The problem with atheism.

[the joint]

funny we're arguing about this crap, while living on a tiny spec of dust in an enormous universe that doesn't know or care about anything we do.

Meaning is embedded into the structural syntax of the universe, and necessarily so.  Information catalyzes meaning.  Without meaning, information is useless, chaotic, and impossible to decipher or communicate. 
Without meaning, you wouldn't be able to empirically study anything.

To say the Universe is meaningless is akin to saying that language is meaningless (reality is, by definition, a language).  But, that would be ridiculous because language predicates meaning.

Basically, if you think the Universe is meaningless, then please explain how information is conveyable.

The universe is pointless. There's no reason for our existence here other than some chemical reactions and random chance that our planet is the exact distance from the right size star, and it's the correct size, etc. There's meaning that we put into it. We are intelligent enough to provide meaning to things. We can try to convince ourselves that there's a reason for our existence, or the universe's existence for that matter, but it doesn't mean that it has to be true. We CREATED language. We PUT meaning into it. Just like if someone says something to you in another language that you don't understand, that has no meaning to you besides the tone of voice and body language of that person. We learn to put meaning to things that already exist or things that we create.

First of all, I'm talking about language as an algebraic construct (i.e. syntax + content + grammar = language).  By definition, any identifiable thing or concept or system is a language.  While we may have created languages (e.g. Morse code), it is also correct to say that language allows for us to exist in the first place.  Language is mathematically holosymmetric in nature, and that's why we can create new languages at all.

Second, you automatically contradict yourself.  Saying the universe is "pointless" is ascribing a defined set of meaningful parameters to the Universe itself (i.e. you are implying that you know what it means to be 'pointless' and so you posit pointlessneses in opposition of meaning), and saying that "random chance" is responsible for our existence is ascribing a causal mechanism for our existence.  Chance is a word that way too many people misunderstand.  There is no such thing as raw chance - chance is unexplained causality.

Third, you're thinking about 'meaning' on a very superficial level ("Oh, that means so much to me!"), and you're ignoring that it's meaningful to be able to even perceive objects, measure sizes and distances, etc. at all.  All humans share at least one common language, namely the language of perception.  The fact that we all perceive the same Universe in congruence with each other indicates that there is something, some meaningful syntax, that binds us together.

Fourth, hearing a foreign language you don't understand is not the same as meaninglessness.  The fact that you recognize it as a language at all indicates that it conveys its meaning to you as linguistic, and it did that successfully.  Meaninglessness implies that you can't even know if there is any information whatsoever that could ever be deciphered or interpreted.  If I showed you writings from an unknown ancient civilization, you would instantly recognize the writings as a language even if you didn't know what was being said.  But, knowing that it is an unknown language, perhaps you'd be compelled to try to learn more about it...

[the joint]

funny we're arguing about this crap, while living on a tiny spec of dust in an enormous universe that doesn't know or care about anything we do.

Meaning is embedded into the structural syntax of the universe, and necessarily so.  Information catalyzes meaning.  Without meaning, information is useless, chaotic, and impossible to decipher or communicate. 
Without meaning, you wouldn't be able to empirically study anything.

To say the Universe is meaningless is akin to saying that language is meaningless (reality is, by definition, a language).  But, that would be ridiculous because language predicates meaning.

Basically, if you think the Universe is meaningless, then please explain how information is conveyable.

Not meaningless, insignifiicant. In the same way that guessing a private key to a Bitcoin address has a chance that is so insignificant that it's almost meaningless. It has a chance, just like our communication has meaning, but it exists in such a vaste space of probabilities that it might as well be meaningless.

Why do you assume we or our planet is insignificant?  If the definable Universe includes us and the planet, then we aren't insignificant to the Universe, but rather we are integral to its definition.

[Vod]

Like Every other cult member, bitchick is going to ignore the tough questions.  Not suprised that athiests win these arguments so easily.   

[BitChick]

Like Every other cult member, bitchick is going to ignore the tough questions.  Not suprised that athiests win these arguments so easily.  

