tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20385137.post9220396555321946993..comments2023-11-02T04:21:10.340-04:00Comments on The way the Ball bounces: Stephen Hawking's Two Big Buckets Of NothingBallBounceshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08776039024486455199noreply@blogger.comBlogger67125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20385137.post-34991666930876405922011-08-15T10:06:31.996-04:002011-08-15T10:06:31.996-04:00Under your simplistic assessment of atheism, you m...Under your simplistic assessment of atheism, you mean; the fact that I can enjoy something is in no way dependent on anything else, unlike what your primitive superstition claims. <br />SDCAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20385137.post-67586315240210788512011-08-15T08:54:14.226-04:002011-08-15T08:54:14.226-04:00"We certainly do NOT; I appreciate my life fo..."We certainly do NOT; I appreciate my life for what it is..."<br /><br />Stop right there. Let's look at the sublime emotion of appreciation. Under atheism/darwinism "you" are not appreciating anything -- appreciation is merely an involuntary chemical reaction in your brain, and nothing more. Because, under darwinism, there is no "you" to direct the appreciating -- you are just a complex molecular machine derived from primitive molecular machines, all without purpose or design. Plus, of course, you don't even begin to have a rational explanation for how something as sublime as appreciation could be generated by a mindless, emotionless process of darwinism, which consists of nothing more than the occasional shuffle of the molecular-based DNA deck. <br /><br />So, once again you have failed to live as though atheism were true, and spoken in a way that is only coherent if we were intentionally created by God -- which is what I mean when I say living as though theism were true.<br /><br />It's a lot harder to be a true atheist than you think.BallBounceshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08776039024486455199noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20385137.post-81038214804186020162011-08-15T06:52:23.822-04:002011-08-15T06:52:23.822-04:00"We may espouse atheism, but we must live our..."We may espouse atheism, but we must live our lives as if theism is true."<br /><br />We certainly do NOT; I appreciate my life for what it is, a fleetingly brief period of time, and I cannot fathom lying to myself that anything else is the case. At the same time, I appreciate that I am part of a society that has guidelines for behaviour for the good of everyone. It is a mystery to me why some people are so desperate to "find meaning" beyond those simple facts that they will happily lie to themselves.SDChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15095625213419645462noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20385137.post-82011835010971964382011-08-13T10:14:04.946-04:002011-08-13T10:14:04.946-04:00"we do these things (whether they are making ..."we do these things (whether they are making music, or climbing mountains, or drawing pictures, or solving scientific problems, or anything else) simply because we ENJOY them."<br /><br />None of what you have said goes to the level of what I am intending to say by meaning. Here are some dictionary definitions which help<br /><br />1. Something that is conveyed or signified; sense or significance.<br /><br />3. An interpreted goal, intent, or end: "The central meaning of his pontificate is to restore papal authority" (Conor Cruise O'Brien).<br /><br />4. Inner significance: "But who can comprehend the meaning of the voice of the city?" (O. Henry).<br /><br />Under atheism, there is no significance to the universe as a whole or its parts -- as you have so eloquently put it, it "just is". Under atheism, there is no goal, intent or end of the universe. It just is. <br /><br />You cannot even state that the goal of enjoyment is to somehow propagate the species, because if propagation of species was a goal of darwinism, then it would be teleological, which darwinists cannot admit. It just is.<br /><br />There is no inner or deeper significance to life, whether it be expressed in painting or raping. Life, like the universe, just is.<br /><br />The kind of meaning-seeking I am talking about entails asking "why". And you have already answered this question with, "don't ask".<br /><br />So, meaning, purpose, significance, worth are all non-starters under atheism. And yet, no one lives their life as though this was actually true. We may espouse atheism, but we must live our lives as if theism is true.BallBounceshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08776039024486455199noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20385137.post-86171127381416690442011-08-13T10:08:48.589-04:002011-08-13T10:08:48.589-04:00"we do these things (whether they are making ..."we do these things (whether they are making music, or climbing mountains, or drawing pictures, or solving scientific problems, or anything else) simply because we ENJOY them."