Liberals are...smarter!

[mpw]

.

 

[Isthmus]

According to the laws of Physics, what we consider cold, in fact is the absence of heat. Anything is able to be studied as long as it transmits energy (heat). Absolute Zero is the total absence of heat, but cold does not exist. What we have done is create a term to describe how we feel if we don't have body heat or we are not hot.
Darkness is in fact simply the absence of light. Light can be studied, darkness can not. Darkness cannot be broken down. A simple ray of light tears the darkness and illuminates the surface where the light beam finishes. Dark is a term that we humans have created to describe what happens when there's
lack of light.
Just as in the previous cases, Evil is a term which man has created to describe the result of the absence of God's presence in the hearts of man.

Because according to science, Middle sciences rule all sciences. You might not get it. But Its scientific stuff my friend.

You're 14, so lets cut you some slack. You're trying, but you're wrapping together scientific concepts incompletely and incorrectly and using them to make an unrelated argument.

To clarify, Science and religion are neither the same, mutually exclusive, opposite arguments or even related. They are two completely different and unrelated diciplines. Science doesn't seek to disprove religion. Science seeks knowledge and doesn't care about religion one way or the other (at least not until religion tries to but in). That science contradicts religion sometimes and disproves it in others, is simply a bi-product of what it does, not its goal. if anything, I would say philosophy, which includes religion, specifically deals with ideas that intentionally and deliberately take religion to task.

BTW, a couple of practical corrections. Science has yet to test or find absolute Zero. The concept and definition exists, but a practical measure of it does not. The coldest temperatures measured are still a handful of degrees above, even in deep space - in part attributed to background radiation left over from the big bang.

Darkness can be studied and is studied all the time. All substances do not absorb or prevent all particles from passing through. As a result there are always particles of some spectrum traveling that the human eye cannot detect. Things like Ultravioliet, radio, infared, and even cosmic rays are always there and can be studied in the dark, even if we can't see them.

As for middle sciences ruling all sciences, I'm not understanding what you are saying? No one scientific study rules any others. If anything comes close to dipping its toes in different disciplines and attempting to tie them together, it might be the Unified theory of everything, but that has more to do with Physics and related fields than it does with other fields of study.

I will give you the concept of Evil being a human invention and not a natural concept. however to say that evil "describe the result of the absence of God's presence in the hearts of man" is a fallacious argument. You have offered nothing to defend that position. Just as easily others could say that the concept of evil is a human construct used to defined opposition to a particular set of beliefs or philosophy. A definition like that could be defended by pulling examples of what different cultures have considered acceptable or good, versus evil in different parts of the world or at different times. See you get a more accurate definition, you defend it with verifiable facts, and you base your conclusion solely on what you find and not on your personal beliefs or opinions.

 

[WAdude]

Utter tosh!
Hot/cold, dark/light are just terms of calibration, they're just measurements of something real, heat/light (both energy).

I think you're confused by the terminology, as light is used as both the energy and the measurement in the case of light energy. You've made the point that there is no cold, just hot, but you're absolutely wrong; though I'm not sure you understand this. To say cold and darkness are not real is just ludicrous.


I disagree, evil is a term used for evil, not as any calibration of the presence of God(you can't measure(except for a measurement of absolute zero) what doesn't exist)

I for example have no God in my heart, pick a dictator or war-monger from history however and you find that often they do great evil in the name of the God that fills their heart; or are you saying that the 9/11 terrorist in NY were less evil than I, what about the 7/7 terrorists in London, Hitler etc. etc.

"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction"-Blaise Pascal

No, no, no my friend. YOU DO NOT GET IT. You may not have any god in your heart, so ofcourse you do not get It. But uh, seriously, what's your meaning of life? Because by being an atheist you then are worth nothing, since you belive in nothing but science, because scientifically, you are nothing, a spec of stardust In the Universe trying to get an understanding of things, your absence, is nothing. Your opposite is nothing, you have no belief, no anything. Can you really accept that? Because rea/ly you have no moral. Evil to you, there Is none, go kill and have sex uncontrollably. No consequences huh? Your free.

On the other hand believers believe In something, they are somebody, not just a spec, they are here to fulfill their destiny, and be with their God. They believe In good and bad, have morals. They are free, have free will, but the difference is they prefer to do what they believe is right, they have freedom.