Umm.  OK?  I guess your question about other gods was the tough one you are referring to?  Or I guess it was that I was too proud to believe in other gods?

I thought I dealt with that briefly.  Let's take Hinduism for example- all paths are valid so serve whatever gods you want.  Logic would say it would be the smartest choice to then serve Jesus.  If the Bible says, "There is only one way to the Father and it is through Jesus Christ."  

I have had debates about this on other posts.  I personally do feel that there will be people that with sincere hearts serve "God", "Allah" or whatever other name they call "HIM" that will find themselves in Sheol and will understand at that point all things and have a chance to accept or reject Jesus there.  It is not that I believe all paths are valid.  Jesus paid the price for our sins so He is the only way we have a chance to have eternal life.  (I don't expect you to get this BTW but you asked for my world view and I am giving it to you here.)  This is not the common Christian belief BTW.  Most Christians are very adamant that if you don't accept Jesus here on earth you go to Hell.  It is pretty black and white for them but I believe it leads to some problems.  The major one being a sense of God being "unfair."  But because I believe God gives us our conscious and our sense of fairness to begin with how could we call Him unfair?  I had trouble with this and found that it was really a problem with the English Translation of the Bible that basically takes "Sheol" and turns it into "Hell."  Sheol is a waiting place for the dead.  I believe that during the three days before Jesus rose again he took the "keys" (as scripture points out) and goes there to preach to the souls.  I believe it will be a place outside of time and everyone will get the chance to accept or reject Him.  So for all of the other paths, gods etc. that people are serving they will have a chance with eyes wide open to accept the truth or reject it.  

As for being too "proud" to serve other gods.  I fear the true God too much to even dare do that.  Call it pride if you want.  I believe the Bible to be true to the core of my being.  So much so that if you held a gun to my head and made me deny my faith, I hope by the Grace of God I would not deny Him.  Call me a fanatic if you want.  Call it a cult.  But that is how strongly I feel about my faith.  I have had people tell me it was the same as the fanatic Muslims.  I am not the one going out there with a gun to kill other people though so I don't get that connection.  I guess the willingness to die?  It is not that I want to.  That would be crazy, but if someone was forcing me to should I just give in?  And yes, horrible things have been done in the name of religions.  I get it.  But many people, even today, face death just for their faith in Jesus and just for doing good things for others.

Did this answer any questions?  Do you have any more?  If I did not answer the question you had let me know.  I really am not trying to skirt the issues here and love to discuss these things!  Iron sharpens iron so they say.

[the joint]

Like Every other cult member, bitchick is going to ignore the tough questions.  Not suprised that athiests win these arguments so easily.  

Here's a few questions for you to start:

1) How can a meaningless system exist?  And if you can answer that one, then how can meaningful systems arise from a meaningless one?

2) Given the mathematical proof for "the boundary of a boundary = 0" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boundary_(topology)) coupled with the sameness-in-difference principle of logic, how would you explain or model the relationship between you/I and the rest of the Universe?  Then, how would refute the idea that the Universe is as much mental (if not more so) than physical in nature?

3) When you realize that you can't refute the Universe is mental in nature, why is the idea of God ridiculous? Or, at least, why is it more ridiculous than the assertion of God's non-existence?

4) What is your definition of God, and how does it differ (if at all) from "truth" that one might seek, for example, through empirical study and observation?

5) Does your definition of God conflict with others' definitions of God?    Are you arguing against a straw man?  I.e. do you believe that every theist poster in this thread has the same argument?  I've attempted to tackle every "tough question" posited here and I haven't seen much in the way of strong rebuttals, though I do enjoy Rassah's responses.

6) What would you say to someone who tells you that they've directly experienced God, that there is plenty of logical, mathematical, and empirical evidence of God?  Assume this "someone" has no psychiatric history, has multiple collegiate degrees, and strongly grasps the scientific method as well as both inductive and deductive reasoning.

[the joint]

Like Every other cult member, bitchick is going to ignore the tough questions.  Not suprised that athiests win these arguments so easily.  

