Antitheists and hypocrisy (SORRY FOR MAKING A RELIGION THREAD)

[Captain Blackout]

Qualia is provably NOT expressible mathematically.

I may have misunderstood the point here, but why not?

If qualia is the objective term for subjective impressions of things in the world (at least that's how I understood it, with examples such as "redness"), then we can express the subjective impressions through irregularities and differences between the individuals perceiving things.

Example: A fully red-green blind person would not perceive redness the way I do (I have a red-green weakness) and a person with fully functioning receptors would perceive red different from me as well.
These differences can be expressed through genetic abnormalities as well as the chemical/biological differences in our respective receptors. And those things (especially genetics and chemistry) are pretty mathematical if you ask me.
There are actual physical, comprehensible reasons behind qualia.

Of course, I'll never experience another person's viewpoint first hand but I can understand and express the differences we experience when perceiving the same quale.

EDIT: Oooh, I see I misunderstood indeed.
It's not about the differences between us, it's about trying to describe a quale that's the difficulty. Well, I agree with that, no question about it.
Though I still fail to see how it is relevant.

Because it means physicalism is wrong. If physicalism is wrong, than atheism is in need of a new support, unless one is ok having faith in atheism. If your belief in atheism is faith based, you have no business giving theists grief. Finally, it means that my statement that the atheist/theist divide is illusory has at least a smidgen of credence.

 

[Xorghul]

Stop grouping Atheists and anti-theists together.

Well they both call themselves Atheists so that's what leads me to this conclusion >.>

Then please tell them to stop grouping atheists and anti-theists together.

 

[Skeleon]

*snip*

Nobody has provided any proof that Qualia exist without a physical correlation, though.
For example, the inverted spectrum thought experiment simply states that this inverted spectrum could occur without any physical correlation.
I don't agree that our subjective impressions of the world aren't the result of interpersonal physical differences.

 

[The_ModeRazor]

If you are sorry for making a religion thread, why make one in the first place?
And if I get the meaning of Anti-Theists right, they sound like a miserable and rather thick headed bunch. Don't even bother talking to them about religion.

 

[goatzilla8463]

Now I wish that I had paid more attention in my R.E. lessons instead of just dicking around.

 

[headshotcatcher]

If you are sorry for making a religion thread, why make one in the first place?
And if I get the meaning of Anti-Theists right, they sound like a miserable and rather thick headed bunch. Don't even bother talking to them about religion.

I wanted to make one but they seem to be rather looked down on, hence the sorry.

And yes that's the observation of most Anti-theists I know about as well

 

[Rafe]

Ugghhh religion thread..

Okay listen, stop grouping Atheists together like its some sort of gathering.

Atheists and theists are NOT two different groups; there is the group of people that believe in god and then everyone else that doesn't.

So here we go with my views on religion (this has been bottled up for too long):

Civilization has truly been achieved without the need for gods.
If there is a God however; that means that he plays no part in people of life as he has given everyone free will. The only way to way to believe someone like that exists is by following ancient scribbles of an outdated age.

Also, every religion has their own God, believing in the one God means that every other religion's God is wrong OR this one God saw fit to create religions that worship different Gods in different ways which can only lead to conflict.
The whole concept is silly and outdated.

Also, to those who say "well you can't prove that he doesn't exist can you!" Just how can you prove that something that doesn't exist; doesn't exist?

So by logic he can?t exist because if he does exist, it must be possible to prove it. On the other hand if he doesn?t exist, it?s impossible to prove. This dispute will go on for some time with no possible winner.

 

[headshotcatcher]

Ugghhh religion thread..

Okay listen, stop grouping Atheists together like its some sort of gathering.

Atheists and theists are NOT two different groups; there is the group of people that believe in god and then everyone else that doesn't.

So here we go with my views on religion (this has been bottled up for too long):

Civilization has truly been achieved without the need for gods.
If there is a God however; that means that he plays no part in people of life as he has given everyone free will. The only way to way to believe someone like that exists is by following ancient scribbles of an outdated age.

Also, every religion has their own God, believing in the one God means that every other religion's God is wrong OR this one God saw fit to create religions that worship different Gods in different ways which can only lead to conflict.
The whole concept is silly and outdated.

Also, to those who say "well you can't prove that he doesn't exist can you!" Just how can you prove that something that doesn't exist; doesn't exist?

So by logic he can?t exist because if he does exist, it must be possible to prove it. On the other hand if he doesn?t exist, it?s impossible to prove. This dispute will go on for some time with no possible winner.

OR you could just believe because it makes you FEEL GOOD instead of always wanting to be right and always wanting to have facts about everything.

Anyway as for religions having different gods the jewish, christian and muslim god are ONE AND THE SAME (christian and jewish gods are in the exact same texts as well, muslim is jewish rewritten) and maybe the other gods are just metaphors for the different sides of 'god' if he/she/it exists.