 

[Isthmus]

No, no, no my friend. YOU DO NOT GET IT. You may not have any god in your heart, so ofcourse you do not get It. But uh, seriously, what's your meaning of life? Because by being an atheist you then are worth nothing, since you belive in nothing but science, because scientifically, you are nothing, a spec of stardust In the Universe trying to get an understanding of things, your absence, is nothing. Your opposite is nothing, you have no belief, no anything. Can you really accept that? Because rea/ly you have no moral. Evil to you, there Is none, go kill and have sex uncontrollably. No consequences huh? Your free.

On the other hand believers believe In something, they are somebody, not just a spec, they are here to fulfill their destiny, and be with their God. They believe In good and bad, have morals. They are free, have free will, but the difference is they prefer to do what they believe is right, they have freedom.

Once again your are making fallacious arguments. Morality or definitions of morality are not dependent on religion or religious belief. Sure religions of all sorts can be a source for ideas of morality, but they are most definitely not the only source, and ideas of morality based on religion are not inherently superior or more effective than those that are not based on religion. In fact, certain specific ideas of morality based on religious doctrine have at times proven to be less than nice or moral (at least by today's standards).

 

[mpw]

.

 

[WAdude]

You're 14, so lets cut you some slack. You're trying, but you're wrapping together scientific concepts incompletely and incorrectly and using them to make an unrelated argument.

Science has yet to test or find absolute Zero. The concept and definition exists, but a practical measure of it does not.

Just because Im 14, thanks. But anyways, science has yet found absolute zero, but its a theory. Do you agree with that theory?

 

[WAdude]

You really don't have a clue.

Who are you to say that because I don't believe in God that I have no morality, that my actions are wrong or evil, that my actions bear no consequences.

I know plenty of religious people that do evil things, far more evil than I would. I live my life with morality, but it's a morality based on justice and equality, not what the fairies tell me to do.

But what you define as evil has no scientifical evidence backing it up, that is what you believe in right? I mean, a little while ago you were asking for scientifical evidence, now you say this? Who am I to say what I said? Ha! Who are you to say that I believe in god because I want comfort? You did say that did you not? Arogant of you isnt it, I mean, I cannot say something because Im a believer, but you can say something because your an atheist and have a far more advanced intellect than me.

And anyways, do you know where justice and equality came from, not science, not atheism, but religion.

Science has been wrong, but it's always seeking evidence and proof; religion doesn't do either.

Same reason I don't believe in fairies or ghosts; none of them are real.

Take Christianity for example, I can explain away just about everything that it claims as mystical and miracle with just a bit of logic, and it makes perfect sense. So why would I choose to ignore all the evidence, logic, etc. and instead believe in God? Short answer; comfort.

For comfort I'll buy a sofa, not a religion.

 

[OrderFromChaos]

Just because Im 14, thanks. But anyways, science has yet found absolute zero, but its a theory. Do you agree with that theory?

What definition of the word theory are you using, the layman's term or the scientific term? They are very different so please be specific.

 

[OrderFromChaos]

But what you define as evil has no scientifical evidence backing it up, that is what you believe in right? I mean, a little while ago you were asking for scientifical evidence, now you say this? Who am I to say what I said, ha! Who are you to say that I believe in god because I want comfort? You did say that did you not?

The concepts of "good" and "evil" have nothing whatsoever to do with science. They are merely constructs of our mind. IMO, they can be thought of in the same manner as saying, "One man's terrorists is another man's freedom fighter."

BTW, he can say anything he likes as long as it does not violate the right's of another. Now, of course you don't have to agree with him, but it is he right to say "you believe in god because you want comfort."

 

[WAdude]

What definition of the word theory are you using, the layman's term or the scientific term? They are very different so please be specific.

Scientific.

 

[WAdude]

The concepts of "good" and "evil" have nothing whatsoever to do with science. They are merely constructs of our mind. IMO, they can be thought of in the same manner as saying, "One man's terrorists is another man's freedom fighter."

BTW, he can say anything he likes as long as it does not violate the right's of another. Now, of course you don't have to agree with him, but it is he right to say "you believe in god because you want comfort."

I didnt really mean his constitutional rights, dont take it to litterally. Im just saying it was arogant.

And uh, ok. So there is no evil. I can simply do whatever I want?

Because really, social law comes from religion.

 

[OrderFromChaos]

Scientific.

Thank you.

Personally, I would have to say no for a couple of reasons. First, zero is not a number (I know, semantics and technicalities ). Second, are we talking about the theory with respect to quantum mechanics? If so, how do you get around the Heisenberg's uncertainty principle? Also, this is basically the same as the theory on the speed of light. We lack the technology to actually test the theories. BTW, if it helps I'm also not 100% sold on the speed of light either.