FYI, when you're done answering my questions, refute this:

http://ctmu.org/

"Of the three kinds of theory, by far the lion’s share of popular reportage is commanded by theories of science.  Unfortunately, this presents a problem.  For while science owes a huge debt to philosophy and mathematics – it can be characterized as the child of the former and the sibling of the latter - it does not even treat them as its equals.  It treats its parent, philosophy, as unworthy of consideration.  And although it tolerates and uses mathematics at its convenience, relying on mathematical reasoning at almost every turn, it acknowledges the remarkable obedience of objective reality to mathematical principles as little more than a cosmic “lucky break”. "


...


"In fact, if we regard the scientific method as a theory about the nature and acquisition of scientific knowledge (and we can), it is not a theory of knowledge in general.  It is only a theory of things accessible to the senses.  Worse yet, it is a theory only of sensible things that have two further attributes: they are non-universal and can therefore be distinguished from the rest of sensory reality, and they can be seen by multiple observers who are able to “replicate” each other’s observations under like conditions.  Needless to say, there is no reason to assume that these attributes are necessary even in the sensory realm.  The first describes nothing general enough to coincide with reality as a whole – for example, the homogeneous medium of which reality consists, or an abstract mathematical principle that is everywhere true - and the second describes nothing that is either subjective, like human consciousness, or objective but rare and unpredictable…e.g. ghosts, UFOs and yetis, of which jokes are made but which may, given the number of individual witnesses reporting them, correspond to real phenomena.

The fact that the scientific method does not permit the investigation of abstract mathematical principles is especially embarrassing in light of one of its more crucial steps: “invent a theory to fit the observations.”  A theory happens to be a logical and/or mathematical construct whose basic elements of description are mathematical units and relationships.  If the scientific method were interpreted as a blanket description of reality, which is all too often the case, the result would go something like this: “Reality consists of all and only that to which we can apply a protocol which cannot be applied to its own (mathematical) ingredients and is therefore unreal.”  Mandating the use of “unreality” to describe “reality” is rather questionable in anyone’s protocol.  "

[termhn]

Like Every other cult member, bitchick is going to ignore the tough questions.  Not suprised that athiests win these arguments so easily.  

1) How can a meaningless system exist?  And if you can answer that one, then how can meaningful systems arise from a meaningless one?

What is this whole thing about a meaningless system? Just because there is no god there is therefore no meaning? No! You can still find meaning in life through your experiences etc. We (at least I) think that life is pointless, as in there is no greater reason or being that put us here. That doesn't mean I can't enjoy life and take meaning from it, though.

[the joint]

Like Every other cult member, bitchick is going to ignore the tough questions.  Not suprised that athiests win these arguments so easily.  

1) How can a meaningless system exist?  And if you can answer that one, then how can meaningful systems arise from a meaningless one?

What is this whole thing about a meaningless system? Just because there is no god there is therefore no meaning? No! You can still find meaning in life through your experiences etc. We (at least I) think that life is pointless, as in there is no greater reason or being that put us here. That doesn't mean I can't enjoy life and take meaning from it, though.

The purpose of a purpose is to be purposeful according to whatever constitutes a purpose.
The purpose of life is to be purposeful according to whatever constitutes life.
The purpose of life is to live.

Not hard.

Edit:  BTW why are you asking me "what is this whole thing about a meaningless system?" when you just said you believe life (i.e. a system) is pointless?

[termhn]

Like Every other cult member, bitchick is going to ignore the tough questions.  Not suprised that athiests win these arguments so easily.  

1) How can a meaningless system exist?  And if you can answer that one, then how can meaningful systems arise from a meaningless one?

What is this whole thing about a meaningless system? Just because there is no god there is therefore no meaning? No! You can still find meaning in life through your experiences etc. We (at least I) think that life is pointless, as in there is no greater reason or being that put us here. That doesn't mean I can't enjoy life and take meaning from it, though.