 

[murphy7801]

Yer sweeping generalizations about people who run under the the lack of faith principle.

 

[PatrickXD]

Hahaha, I don't quite know what I am actualy... maybe somebody cold clear this question for me: I believe in God, but I dont believe in religion (that he should be praised) I dont believe in fate, I believe in free will. I believe that it is impossible to prove 'him,her,it' wrong or right. I used to be an atheist but not an anti-theist. What am I?

And one funny thing my mumsaid once when some christian preachers came to our front door:
Them: Hello, we were just passing through and thought we'd spread the word of christ.
Mum: Yeah, well spread it somewhere else!

That made me laugh XD

 

[Rafe]

Ugghhh religion thread..

Okay listen, stop grouping Atheists together like its some sort of gathering.

Atheists and theists are NOT two different groups; there is the group of people that believe in god and then everyone else that doesn't.

So here we go with my views on religion (this has been bottled up for too long):

Civilization has truly been achieved without the need for gods.
If there is a God however; that means that he plays no part in people of life as he has given everyone free will. The only way to way to believe someone like that exists is by following ancient scribbles of an outdated age.

Also, every religion has their own God, believing in the one God means that every other religion's God is wrong OR this one God saw fit to create religions that worship different Gods in different ways which can only lead to conflict.
The whole concept is silly and outdated.

Also, to those who say "well you can't prove that he doesn't exist can you!" Just how can you prove that something that doesn't exist; doesn't exist?

So by logic he can?t exist because if he does exist, it must be possible to prove it. On the other hand if he doesn?t exist, it?s impossible to prove. This dispute will go on for some time with no possible winner.

OR you could just believe because it makes you FEEL GOOD instead of always wanting to be right and always wanting to have facts about everything.

Anyway as for religions having different gods the jewish, christian and muslim god are ONE AND THE SAME (christian and jewish gods are in the exact same texts as well, muslim is jewish rewritten) and maybe the other gods are just metaphors for the different sides of 'god' if he/she/it exists.

But admitting you only believe because it makes you feel good just raises more questions than it answerers.

Also not every Muslim, Christian and Jew believes that their God is the same. You've also just said that other religions aren't real and are metaphors for YOUR own God.

Look if it makes you happy don't let me stop you, just understanding is human nature. Religions shrouded in nonsense just perk my curiosity.

Sorry if I offended you.

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

Because when a religion attempts to convert someone its because they want to make them ignorant of logic and take their cash. Hurah for the money loving church. I do see your point though, and the main reasons i thought of the mark were "we want to save them from ignorance".... then i went "oh" cus i realised how similar it was to "we want to save them from sin". Nope i dont try and make anyone an athiest, it isnt my place. I like the way you take a few extremists and generalise us, huzah .

Edit: im terrible at this "raises hand guiltily", i always want people to see from my point of view in other arguements and when religion comes up it takes a lot of self control not to say "ITS ALL LIES >:C". I do argue points to the death. I dont want to assimilate people as many religions do, i just want people to try and see it from my perspective.

 

[Captain Blackout]

*snip*

Nobody has provided any proof that Qualia exist without a physical correlation, though.
For example, the inverted spectrum thought experiment simply states that this inverted spectrum could occur without any physical correlation.
I don't agree that our subjective impressions of the world aren't the result of interpersonal physical differences.

Let's say I'm the only person left alive. Now the differences in our experiences don't matter. Qualia still exist, because I'm still here.

This isn't about differences between you and me. It's about:

1) We experience the universe in a special way, apart from machines. It's not just 1's and 0's, just data. We actually feel the universe with our senses.

2) Those experiences have a quality and character to them. In order to isolate (or at least denote) the quality and character, we refer to them as qualia.

3) There are arguments against qualia, but every moron who argues against the existence of qualia are still subject to the quality and character of their experiences. It's like arguing against your own existence. Sure, I can't prove you exist, and you can't logically prove it to yourself (cogito ergo sum is a bad argument at best) however denying your own existence is stupid.

4) As far as we know qualia don't exist outside of our experience. More to the point they exist inside our heads, grounded in the physicality of our brains. Just as a program is really the arrangement of electrons in the hardware of a computer our experiences are the arrangement of everything in our head. However this doesn't account for qualia completely! A computer can hold a map of the universe in it's memory, it still doesn't see "red" as "red" they way we do, it's just data to the machine.

5) Qualia can't be captured mathematically. Try unambiguously describing red to someone blind since birth. Good luck. Explain an orgasm to an asexually reproducing creature. Without an analogous experience you might be there a while.

6) The miracle of experience can't be defined in strictly physical terms. This being the case, what terms do we use?

 

[Spacewolf]

OR you could just believe because it makes you FEEL GOOD instead of always wanting to be right and always wanting to have facts about everything.

yes but how often does religon work like that infact religion often has the opposite effect of if you do anythinng wrong your going to hell even though some of the stuff contradicts its self.

