn other shiny thing...”

And with that the group moves on, completely satisfied in thinking that they have resolved the mystery of the engine.

The point is that Dawkins is like the above Neanderthal who is satisfied in understanding “how the machine works” while attaching no importance whatsoever in how the machine got there in the first place.

His theories seem to “take for granted” the unthinkably vast array of prerequisite conditions that had to be in place before the “machinery” of evolution (cells/DNA) could even come into existence.

Not the least of which being the unimaginable stability (for billions of years, no less) of the millisecond-by-millisecond precision with which this gigantic orb we are standing on...


...has maintained a perfect axial/orbital relationship with the perfect source of energy that powers the bio-genetic processes taking place on its surface.

All of which Dawkins’ seems to take as a “given” foundation upon which his theories are then based.



Therefore, the “challenge” for Richard Dawkins is that before he can assume that his ideas stand as some kind of definitive (God-eliminating) statement about reality, he needs to clearly and logically resolve some pressing issues:

One, he needs to explain how a tiny kernel of compressed matter was somehow “impregnated” with every possible ingredient necessary to create all of reality as we understand it (i.e., the Big Bang theory).

Two, he needs to explain from whence the kernel came from.

And three, he needs to explain how an alleged explosion of disparate quantum particles could somehow manage – by sheer chance – to magically blend together into a state of order that defies comprehension.

Until Dawkins has made sense of those key issues, then he will always appear (to me) as being like the above mentioned Neanderthal - walking away with a smug assumption that a deep mystery has been resolved.
_______
You make a very compelling argument, seeds, but we are still left with the fact that Dawkins is highly intelligent and you are a fucking idiot so I think the scales are slightly tipping in Dawkins' favour. It's a very close thing though.
Harbal, again you are rendering yourself as the TRUE "fucking idiot" by suggesting that a "fucking idiot" has made a "very compelling argument".

Seeds, all along i have said it is not the domain of a biologist to make a case against the existence of God - that should at the minimum be left to physicists. And indeed you have made a very compelling argument.
User avatar
Harbal
Posts: 9557
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: Mr Can doesn't understand.

Post by Harbal »

attofishpi wrote:
Harbal, again you are rendering yourself as the TRUE "fucking idiot"
Oh dear, that wasn't my intention at all, please accept my apologies, Fish Pie.
Seeds, all along i have said it............./ And indeed you have made a very compelling argument.
So you think he's a fucking idiot, as well. That's three of us then, Fish Pie.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Mr Can doesn't understand.

Post by Dontaskme »

seeds wrote:
seeds wrote: Who told you that all of reality is “non-dual”?
Dontaskme wrote: Knowledge told me, however, the knowledge I am is not who I really am ... for I am always ...with or without the knowledge. I don't know that I am without knowing I am not. BUT the I don't know that, ...that knowing arises in I from nowhere. It's an appearance in I but not I...as knowledge.
Try explaining that to Grandma.
What do you think Grandma's are not self realised, self realised in the sense of realising there is no separate 'me' - and that All there is is EVERYTHING ONE WITHOUT A SECOND.....don't make me laugh...it's the same one energy as everything appearing as separate things...the difference is plain and simply illusory.

seeds wrote:DAM, I appreciated the effort you put-forth in laying out your case for non-duality.

However, from previous encounters, you already know that I am not a fan of the extremes to which you carry the concept of “oneness,” for it seems to be devoid of any meaningful (long-term) purpose for us.
Listen, reality is nondual whether you or others on this forum like it or not, that truth is not going to change things. And unless you can come up with a suitable plausible rebuttal against that truth then perhaps I'll let it go. I am open to being wrong you know. Meanwhile reality is nondual meaning there is just EVERYTHING.

Einstein was quoted as saying energy is neither created nor destroyed ...this idea can also be translated as nothing can die because nothing was born. Meaning there's just everything expressing itself over and over again infinitely for eternity.

If this were not true then nothing would appear, nothing would be possible, these words would not be appearing on your computer screen all over the internet, also, no one would be posting replies. Thoughts, feelings, senses, beliefs, ideas, images, concepts, all of these things would not appear if there wasn't just EVERYTHING all at once without beginning or end. This cannot be refuted or denied, it's a happening.


There is no you, or me, or us, or them, or other speaking or listening, or doing or being.....there's just EVERYTHING speaking, listening, doing, being.

That there appears to be a you, or a me, or an us, or a them is plain and simply inclusive of EVERYTHING ..aka oneness appearing as the many...aka Same one.

It's the same one UNDIVIDED energy that never started nor ends, that appears to itself as the word ''start'' and ''end'', appearing to divide EVERYTHING into TWO OR MORE THINGS...it appears to SEPARATE into THIS and THAT... but any division is pure illusion. How can one energy that is everything without beginning nor end, is neither born nor can die divide itself.??...it would have to get outside of itself, but how can one get outside of itself? how can one divide itself, what would it divide itself with? hOW CAN THE OCEAN DIVIDE ITSELF? ANY WAVE IS STILL THE OCEAN.

iT can't be divided simply because there is no thing to divide it, there is no you period. There is no you because there is no OTHER than you. You are ONE...this is ONE....aka EVERYTHING..aka NO THING
seeds wrote:Furthermore, if you can’t even convince people on a philosophy forum of the merits and worth of non-dualistic thought, then what hope is there of convincing the average person?
_______
Listen, I'M NOT OUT TO CONVINCE ANYONE...it's not my problem if people posting on this forum or those who are only reading want to reject the truth, either they understand the truth or they reject it, that's none of my business, but it's not going to change my mind about it. I'm not going to give up explaining this if that's what your hoping, so get used to it. I'm never going to give up.