 

[WAdude]

Utter tosh!
Hot/cold, dark/light are just terms of calibration, they're just measurements of something real, heat/light (both energy).

I think you're confused by the terminology, as light is used as both the energy and the measurement in the case of light energy. You've made the point that there is no cold, just hot, but you're absolutely wrong; though I'm not sure you understand this. To say cold and darkness are not real is just ludicrous.


I disagree, evil is a term used for evil, not as any calibration of the presence of God(you can't measure(except for a measurement of absolute zero) what doesn't exist)

I for example have no God in my heart, pick a dictator or war-monger from history however and you find that often they do great evil in the name of the God that fills their heart; or are you saying that the 9/11 terrorist in NY were less evil than I, what about the 7/7 terrorists in London, Hitler etc. etc.

"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction"-Blaise Pascal

So cold is real? No, its just a word to describe what we feel, you cant measure cold, because cold doesnt give off energy, same goes for darkness. I believe it is you who does not understand. Were talking scientific here, just like you wanted.

 

[OrderFromChaos]

I didnt really mean his constitutional rights, dont take it to litterally. Im just saying it was arogant.

And uh, ok. So there is no evil. I can simply do whatever I want?

Because really, social law comes from religion.

I did not necessary mean that in a Constitutional context.

Yes, you can do what you want but you would pay the consequences for your actions. IMO, you could say that about laws, but I would expand upon it. Social laws come from men, who happen also to construct religions so therefore social laws come from religion.

The world is not "good" or "evil," it is just indifferent to your plight in life. It is also indifferent to every other living being so it's nothing personal.

 

[WAdude]

Thank you.

Personally, I would have to say no for a couple of reasons. First, zero is not a number (I know, semantics and technicalities ). Second, are we talking about the theory with respect to quantum mechanics? If so, how do you get around the Heisenberg's uncertainty principle? Also, this is basically the same as the theory on the speed of light. We lack the technology to actually test the theories. BTW, if it helps I'm also not 100% sold on the speed of light either.

Oh ok. Cool. Cause a little while ago, mpw said something about how 2 universes collided and created the universe, which is dumb to say, because we dont have the technology to prove that. Just a little bit of an understanding.

 

[WAdude]

I did not necessary mean that in a Constitutional context.

Yes, you can do what you want but you would pay the consequences for your actions. IMO, you could say that about laws, but I would expand upon it. Social laws come from men, who happen also to construct religions so therefore social laws come from religion.

The world is not "good" or "evil," it is just indifferent to your plight in life. It is also indifferent to every other living being so it's nothing personal.

No, Im sorry, what I meant was that it was arogant for mpw to say who am I to say what I said, when a little while ago she said that I believe in God because I want comfort, but I cant say she has no morals because she is an atheist.

And yes, I know social law comes from religion, which sucks, cause an atheist like mpw follows these social laws, yet, she is an atheist.

 

[OrderFromChaos]

Oh ok. Cool. Cause a little while ago, mpw said something about how 2 universes collided and created the universe, which is dumb to say, because we dont have the technology to prove that. Just a little bit of an understanding.

That is not dumb to say. IMO, if it can be explained in a logic manner than does not go beyond the realm of the natural world it should be given thought. BTW, just because we do not have the technology at the present does not mean it will never be invented. Many doubted Einstein's theories, heck some do to this day, which is why they are still testing the theories in 2007.
Test of Einstein's Theory of Gravity Hits a Snag : NPR

BTW, a scientific theory is not set in stone. They are merely the best possible explanation that we have currently to predict the behavior of whatever we are studying.

 

[OrderFromChaos]

No, Im sorry, what I meant was that it was arogant for mpw to say who am I to say what I said, when a little while ago she said that I believe in God because I want comfort, but I cant say she has no morals because she is an atheist.

And yes, I know social law comes from religion, which sucks, cause an atheist like mpw follows these social laws, yet, she is an atheist.

I was being tongue-in-cheek with the social laws, if you followed my reasoning on why I said sure. Personally, social laws come from men, that's it.

Does China have social laws?

 

[WAdude]

That is not dumb to say. IMO, if it can be explained in a logic manner than does not go beyond the realm of the natural world it should be given thought. BTW, just because we do not have the technology at the present does not mean it will never be invented. Many doubted Einstein's theories, heck some do to this day, which is why they are still testing the theories in 2007.
Test of Einstein's Theory of Gravity Hits a Snag : NPR

BTW, a scientific theory is not set in stone. They are merely the best possible explanation that we have currently to predict the behavior of whatever we are studying.

