Monday, April 6, 2015

573: Atheism is just another religion

It was said last Tuesday in the discussion: Atheism is just another religion. 
.
Often theists (believers in a god) will try to place atheism and theism on the same plane by arguing that while theists cannot prove that god exists, atheists also cannot prove that god does not exist.
.
From the very beginning I had trouble with the word “atheism”. It sends the wrong message, is my opinion, for atheist is no “-ISM”.
.
Rationalism, utilitarianism, idealism, catholicism, protestantism…. all big theories with all kinds of metaphysical layers and backgrounds.
.
But atheism? Comprehensive, unabridged dictionaries use "disbelief in God or gods" when defining atheism. 
.
When we take a closer look at "disbelieve," we find two senses: an active and a passive. In the passive sense, "disbelieve" simply means "not believe" ,
.
thus a person who disbelieves a claim may simply not accept the truth of the claim without going any further, like asserting the opposite. 
.
Confusion occurs, when people start to think that atheism has something to do with an active deniai of the existence of a god.
.
But in the previous lecture we have concluded, that we can deny the existence of something if there it includes a conceptual contradiction, like in  “a married bachelor” or “virgin prostitute”.
.
If taken as an empirical statement, the denial of the existence of something, we never can prove that. The best we can achieve is a high probability of the non existence of something.
.
So, atheism is not the “denial of god” religion. But what is meant by a “religion”? 
.
For something to be a religion, does it have to be a comprehensive worldview, a system of rituals and canons of conduct, or something else?
.
If it was sufficient for a comprehensive worldview to be called a religion, then many detailed ideologies would have to be considered religions. 
.
Arguably a religion needs to be based on belief in some kind of entity or force with supernatural powers.
.
However, the concept of religion itself is by no means unproblematic. There does not seem to be an uncontroversial definition for the purposes of scholarly fields such as anthropology, or for the purposes of the law.
.
Just try to find any meaningful common denominator between the “everyday magical practices” of an indigenous tribe, 
.
Judaic obedience to the commandments of God, 
the practice of Sunni Islam based on the Qur’an, of Sufi mysticism or of Buddhism (which has no god).
.
Atheism is not a religion. For example, it is not a comprehensive worldview, a way of life, or a system of rituals and conduct.
.
It is no more than an informed lack of belief in any god(s) or at most a positive belief that no god(s) exist. Atheism is compatible with many views of the world.
.
Atheism is not a “way of life,” a “world outlook,” or a “total view of life,” any more than a failure to believe in magic elves is any of these things.
.
While some philosophical positions are atheistic, atheism in itself does not entail any specific system of thought but can be incorporated into many.
.
Besides, I do not make my atheist stance on religion central to my live in the same way as many evangelical Christians do, and should, in their view.
.
Thank you… the floor is yours…. ^_^