This is especially visible in the 3 religions you mentioned as even though they are similar there has been a period of almost nonstop war there for several hundred years over what very small differences there are and i carnt imagine that all that war is good for a happy atmosphere

 

[Niorff]

What the point ?

Believe what you want, keep it for yourself.

 

[Parallel Streaks]

When you're the son of a criminal psychologist it's pretty difficult to have faith even from a young age, especially when I got older and he openly discussed his patients at the dinner table.

I'm an atheist, but I respect people's rights to believe in whatever the hell they want, it doesn't really affect me.

 

[Skeleon]

1) We experience the universe in a special way, apart from machines. It's not just 1's and 0's, just data. We actually feel the universe with our senses.

Yes, but senses acutally are 1s and 0s. Analogue data is transformed by receptor cells into a digital acitiviy potential. This system is also used to store memory in the hippocampus.
These potentials are actually measurable.

2) Those experiences have a quality and character to them. In order to isolate (or at least denote) the quality and character, we refer to them as qualia.

Again, yes. But our impressions are affected by stored memories (i.e. former experiences). An impression is individual to us because we have an individual stock of experiences. It would be difficult (or rather impossible at this point) but one could probably calculate how a person with specific memories and experiences would consider a new impression he or she got.

3) There are arguments against qualia, but every moron who argues against the existence of qualia are still subject to the quality and character of their experiences. It's like arguing against your own existence. Sure, I can't prove you exist, and you can't logically prove it to yourself (cogito ergo sum is a bad argument at best) however denying your own existence is stupid.

I'm not argueing against the existence of Qualia, I'm saying that Qualia do have physical correlates. And I'm not saying experiences don't count, I'm saying that experiences would be part of the calculation if we could somehow take every experience a person has ever had into account. Which is practically impossible, at least for now.

4) As far as we know qualia don't exist outside of our experience. More to the point they exist inside our heads, grounded in the physicality of our brains. Just as a program is really the arrangement of electrons in the hardware of a computer our experiences are the arrangement of everything in our head. However this doesn't account for qualia completely! A computer can hold a map of the universe in it's memory, it still doesn't see "red" as "red" they way we do, it's just data to the machine.

Hmm, the first part sounds like it's actually in support of my point of view. The second part... well, I guess it comes down to what one defines as consciousness (and its origin). If you consider consciousness as something metaphysical, I can see where this position is coming from. If you see consciousness as the logical result of evolution and as a representation of electrical brain activity, we don't get that problem however.

5) Qualia can't be captured mathematically. Try unambiguously describing red to someone blind since birth. Good luck. Explain an orgasm to an asexually reproducing creature. Without an analogous experience you might be there a while.

Yes, but that is not because it's magic, it's because our mind works this way. We constantly compare experiences and impressions to older memories we have. We see geometrical shapes, lines, circles in everything because our brain looks for patterns it recognizes. If there is no such pattern to compare a new impression to, this impression cannot truly be realized by the conscious mind.
I remember this story about a Native American tribe that lived along a beach where the ships of the explorers were drawing nearer. They had never seen anything like those ships, they did not even really perceive them.

6) The miracle of experience can't be defined in strictly physical terms. This being the case, what terms do we use?

This, again, is a difference of perception. Philosophically, I'd agree with you.
But what it boils down to is that experiences and memories are a sequence of electrical discharges. If we ever had the ability to measure them all and take them all into account, we could actually predict a person's reaction to a new impression. Different perceptions of qualia would become calculable.

 

[zirnitra]

Okay I hate to do this but. SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP! ENOUGH RELIGION ON THIS SITE(again dreadfully sorry about the caps), every couple of months we get a massive surge of religion threads between the ones about abortion and the ones about cannabis. They all get about four hundred million replies from people who all say roughly the same thing, ether the left wing or right wing response. No one bothers to read the posts before to see how many scores of times their exact sentence has already said.

Apart from the four people who have a massive argument constantly quoting and retorting each other, which no one ever wins eventually a couple of them on one side just decides to stop trying to prove someone they've never met wrong. and goes outside and plays in the sun like a happy person.

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

[/quote] OR you could just believe because it makes you FEEL GOOD instead of always wanting to be right and always wanting to have facts about everything.

Anyway as for religions having different gods the jewish, christian and muslim god are ONE AND THE SAME (christian and jewish gods are in the exact same texts as well, muslim is jewish rewritten) and maybe the other gods are just metaphors for the different sides of 'god' if he/she/it exists.[/quote]

So lets say that your city is burnt to the ground and evreything you ever liked was destroyed, would you stick a paper bag over your head and pretend it wasnt there because it made you FEEL BETTER pretending that something exists that doesnt? Or would you actually accept that it didnt exist anymore and move on. Your logic points to the former. You make it sound like you delude yourself to sheild you from the world. I can pretend that bad things never happen and that people never die by stayong at home all day because it makes me feel better, but thats just retarded.