<br /><br />This makes you an epicurean, then, a pleasure-seeker. A psychopath finds pleasure in murder and torture. A rapist finds enjoyment in the anticipation and act of rape. <br /><br />And enjoyment is nothing more than the product of a chemical reaction caused by mindless natural processes. Life under atheism really is an absurdity.<br /><br />Strangely, atheists seem generally unwilling to admit this.BallBounceshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08776039024486455199noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20385137.post-71654250650336535562011-08-12T15:48:20.912-04:002011-08-12T15:48:20.912-04:00Your examples of rocks and cabbage are interesting...Your examples of rocks and cabbage are interesting, as they display one of the great gaps on “Christian Ethics”, and that is the idea that there IS always a discrete “right” and “wrong”, or a sharp dividing line between ethical and non-ethical behaviour (this completely aside from the obvious issue that “the sharp dividng line” is being drawn by modern people translating ancient texts of dubious origin, assembled by bronze-age goat herders, which are essentially a collection of parables and allegory, whose meaning shifts with cultural changes over time). <br /><br />But the line is actually very fuzzy, and all of the moral philosophers I listed above don’t pay any attention to rocks and cabbages, but to the fuzzy area between people and cabbages. As a non-Christian, I extend my ethical thought towards many non-humans. My ethics tell me it is wrong to cage, torture, or intentionally injure primates, especially our very close cousins the great apes. I think it is morally repugnant to torture any animal. But my moral ground here does not go so far as to make me a vegan, but with some people it does. I am free to admit there is a fuzzy ground between “right” and “wrong” in animal rights, and do my best to define it in a way that allows me to live with a relatively clean conscience. That said, I have smacked a lot of mosquitoes in my life. Does that man I equate dogs with people? No. But I also do not dismiss dogs as being no more worthy my care than a rock. <br /><br />There are many examples of the fuzzy moral lines. I think that embryonic stem cells should be allowed for research, as they are not sentient beings, but the products of the research may reduce the suffering of sentient beings. I also think that animal research is a valuable tool to improve the human condition, but that it should be carried out in as humane a way as possible. If the research is, by necessity, incredibly inhumane, then we have to balance the suffering of the animal against the potential gains of the research. I think state execution is morally wrong, regardless of the severity of the crime, especially when we have the technology and resources to prevent a criminal from repeating heinous crimes. Of course, you can make up a million examples along the line of the “Runaway Trolly Quandary”.<br /><br />Does the atheist have a good answer for this? No! But neither does the Christian, because the fuzzy line does not fit with Christian Dogma. You imagine there is a sharp line, send down from a Deity through a prophet and the gospels. But the gospels are frighteningly vague about where that fuzzy line is, and leave a lot open for interpretation (I think about Luke 19)PATJnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20385137.post-65472050700291302612011-08-12T12:39:30.076-04:002011-08-12T12:39:30.076-04:00"What you can't explain is why uncreated,..."What you can't explain is why uncreated, purposeless creatures whose existence has no meaning should be meaning-seekers and meaning-makers."<br /> <br /> I certainly can; we do these things (whether they are making music, or climbing mountains, or drawing pictures, or solving scientific problems, or anything else) simply because we ENJOY them. Why do you have this neurotic compulsion to assume that an unseen force is responsible for such things?<br /> Unlike those in your cult, I am not forced to accept the pronouncements of others as to the nature of being, and my will is affected by my decisions. Can you show evidence to the contrary?<br /> Finally, your supposed "slate" is nothing of the sort; if you have wronged someone, the only entity to who you have any sort of obligation is to THAT person, since there is no invisible magic man in the sky making marks on an imaginary "slate" for you. Your cult is directed towards living for a non-existent "future life", while mine is directed towards living my life.SDChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15095625213419645462noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20385137.post-59306817071798469012011-08-12T09:59:43.940-04:002011-08-12T09:59:43.940-04:00Slate. I had a slate. I did not treat my parents w...Slate. I had a slate. I did not treat my parents with the respect they deserved. I was unkind. I was unselfish.<br /><br />And, I have a slate. You don't have to go farther than this blog. I have not always accorded blog posters the respect and courtesy they are entitled to -- you included. Many of my posts are intemperate and unkind.BallBounceshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08776039024486455199noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20385137.post-52040346553445515352011-08-12T09:57:09.249-04:002011-08-12T09:57:09.249-04:00"there is no free will" - this is simply..."there is no free will" - this is simply an assertion on your part."