The purpose of a purpose is to be purposeful according to whatever constitutes a purpose.
The purpose of life is to be purposeful according to whatever constitutes life.
The purpose of life is to live.

Not hard.

OK, I agree that the purpose of life is to live... what does that have to do with meaningless system?

[the joint]

Like Every other cult member, bitchick is going to ignore the tough questions.  Not suprised that athiests win these arguments so easily.  

1) How can a meaningless system exist?  And if you can answer that one, then how can meaningful systems arise from a meaningless one?

What is this whole thing about a meaningless system? Just because there is no god there is therefore no meaning? No! You can still find meaning in life through your experiences etc. We (at least I) think that life is pointless, as in there is no greater reason or being that put us here. That doesn't mean I can't enjoy life and take meaning from it, though.

The purpose of a purpose is to be purposeful according to whatever constitutes a purpose.
The purpose of life is to be purposeful according to whatever constitutes life.
The purpose of life is to live.

Not hard.

OK, I agree that the purpose of life is to live... what does that have to do with meaningless system?

You said you believe "life is pointless", then you agree the purpose of life is to live, then you give some hybrid idea that you can find meaning but outside of yourself there is no meaning...

I'm not sure.  I just see contradictions all over the place. 

[termhn]

Like Every other cult member, bitchick is going to ignore the tough questions.  Not suprised that athiests win these arguments so easily.  

1) How can a meaningless system exist?  And if you can answer that one, then how can meaningful systems arise from a meaningless one?

What is this whole thing about a meaningless system? Just because there is no god there is therefore no meaning? No! You can still find meaning in life through your experiences etc. We (at least I) think that life is pointless, as in there is no greater reason or being that put us here. That doesn't mean I can't enjoy life and take meaning from it, though.

The purpose of a purpose is to be purposeful according to whatever constitutes a purpose.
The purpose of life is to be purposeful according to whatever constitutes life.
The purpose of life is to live.

Not hard.

OK, I agree that the purpose of life is to live... what does that have to do with meaningless system?

You said you believe "life is pointless", then you agree the purpose of life is to live, then you give some hybrid idea that you can find meaning but outside of yourself there is no meaning...

I'm not sure.  I just see contradictions all over the place. 

I'm saying that there is no "deeper meaning" after just enjoying life.

[the joint]

Like Every other cult member, bitchick is going to ignore the tough questions.  Not suprised that athiests win these arguments so easily.  

1) How can a meaningless system exist?  And if you can answer that one, then how can meaningful systems arise from a meaningless one?

What is this whole thing about a meaningless system? Just because there is no god there is therefore no meaning? No! You can still find meaning in life through your experiences etc. We (at least I) think that life is pointless, as in there is no greater reason or being that put us here. That doesn't mean I can't enjoy life and take meaning from it, though.

The purpose of a purpose is to be purposeful according to whatever constitutes a purpose.
The purpose of life is to be purposeful according to whatever constitutes life.
The purpose of life is to live.

Not hard.

OK, I agree that the purpose of life is to live... what does that have to do with meaningless system?

You said you believe "life is pointless", then you agree the purpose of life is to live, then you give some hybrid idea that you can find meaning but outside of yourself there is no meaning...

I'm not sure.  I just see contradictions all over the place. 

I'm saying that there is no "deeper meaning" after just enjoying life.

And where does that meaning come from?  What of the syntax of the system in which you were born into that allowed not only yourself to find meaning, but others as well?  Meaning is found in the Universe because the Universe allows for meaning. There's a reason why we can find meaning at all, and the way I see it, you're suggesting there's no reason for this reason to exist.  How could something allow for meaning if it wasn't inherently meaningful?

[dank]

It is true, life has whatever meaning you give it, but there is a universal end purpose to life on earth, which is to evolve as an intelligent spirit and find heaven, whether it's when your dead or alive.

Are we nothing?  For we exist, we are something.  We are made of the universe, surely we are everything.  But yes, the illusion can disappear in the flash of an eye leaving reminiscence of something that indeed exists though you can't quite differentiate one thing from another, for it is all the same.

