The Anti-theist Thread

[jerseydevil]

True - but mammals that are large and have fewer natural enemies - produce fewer offspring. Also - they have to roam farther to search for food because of their appetites. During that journey they travel in large groups and a lot of times they are weak.

Now the extinction of an animal could be related to multiple events. If humans were able to only hunt so many mammoth - but then for some reason there was a hard winter, but man continued to hunt the same number as the year before - even though many of the mammoths were dying off because of starvation - early man could play a big role in the extinction. The mammoths may never have been able to reproduce enough to recover from it.

[mirrille]

I've always found it a little hard to believe that early "human" hunting could be so much responsible for killing off mammoth herds. I guess...It's not like droves of hunters with guns killing off the bison herds for fun or anything. There couldn't have been that many humans. And mammoths are so big. Get just a few and you have enough food for a year. The tribes can't that big. So yeah, there must have been some other major environmental factors. Of course, I'm no paleontologist.

Wow. Everyone here sounds so educated. In response to jerseydevil's earlier question, I'm finishing up my B.Sc in microbiology and immunology. Bioinformatics is kind of a pet interest of mine. So yeah, I am in the field, sort of, but as a mere student. When I started university, I wanted to be an immunologist or a stem cell biologist (I could be both. ). Now I'm not sure what I can do.

[FrodoFriend]

I agree with mirrille about the mammoth-hunting (how did we get that out of non-theism anyway? ). Think of the tremendous effort involved in killing a mammoth. The animal had a pretty fair chance of killing the hunters rather than the other way around. There must have been other factors as well.

[Wayfarer]

****

FrodoFriend, are you purposely trying to miss the point?
Appearently eveyone else just ignored me. How nice.

Wait... That's not fair. A-elf said he'd get back to me and the rest of you commented on bits and pieces. My appologies.

Let me lay out my arguements again...S L O W L Y.

Science is the search for and catalogue of the fundamental, Ordered principles of nature.- BoP.

Therefore, in order for science to be valid, we must assume that there is an underlying order to the universe. -Simple Logic

No ordered system is valid if it can be proven to be the result of Chaos. Order must come from order. -Fairly Obvious

All order must come from other order, until eventually you reach an ordered system which is absolute. -Aristotle.

Conclusion:
There must be some fundamental ordered system from which all other order derives.
a)To accept science is to assume this Fact.
b)Any belief which denies a fundamental order to the universe is at odds with both science and experience.

Note that I have not yet said anything about God. This is intentional.

Now that we've established that there must be some ordered system, we need to narrow down the playing field. I submit that there are two possibilities here: Theism and Athiesm.

Theism holds that this fundamental, self existant truth is apart from and superior too everything else. This view holds that all truth is resultant from this one Truth.

The Athiest holds that this fundamental ordered system is simply what we call nature, or the universe. This view holds that everything is because Everything Is. That is, any object or event is resultant from every other object and event. That is the view that, for example, what you believe is determined by the way your brain works and your environment.

If you are honest, I think you will admit that these are what we're discussing. If you think (or think you think) something else, perhaps we'd better get some clarification here.

Now, moving on from here...

The athiest claims that everything, including you and I, are the products of the total system. I'm here typing this because, ultimately, everything else is the way it is, and, since everything is the way it is, I must be sitting here typing this.

(Actually, I'm standing. But that's of no consequence.)

Now, to return to logic, we know that any order which arises from chaos is invalid. More specefically, that no thought with an illogical motivation is in need of serious consideration. If you knew that I was typing this because Jesus was holding a gun to my head and forcing me, well, I doubt you would find my logic very convincing.

We can then reasonably assume that no thought is valid if it claims that thought is not valid-for obvious reasons. Still with me?

Now, the clincher. Naturalistic Atheism (and I know no other kind) claims just that. It says, for example, that my belief in God is due to the function of a certain region of the brain. That being said, I have less choice in the matter than I would if Jesus was holding a gun to my head.

Hence it follows that, if Athiesm is true, my belief in God is completely invalid. However, the athiestic belief must then likewise be a result of the total system, and so is equally invalid. In fact, if you and I are simply products of the total system, then we have no choice but to think what we do, although it hardly matters because all of our thoughts are invalid anyway. So why bother argue it anymore?

I shan't, at least until I hear an answer. So with that, gopod day.

]: )

[jerseydevil]

Well since we weren't there - we don't really know at this point. We're learning more and more though. There is some evidence now that man may not even have hunted the mammoth - or at least not to the extent that was once believed. But that's what's good about science versus just belief - science will change with new evidence. People are much less willing to change their beliefs in terms of religion - even when you give them proof.

[Elvet]

Wayfarer,
Why can't order come from chaos?

[FrodoFriend]

FrodoFriend, are you purposely trying to miss the point?

I'd just like to point out that you have consistently missed my points in the past - the ones that you actually responded to, that is.

If you are honest, I think you will admit that these are what we're discussing. If you think (or think you think) something else, perhaps we'd better get some clarification here.

Actually, we were discussing evolution and mammoth-hunting.

Very well, I'll try to give you the answer you requested.

[Arathorn]

Originally posted by Elvet
Wayfarer,
Why can't order come from chaos?