<br /><br />It is the conclusion of many materialistic atheistic philosophers and scientists. There is a huge body of literature on this topic.<br /><br />e.g., <br /><br />http://www.physorg.com/news186830615.html<br /><br />It is the logical conclusion of equating our minds with our brains. If our brains are molecular machines, and there is no soul inside the machine, then the machine drives us, rather than us driving the machine. Actually, the machine is us, and the "you" inside the machine doesn't exist -- it's an illusion.<br /><br />See the problem with denying belief in God? When God disappears, so do "you".BallBounceshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08776039024486455199noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20385137.post-38233281580594118962011-08-12T09:51:37.093-04:002011-08-12T09:51:37.093-04:00"Our lives have the meanings that we assign t..."Our lives have the meanings that we assign to them."<br /><br />What you can't explain is why uncreated, purposeless creatures whose existence has no meaning should be meaning-seekers and meaning-makers. You've got an absurdity to deal with -- something that is absurd under darwinism. "You" just don't fit with the darwinian model you espouse as truth.<br /><br />To put it more starkly, since there is no meaning to life or existence, when humans assign meaning to their lives they are engaged in an act of gigantic self-delusion.BallBounceshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08776039024486455199noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20385137.post-45411230162004288592011-08-12T09:00:18.383-04:002011-08-12T09:00:18.383-04:00"A true atheist will admit that if atheism is..."A true atheist will admit that if atheism is true, there is no meaning to either the universe or life, there is no purpose to human existence or the universe, and there is no free will"<br /><br />"there is no meaning to the universe or life" - why does this bother you to the point that you're willing to lie to yourself to give yourself a false "meaning"? Our lives have the meanings that we assign to them.<br /><br />"there is no free will" - this is simply an assertion on your part.SDChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15095625213419645462noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20385137.post-34881820620751269672011-08-11T20:02:12.595-04:002011-08-11T20:02:12.595-04:00"You seem to be arguing that this justice (an..."You seem to be arguing that this justice (and the subsequent promise of personal punishment/reward in this or the afterlife) is the basis for human morality and ethics."<br /><br />Not sure I argued that, PatJ.<br /><br />"You take it so far as to say that people who do not believe in your justice system (atheists) have no basis for their ethics."<br /><br />Don't think I said that either, PatJ.<br /><br />I would say that atheists have no good grounds for believing that objective right and wrong exists. In a molecules-to-man universe, right and wrong seem like out-of-place categories; at best a human construction, and, therefore, like tastes in music, subjective. I would go further and suggest that in a hard materialist universe, right and wrong, like meaning, purpose, and worth, are absurd categories.<br /><br />I've used this example before. If it is not wrong, or evil, for a rock to fall on a cabbage and squash it, how is it different if it falls on a person? We're just a different arrangement of molecules, a slightly modified sequence of DNA. In fact, there's undoubtedly a darwinist out there somewhere celebrating how much DNA we share with cabbages. I know they do about earthworms.<br /><br />If it's not wrong for a rock, or a bear to kill a human, why is it wrong for another human? <br /><br />If it is not wrong for a human to kill a pesky bug, why is it wrong for a human to kill another pesky human? It seems to me the atheist has no good answer to this.<br /><br />Empathy? Empathy is nothing more than a chemical reaction in the brain; it has no real authenticity or legitimacy; it's just another one of those amoral darwinian burps that evolution coughed up; no better than, e.g., the urge to rape or kill.