So does nothingness exist if we exist, or is it an illusion of nothing?

We are infinitely big, infinitely small, but are we nothing?

Are we something?

I need answers, are we something?

[SlyWax]

@"the joint" you have a hard time with local loop.

The fact that life give itself some meaning is just a local loop, and as so doesn't impose condition on the rest of the universe.

If the sun explode, earth would be reduced to dust, and the universe will continue as pointless as it was before.
The universe is pointless because the universe has no will.

The problem with human thinking, is it try to search meaning and patterns everywhere, that's how we evolved. Because it's useful to know that a lion wants to eat or that an other person has an aim, as it help us anticipate action of others and so survive with more efficiency.
Alas searching pattern where there is none is detrimental, and the worse is we will find (false) patterns.
Just like when you look in the sky and see faces, our brain is hard-wired to see faces everywhere, this doesn't mean there is faces drawn everywhere, you have just been tricked by your brain.

The same happen with the universe : "it has to have a meaning because otherwise my brain is lost".
So what an atheist do, is accept the fact that universe has no will, despite the fact that his primal brain cry for a meaning.
Other people would invent a supreme been that look like them to give them this meaning that they what so much.

The same goes for infinity or emptiness (or the absence of everything) , infinity and void are difficult concept to grasp. That's why people don't accept void, and always want to put something there, whether it is a god or a super alien.

[Vod]

As for being too "proud" to serve other gods.  I fear the true God too much to even dare do that.

There you go.  If you are not too proud to accept gods, then neither are atheists.  I fear personal humiliation too much to dare believe in one.

[termhn]

@"the joint" you have a hard time with local loop.

The fact that life give itself some meaning is just a local loop, and as so doesn't impose condition on the rest of the universe.

If the sun explode, earth would be reduced to dust, and the universe will continue as pointless as it was before.
The universe is pointless because the universe has no will.

The problem with human thinking, is it try to search meaning and patterns everywhere, that's how we evolved. Because it's useful to know that a lion wants to eat or that an other person has an aim, as it help us anticipate action of others and so survive with more efficiency.
Alas searching pattern where there is none is detrimental, and the worse is we will find (false) patterns.
Just like when you look in the sky and see faces, our brain is hard-wired to see faces everywhere, this doesn't mean there is faces drawn everywhere, you have just been tricked by your brain.

The same happen with the universe : "it has to have a meaning because otherwise my brain is lost".
So what an atheist do, is accept the fact that universe has no will, despite the fact that his primal brain cry for a meaning.
Other people would invent a supreme been that look like them to give them this meaning that they what so much.

The same goes for infinity or emptiness (or the absence of everything) , infinity and void are difficult concept to grasp. That's why people don't accept void, and always want to put something there, whether it is a god or a super alien.

Thank you for enumerating my thoughts in a much more eloquent way than I was able to, hehe... No, but seriously, this. If we didn't exist the universe would go on just the same.

[dank]

@"the joint" you have a hard time with local loop.

The fact that life give itself some meaning is just a local loop, and as so doesn't impose condition on the rest of the universe.

If the sun explode, earth would be reduced to dust, and the universe will continue as pointless as it was before.
The universe is pointless because the universe has no will.

The problem with human thinking, is it try to search meaning and patterns everywhere, that's how we evolved. Because it's useful to know that a lion wants to eat or that an other person has an aim, as it help us anticipate action of others and so survive with more efficiency.
Alas searching pattern where there is none is detrimental, and the worse is we will find (false) patterns.
Just like when you look in the sky and see faces, our brain is hard-wired to see faces everywhere, this doesn't mean there is faces drawn everywhere, you have just been tricked by your brain.

The same happen with the universe : "it has to have a meaning because otherwise my brain is lost".
So what an atheist do, is accept the fact that universe has no will, despite the fact that his primal brain cry for a meaning.
Other people would invent a supreme been that look like them to give them this meaning that they what so much.

The same goes for infinity or emptiness (or the absence of everything) , infinity and void are difficult concept to grasp. That's why people don't accept void, and always want to put something there, whether it is a god or a super alien.