I think it was Jesus, a voice from within itself aka everything.. that said the truth is within you, the truth happened to me, the truth has found me. life evolved the truth of nondual knowledge to me...because it can, and it does.
seeds wrote:you already know that I am not a fan of the extremes to which you carry the concept of “oneness,” for it seems to be devoid of any meaningful (long-term) purpose for us.
You are not going to get any meaning or purpose out of this if it's for an assumed sense of separate 'me' ...so forget that.

But by dropping that separate 'me' idea, you will be left with everything. You've got nothing to lose...with nonduality.
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 9956
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: Mr Can doesn't understand.

Post by attofishpi »

seeds wrote:And doubting his existence, as I suggested earlier, is exactly what God wants us to do.
Hi seeds - have you considered God's reason(s) as to why it has left us with doubt?
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Mr Can doesn't understand.

Post by Dontaskme »

seeds wrote: In an alternate forum I indirectly compared Dawkins and his ilk to that of a group of Neanderthals roaming through the woods and stumbling upon a running, 350 horsepower, V8 engine.

After many days of grunting, head scratching, and beating the engine to pieces with clubs and rocks, one of the more intelligent member of the group was somehow able to figure out how it works...

Og say “...fire make shiny thing push down and turn other shiny thing...”

And with that the group moves on, completely satisfied in thinking that they have resolved the mystery of the engine.

The point is that Dawkins is like the above Neanderthal who is satisfied in understanding “how the machine works” while attaching no importance whatsoever in how the machine got there in the first place.

His theories seem to “take for granted” the unthinkably vast array of prerequisite conditions that had to be in place before the “machinery” of evolution (cells/DNA) could even come into existence.
Did the machine get here? or has it been here all the time?

Life does not come into existence as if it is coming from some other place. There is only one place EVERYTHING can be, and THAT PLACE is here NOW ..All that is and ever will be, is made out of the same place it's appearing. No thing can leave or enter what they were never in or out of... there's just everything and no thing herenow...nowhere.

You are trying to intellectualise this from outside the arena of everything. It's like electricity trying to explain what it's like to be electricity.

How can mind explain mind? It would have to split itself in two, into knower and known. Your Body Is The Engine Your mind is the engineer.
When mind tries to peek up it's own skirt all it sees is itself.



seeds wrote:Therefore, the “challenge” for Richard Dawkins is that before he can assume that his ideas stand as some kind of definitive (God-eliminating) statement about reality, he needs to clearly and logically resolve some pressing issues:

One, he needs to explain how a tiny kernel of compressed matter was somehow “impregnated” with every possible ingredient necessary to create all of reality as we understand it (i.e., the Big Bang theory).

Two, he needs to explain from whence the kernel came from.

And three, he needs to explain how an alleged explosion of disparate quantum particles could somehow manage – by sheer chance – to magically blend together into a state of order that defies comprehension.

Until Dawkins has made sense of those key issues, then he will always appear (to me) as being like the above mentioned Neanderthal - walking away with a smug assumption that a deep mystery has been resolved.
_______
Dawkins cannot answer those questions because he doesn't exist except as an intangible unseen mental idea aka no thing. The body of Dawkins doesn't know anything, the body is known as an idea by the engineer, but the engineer is unknowable even to itself, that too is an idea arising in itself, and there is ONLY SELF.

And maybe Dawkins knew that not just the universe, but even God himself was never created. The universe does not require thought to be. IT IS without doubt or reason, or thought.

Image

And here's the rub...there is NO YOU...because there is NO OTHER than YOU.

''When I say 'I am', I do not mean a separate entity with a body as its nucleus, I mean the totality of being, the ocean of consciousness, the entire universe of all that is known. I have nothing to desire for I am complete forever'' ~ NISARGADATTA

The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing.
Socrates wrote nothing and he claimed he had nothing to teach. Yet Socrates, more than any other ancient philosopher, is responsible for creating philosophy as we know it today. In other words no thing was ever created. CREATION IS ONLY IMAGINED IT'S CREATED.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Mr Can doesn't understand.

Post by Dontaskme »

seeds wrote: The point is that Dawkins is like the above Neanderthal who is satisfied in understanding “how the machine works” while attaching no importance whatsoever in how the machine got there in the first place.
It's simply logic..Dawkins is only a speculator of what he thinks is going on. It's the same for every assumed entity who attempts to take the knowing controls as to what's actually going on. These assumed entities have never been alive before, and yet suddenly an attempt is made to believe they have sussed out their origin.. wrongly thinking they've got this aliveness all figured including you seeds.

Also, if your parents had never met you wouldn't even have been here at all. Now try to imagine that for one second, try to imagine never having existed.. and yet here you are now attempting to have a handle on what's going on. What you think you are is nothing but the effect of a causeless cause.Every effect has a cascading effect on the outcome of the subsequent events.

This clearly shows that we are NOT in control over choices of events. Every EFFECT becomes a CAUSE for another event. There are chains of CAUSE and EFFECTS that runs this whole Universe. We can only know 'WHAT' and 'How' things happen so. But, we can never know 'WHY' things happen.
Post Reply