<br /><br />Atheists may profess atheism, but when it gets down to actually living their lives, they live them as though theism were true -- a universe where complex material arrangements are not the highest reality, but lives driven by meaning, purpose, and values -- categories which are absurd if atheism is true. <br /><br />A true atheist will admit that if atheism is true, there is no meaning to either the universe or life, there is no purpose to human existence or the universe, and there is no free will (under which scenario it becomes a bit weird to even be discussing moral codes and ethics.)BallBounceshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08776039024486455199noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20385137.post-52559797011017610562011-08-11T18:21:28.800-04:002011-08-11T18:21:28.800-04:00Yes, by definition I mean legal justice, whether c...Yes, by definition I mean legal justice, whether codified in Civil Law and enforced by a government or etched in tablets in a holy book and enforced by a deity. You seem to be arguing that this justice (and the subsequent promise of personal punishment/reward in this or the afterlife) is the basis for human morality and ethics. You take it so far as to say that people who do not believe in your justice system (atheists) have no basis for their ethics. <br /><br />Unfortunately your trip through “ethics” as a study got stopped somehow in the late bronze age when the bible was written. The contributions of Aristotle, Locke, or John Stewart Mills seem to have been missed entirely. Even Kant’s formalism has a solid basis without invoking the need for an ultimate purveyor of justice.<br /><br />Short form: Christian justice does not equal ethical morality. And none of this has anything to do with the physical processes at the beginning of the universe.PatJnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20385137.post-77831598089099956802011-08-11T17:51:37.804-04:002011-08-11T17:51:37.804-04:00"you seem to spend a lot of time mocking the ..."you seem to spend a lot of time mocking the people who are doing good work discovering how the cement was made, and even calling them liars and cheats for suggesting it might be useful to know how the cement was made."<br /><br />Interesting how that same criticism doesn't apply to those who mock we who seek to understand WHY the cement was made.Joehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17314193532768891832noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20385137.post-20584560325234732962011-08-11T16:08:55.899-04:002011-08-11T16:08:55.899-04:00Yes, Richard, I DID see option 4, but you have jum...Yes, Richard, I DID see option 4, but you have jumped right PAST that step, so I'm asking what makes you think you have a "slate"? Is it (as you've already elucidated) just because "it makes you feel good", or do you have any sort of a rational reason?<br />SDCAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20385137.post-77919315135416965132011-08-11T16:06:55.199-04:002011-08-11T16:06:55.199-04:00Joe, I can see all of those things just perfectly ...Joe, I can see all of those things just perfectly fine, and I don't need to imagine that there's an invisible magic man in the sky necessary to "explain" any of it; why do you?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20385137.post-1389838903069721402011-08-11T14:39:58.429-04:002011-08-11T14:39:58.429-04:00"you seem to spend a lot of time mocking the ..."you seem to spend a lot of time mocking the people who are doing good work discovering how the cement was made, and even calling them liars and cheats for suggesting it might be useful to know how the cement was made."<br /><br />I do? I know I am satirical, but liars and cheats? I've really got to tone down my rhetoric. I'm really trying to be a nice guy!BallBounceshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08776039024486455199noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20385137.post-33952668788247263072011-08-11T14:36:36.671-04:002011-08-11T14:36:36.671-04:00Justice is a tool to deal with unethical behaviour...Justice is a tool to deal with unethical behaviour,<br /><br />You are perhaps thinking of legal justice, which is just one element of justice. There are several, including:<br /><br />1. The quality of being just; fairness.<br />2.<br />a. The principle of moral rightness; equity.<br />b. Conformity to moral rightness in action or attitude; righteousness.<br />3.<br />a. The upholding of what is just, especially fair treatment and due reward in accordance with honor, standards, or law.<br /><br />If someone steals a kid's toy, and somebody else gives them a toy to compensate, that is an act of justice regardless of whether the thief is caught and punished.BallBounceshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08776039024486455199noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20385137.post-7945023349812653252011-08-11T14:32:44.083-04:002011-08-11T14:32:44.083-04:00"And what makes you think you have a "sl..."And what makes you think you have a "slate" to begin with? "<br /><br />Did you not see option 4?BallBounceshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08776039024486455199noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20385137.post-32538166792848258712011-08-11T14:31:46.330-04:002011-08-11T14:31:46.330-04:00"Clearly, things are no objectively true just..."Clearly, things are no objectively true just because you feel they are true, that is the opposite of “objectively” true."<br /><br />The objective purpose and meaning I am talking about flows from whether or not this universe is the intentional creation of God. It has nothing whatsoever to do with whether I think the universe has purpose or even whether I exist or not. Or whether anybody exists. This purpose and meaning exists if God intentionally created the universe, and does not exist if the universe is an uncreated bang, buzz, burp, or aberration.