Wait, you said you doubt the speed of light, but that was one of Einsteins theories, you know, E=mc2. So by many doubted Einsteins theories, you also are one of the many. And I know scientific theories are to the predict behavior of things that we are studying, but it is dumb to say, because mpw says God does not exist, because scientifical data cannot prove it, yet, we dont know if God even exists within our Universe, if he exists outside of it, then we cannot prove him real by our understandings.

 

[mpw]

.

 

[WAdude]

I was being tongue-in-cheek with the social laws, if you followed my reasoning on why I said sure. Personally, social laws come from men, that's it.

Does China have social laws?

It comes from men? No, men modified it to their own personal benifits. See Chinas social laws are modified, like evolution, things change, but they came from the same source, and that is religion.

 

[germ.e83]

You really don't have a clue.

Who are you to say that because I don't believe in God that I have no morality, that my actions are wrong or evil, that my actions bear no consequences.

I know plenty of religious people that do evil things, far more evil than I would. I live my life with morality, but it's a morality based on justice and equality, not what the fairies tell me to do.

There's a difference between 'religious' people & true believers. 'Religious' people who freely do evil acts w/o any sense of guilt or regret are arguably not true believers. A true, Christian believer would strive to turn from evil acts. I agree that there are many evil 'religious' people out there.

If you don't believe in God, I would assume you don't believe in an afterlife (correct me if I'm wrong). If there is no afterlife, and people like Hitler simply die w/ no proper consequences for their acts in life, what purpose does morality have? Sure, you can say you're living a moral life, but in the end, if a rapist & mass murderer w/ no repent simply ceases to exist when he dies, yet you, a moral person whose done good in life face the same exact result at death, what purpose is there in that morality? It's pointless. Everyone's fate is exactly the same, so why be a good person?

 

[OrderFromChaos]

Wait, you said you doubt the speed of light, but that was one of Einsteins theories, you know, E=mc2. So by many doubted Einsteins theories, you also are one of the many. And I know scientific theories are to the predict behavior of things that we are studying, but it is dumb to say, because mpw says God does not exist, because scientifical data cannot prove it, yet, we dont know if God even exists within our Universe, if he exists outside of it, then we cannot prove him real by our understandings.

Yes, you can doubt a theory and still use it. This is not an either or type thing. I would very much like to see the speed of light proven wrong, and Einstein as well since it means we might have a chance to get outside of our own solar system let alone galaxy.

Science will never prove any god exist since the very definition of what a god and what science is does not allow that.

Any god == it not bounds by natural world
science == study of the natural world

 

[WAdude]

What do you mean by scientifical? (Obviously you actually mean the word scientific, I'm not being the grammer police)

Because I'm describing evil as a willingness to do things to others that are not moral; things like killing people, or depriving them of human rights. I accept that evil is subjective, but in the context I've used it's a comparative measurement against my own actions.

You state I have no morality, you're very, very wrong. I've campaigned for equality for lesbians, while others refuse such equalities due to religion: where do you stand on the morality of inequality of sexuality based on religious beliefs?


Okay, why do you choose to believe in God, if not for comfort?

Comfort in 'knowing' there's an afterlife in heaven?
Comfort in 'knowing' there's a meaning to your life?
Comfort in 'knowing' that you're not just an irrelevance in the universe?
Comfort in 'knowing' that you're being watched over by your God?


!? Care to prove that? I see more justice and equality in science than religion; Any controversy with a woman being a doctor? a physicist? a chemist?... Catholic priest? Imam? even educated in some countries(where religion is in control)?

I believe in God because he is my father in heaven, because although he is invisible, and fake (by your standards), he is, to me, like my dad. He created us, he loves us, he watches us, and to give back, I love him back, give him back by doing what I think is right. I do not want comfort from him, thats not a reason to believe in God. "I want comfort from God, so I believe in him", thats really not the best way to go to heaven ( I know you dont believe in God, nor Heaven, but by my standards, I do)

 

[OrderFromChaos]

It comes from men? No, men modified it to their own personal benifits. See Chinas social laws are modified, like evolution, things change, but they came from the same source, and that is religion.

How do you know it does not come from men? You have made some assertions and I would like you to back them up please. There is a reason why Socrates was/is considered the smartest man to have lived.

So China has social laws, correct? Did you know China is an atheistic country? So, does China have social laws, and if so where did they come from?