This is something I will wish to answer with what I know, if you don't mind my b utting in.

I think we must assume a closed system for the law of entropy which states that a system naturally goes from a state of higher order to one of lower order(more chaotic). This law was postulated, observed and has, so far, been generally accepted in the scientific community. Everything is observed to go to a state where the forms are simpler (decays) if left alone.

By assuming a closed system, I am saying one where neither energy nor matter enters/escapes that system. For the solar system, we need to assume that no comets or cosmic rays or other particles enter or leave it. (or if we assume the universe, the sum of the total energy and matter of the universe is held constant--they may change from energy to matter or the other way around but no new matter or energy comes from outside the universe or leaves the universe)

FYI

[FrodoFriend]

Argh. Nevermind. I had an answer to your post here, Wayfarer, but I'm not going to bother. First of all it was too confusing, plus the logic is flawed, plus you're assuming stuff about atheists that isn't true. Plus you'd come up with some other illogical supercilious argument, and I'm tired of arguing.

[Elvet]

Thank you, Arathorn, for your clarification.
I do understand about entropy and closed systems. I wanted to see how Wayfarer would explain it further. As a scientifically trained person, I accept that I cannot explain many things, using the laws of science as they exist now. No doubt things will change and evolve. The world is always in flux. Religion, however is rigid. There is always god to fall back on. There is no need to look further.

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by Elvet
Wayfarer,
Why can't order come from chaos?

Just like to point out a couple of things. One of the fundemental principles of the founding anthropological field (ie earlier than 1800s), was something called the Great Chain of Being. This is the fixed notion that all life exists ultimately in an ordered fashion from God, right down to 'primitives'. This is order, as opposed to chaos. Since then, our viewpoint on evolution has 'evolved' into new concepts, and fundementals. We now are beginning to realise through science, nature, and other systems, that life as we know it, has increasing incongruencies. (For more information on this read Binford). So, your argument Wayfarer, that there has been order, and always will be order, is flawed. (Aristotle, had some great ideas, but a lot of these are now considered to be untrue: how is this relevant to the argument?)

On another note, does this mean that we can perceive evolution as order, and that adaptation is a process to counter-act the chaos? I don't think so. Chaos vs order, is a victorian principle, which belongs in that era, not in this argument. Life is a lot more complex than these fixed notions allow.

(On a side note, HOW on earth do you manage to type standing up without developing severe side effects... ?)

[FrodoFriend]

Can we go back to talking about mammoths now?

[Cirdan]

Wayfarer,

Why do you try to use logic to explain your faith. By definition faith defies logic. The apotheosis of order is a fallacy. Order does not require a motive to be order. The order that physics defines has very little bearing on human development. Theists require a simple answer to the unknown to assuage fear. It is critical to the theistic system to recruit believers to build credibility. Atheists deny god to expel the uncertainty. Anti-theists oppose organized religion based on the often less than holy human manifestations of theism. Religion is a like a poor translation of a dead language. If is more often than not corrupted by those who stand to benefit from it. I have left MBs with hate speakers hiding behide the bible. It has been an excuse for countless atrocities. I am glad you have found guidance and hope in your faith, but you might want to be less concerned with justifying and rationalizing it. No one can prove by dialog whether god exists or not.

peace

Cirdan

[Cirdan]

Many large species disappeared during the exposure of the North American and Australian land bridges during the last ice age. The proficient hunters AND the climactic changes wiped them out. Mammaoth kabobs, anyone?

[BeardofPants]

Plus it'd be pretty damned hard to adapt in the interglacials, if you were big and wooly....

That kabob would have to be pretty big... BUT I can't, I'm vegetarian, so I'll stick to the tofu mammoths

[FrodoFriend]

That kabob would have to be pretty big... BUT I can't, I'm vegetarian, so I'll stick to the tofu mammoths

LOL! There's a Farside cartoon about that. The lionesses accidentally catch a tofu-gazelle.

Oscars are on in 50 minutes!! GO FOTR!!

[Cirdan]

Originally posted by afro-elf
Cirdan

I totally agree that the mind a largely unknowm area

Maybe it was a ...etc

Sorry I missed your response earlier. I actually signed off 'Moot for a whole 19 hours. I need to unsubscribe to some of these threads. Anyway, it sounds like we have something in common as far as our approach to learning and work. I always tested very high but was poorly motivated and organized (I found the report cards that said so in an old box the other day). I have always been an avid reader but public school was not challenging. I took off in college but I still tend to scatter myself. ( I'm currently reading six books, all very different.

Good luck with the biuotech more. I've been looking into taking up bioinformatics. It's interesting and suites my skill sets. Nice threads, elf!

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by FrodoFriend


LOL! There's a Farside cartoon about that. The lionesses accidentally catch a tofu-gazelle.

Oscars are on in 50 minutes!! GO FOTR!!

I know, anthropologists, and Farside cartoons are like this *crosses fingers*

Grumble, can't watch the oscars live, grumble grumble! Hope someone puts up a thread on them...

[FrodoFriend]

Heh heh, comics are the best. I'm sure there'll be a thread about the Oscars. Several, probably. Then CBG will have to come along and shut them down again . . . Entmoot as usual.

[Cirdan]

The Simpsons had a tofu turkey with REM once.