<br /><br />The fact that I as a human being have intuitions about purpose and meaning is another issue. <br /><br />Here are the choices.<br /><br />1. There is no Creator, no purpose/meaning, but intimations of purpose/meaning embedded inside darwinian lifeforms called humans. This is absurd and leads to either the denial of purpose/meaning and existential despair -- well documented by the godless 20th cc. existentialists -- or the affirmation of purpose/meaning, which amounts to huge self-delusion. So, no God = absurdity, and either delusion or despair -- your call.<br /><br />2. There is a Creator, purpose and meaning objectively exist, intimations of purpose and meaning are purposely embedded in human beings, and human instincts concerning purpose, meaning and worth are validated. God = purpose, meaning, and validation of human intimations. <br /><br />It is true that there is an existential choice to be made, but this is not about subjective feelings.<br /><br />I hope this clarifies this for you.BallBounceshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08776039024486455199noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20385137.post-11726422589489653002011-08-11T13:34:10.003-04:002011-08-11T13:34:10.003-04:00Well Same Dumb Comments when you take your silly b...Well Same Dumb Comments when you take your silly blindfold off I will be happy to show you the colours of the rainbow, the beauty of the sunset and the myriad of stars in the night sky. Until then you can entertain yourself with those buckets of nothing. How is that experiment coming along BTW. Any sign of singularity?Joehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17314193532768891832noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20385137.post-15463634038361205972011-08-11T12:16:31.644-04:002011-08-11T12:16:31.644-04:00You put a lot of fancy words around “if it makes R...You put a lot of fancy words around “if it makes Richard Ball feel good, it must be true”. It is the height of conceit to expand your own good-feelings to the entire universe. Clearly, your “purpose” and “meaning” are different from those of most of the human population of Earth, are different than those of the bacterial population of earth (which outnumber the human population by a factor of about a trillion), and are different from those of any other life forms than might exists across this universe. Clearly, things are no objectively true just because you feel they are true, that is the opposite of “objectively” true.<br /><br />You thought Genesis was more pleasing, because it lacked “capricious, drunken gods” (I will avoid the argument that the “Tree of Knowledge” and the “Great Flood” stories are stellar examples of a capricious action by a god) of other creation stories. Therefore it is objectively true? This is the logical rabbit hole you are taking us down?<br /><br />“I didn't want to know so much how cement was made” – for someone with such a disinterest, you seem to spend a lot of time mocking the people who are doing good work discovering how the cement was made, and even calling them liars and cheats for suggesting it might be useful to know how the cement was made. <br /><br />To continue the analogy, you have previously argued that cement-making schools should stop teaching how cement is made, and instead teach why cement is made.<br /><br />But you are again changing tacks. Explain to me how a morality based on punishment and reward is ethical?P@Jnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20385137.post-19782550776096659312011-08-11T10:16:56.183-04:002011-08-11T10:16:56.183-04:00And Joe, your "personal encounter" would...And Joe, your "personal encounter" wouldn't have happened to occur at a time when you were drunk, high, or under a great deal of stress, would it? Hallucinations like these are common among all cultists.<br />SDCAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20385137.post-1336466908336477342011-08-11T10:14:07.690-04:002011-08-11T10:14:07.690-04:00Lying to yourself that you have a diamond the size...Lying to yourself that you have a diamond the size of a Volvo buried somewhere in the backyard, just waiting for you to dig it up, might make you feel good too, Mr. ball, but it has no relation to REALITY. You are admitting that you don't care about truth, just so long as you can "feel good" about what you choose to believe in.<br />SDCAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20385137.post-83911179072721592542011-08-11T08:46:24.224-04:002011-08-11T08:46:24.224-04:00Accepting something that will validate your existe...Accepting something that will validate your existence and your intuitions about yourself as a tentative hypothesis to be further explored is eminently rational; in fact it is the opposite -- rejecting out of hand an hypothesis that will validate your existence and potentially fulfill the deepest aspirations of the human heart -- that is irrational.<br /><br />And that is the settled position of hardened atheists.BallBounceshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08776039024486455199noreply@blogger.com