Thank you for enumerating my thoughts in a much more eloquent way than I was able to, hehe... No, but seriously, this. If we didn't exist the universe would go on just the same.

Every sound wave and light wave you emit will forever stream across the universe.  Every movement has it's own gravitational pull which can be felt at an ever exponentially decreasing rate, but still present.

You existence affects the entire universe.

[termhn]

@"the joint" you have a hard time with local loop.

The fact that life give itself some meaning is just a local loop, and as so doesn't impose condition on the rest of the universe.

If the sun explode, earth would be reduced to dust, and the universe will continue as pointless as it was before.
The universe is pointless because the universe has no will.

The problem with human thinking, is it try to search meaning and patterns everywhere, that's how we evolved. Because it's useful to know that a lion wants to eat or that an other person has an aim, as it help us anticipate action of others and so survive with more efficiency.
Alas searching pattern where there is none is detrimental, and the worse is we will find (false) patterns.
Just like when you look in the sky and see faces, our brain is hard-wired to see faces everywhere, this doesn't mean there is faces drawn everywhere, you have just been tricked by your brain.

The same happen with the universe : "it has to have a meaning because otherwise my brain is lost".
So what an atheist do, is accept the fact that universe has no will, despite the fact that his primal brain cry for a meaning.
Other people would invent a supreme been that look like them to give them this meaning that they what so much.

The same goes for infinity or emptiness (or the absence of everything) , infinity and void are difficult concept to grasp. That's why people don't accept void, and always want to put something there, whether it is a god or a super alien.

Thank you for enumerating my thoughts in a much more eloquent way than I was able to, hehe... No, but seriously, this. If we didn't exist the universe would go on just the same.

Every sound wave and light wave you emit will forever stream across the universe.  Every movement has it's own gravitational pull which can be felt at an ever exponentially decreasing rate, but still present.

You existence affects the entire universe.

You don't say. What is your point? Everything in the universe affects the universe.

[BitChick]

As for being too "proud" to serve other gods.  I fear the true God too much to even dare do that.

There you go.  If you are not too proud to accept gods, then neither are atheists.  I fear personal humiliation too much to dare believe in one.

But what if the Bible is true?  Then the verse: "every knee will bow before me; every tongue will acknowledge God" is true.  Then wouldn't you have some personal humiliation at that point? 

[dank]

@"the joint" you have a hard time with local loop.

The fact that life give itself some meaning is just a local loop, and as so doesn't impose condition on the rest of the universe.

If the sun explode, earth would be reduced to dust, and the universe will continue as pointless as it was before.
The universe is pointless because the universe has no will.

The problem with human thinking, is it try to search meaning and patterns everywhere, that's how we evolved. Because it's useful to know that a lion wants to eat or that an other person has an aim, as it help us anticipate action of others and so survive with more efficiency.
Alas searching pattern where there is none is detrimental, and the worse is we will find (false) patterns.
Just like when you look in the sky and see faces, our brain is hard-wired to see faces everywhere, this doesn't mean there is faces drawn everywhere, you have just been tricked by your brain.

The same happen with the universe : "it has to have a meaning because otherwise my brain is lost".
So what an atheist do, is accept the fact that universe has no will, despite the fact that his primal brain cry for a meaning.
Other people would invent a supreme been that look like them to give them this meaning that they what so much.

The same goes for infinity or emptiness (or the absence of everything) , infinity and void are difficult concept to grasp. That's why people don't accept void, and always want to put something there, whether it is a god or a super alien.

Thank you for enumerating my thoughts in a much more eloquent way than I was able to, hehe... No, but seriously, this. If we didn't exist the universe would go on just the same.

Every sound wave and light wave you emit will forever stream across the universe.  Every movement has it's own gravitational pull which can be felt at an ever exponentially decreasing rate, but still present.

You existence affects the entire universe.

You don't say. What is your point? Everything in the universe affects the universe.

Point being your existence effects those around you more than you would think.