The Discussion

Max Chatnoir: Couldn't you make some of those same claims about being something like a Presbyterian?
CB Axel: Which claims?
herman Bergson: which claims, Max?
Sousi (sousinne.ceriano): The sad... truly sad... part is that religious people try to "smear" atheism by calling it a religion... what does that say about the religious view of their own system?
Max Chatnoir: Claims about it not setting your world view, for example.
Max Chatnoir: Or being compatible with different philosophies?
herman Bergson: The problem is really in the name...atheISM....
herman Bergson: it suggest that this is some kind of metaphysical theory or the like...
Max Chatnoir: Oh, does A-Theism also include A-deism?
herman Bergson: It is just an empirical statement......
Bejiita Imako: indeed
herman Bergson: it includes everything that is not part of the naturalistic universe
Bejiita Imako: its basically wrong term to use
Sousi (sousinne.ceriano): I see atheism as primarily a political movement... focused on maintaining separation of churches and state... this can also be called secularism...
herman Bergson: yes Bejiita I agree....but we have no other word...:-(
Max Chatnoir: That's an interesting point.
Bejiita Imako: indeed, what other term could be useful
Bejiita Imako: ateism sound indeed like a lifestyle when it is in fact no specific lifestyle at all
CB Axel: Heathen?
Max Chatnoir: It does sort of define a world view, in which the world is limited to the natural world.
herman Bergson: lol Don’t think so CB....the heathen wil get killed by muslims ....
CB Axel: So will atheists
herman Bergson: And ...a political movement......
herman Bergson: is too much Sousi....
herman Bergson: I tis just an empirical obeservation....
herman Bergson: the observation that there are no gods that interact with our reality...
CB Axel: There can be theists who are also secularists.
Max Chatnoir: I see it more as a human rights movement.
herman Bergson: what you do with such an observation is your choice
Max Chatnoir: That's a nice point also, CB.
Sousi (sousinne.ceriano): There CAN... but it is rare.
herman Bergson: yes....those who believe that god doesnt interfer with our lives...
Bejiita Imako: ah
herman Bergson: is just there as the Beginning of all things
CB Axel: I'm not so sure it's as rare as it seems. I think the theist secularists are just quiet about it.
Max Chatnoir: Well, it's sort of in the constitution.
Max Chatnoir: So it's not totally closeted.  :-)
herman Bergson: you have two options....
Sousi (sousinne.ceriano): Mainly... ignored.
herman Bergson: on the one hand some believe that there is a god who created all and still manipulates our lives...
herman Bergson: ton the other hand there are who believe that this all was created indeed and then left alone by god
Sousi (sousinne.ceriano): Sad thing about religion is... the more people are religious in a country, the worse off quality of life is for that country
Max Chatnoir: Well, what disturbs me is people who are making the argument that the writers of the constitution meant to identify the US as a christian nation.
herman Bergson: But he put in his divine insights in his creation
Sousi (sousinne.ceriano): That correlation is quite clear
Bejiita Imako: yes
herman Bergson: Both ideas have no empirical justification in my opinion...but people believe in them
Sousi (sousinne.ceriano): It has been said that 25% of humanity have the ability to feel religious feelings.
herman Bergson: and the most fascinating matter still is the question WHY DO PEOPLE BELIEVE?
Max Chatnoir: Yes, I heard a woman on NPR this morning who was talking about being a cancer survivor and said something about that being part of a plan for her.
Sousi (sousinne.ceriano): The rest of the religious bunch follow them for social reasons
herman Bergson: Oh sure Sousi...
Sousi (sousinne.ceriano): Because they feel stuff the rest of us can't imagine
Sousi (sousinne.ceriano): Stuff they can't deny
CB Axel: I think people believe in a god because they're afraid not to.
Bejiita Imako: group pressure
herman Bergson: If you knew what I feel Sousi, you can not imagine ^_^
herman Bergson: But that doesn’t make me religious or close to a god :-))
.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): lol Herman
Sousi (sousinne.ceriano): Oh, I might have an idea or two. =)
Bejiita Imako:
herman Bergson grins
herman Bergson: yes standard issue SL thoughts :-))
Bejiita Imako: hehe
Sousi (sousinne.ceriano): Bye
herman Bergson: But from a psychological point of view....this habit of believing in things....really fascinating
herman Bergson: .
CB Axel: I think the only thing atheists believe in is that other people's religious beliefs should not be used to control everyone's behaviors.
herman Bergson: yes...to begin with CB
.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): believe is not so bad as long as it is free and not a power to kill people
CB Axel: If atheism is a religion, it's creed is "bugger off."
CB Axel: Beertje, there are other religious beliefs that don't kill me but that I don't want controlling my life.
Bejiita Imako: indeed religion is mostly used in a bad way today, IS tries basically to wipe out the planet at moment for ex
Bejiita Imako: wipe
Bejiita Imako: awful
Bejiita Imako: but their way of islam is ls also a bit disturbed
CB Axel: Yes. That's an extreme example.
herman Bergson: But what fascinates me is the question....what drives Homo Sapiens to this behavior.....?
.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): fear i presume
herman Bergson: There are a few ideas....
CB Axel: I think it's fear, herman.
herman Bergson: Social cohesion
herman Bergson: fear indeed
Bejiita Imako: ah
herman Bergson: wishful thinking...
CB Axel: Social cohesion is a good one.
Bejiita Imako: yes
herman Bergson: ohh...I'll tell you next lecture about this social cohesion idea..and what is happening today!
Max Chatnoir: That will be interesting.
CB Axel: Something to look forward to. °͜°
herman Bergson: really amazing observation....
Bejiita Imako: aaa
Bejiita Imako: yes
CB Axel: I can't wait. That will be fun.
Max Chatnoir: Oh, you mentioned an example of something last time?
herman Bergson: I mean...the belief that religion is deminishing....forget it....
Max Chatnoir: I may have missed it.  I didn't lock my door and somebody came in....
Max Chatnoir: Certainly isn't diminishing in the US.
herman Bergson: In Europe it is ....
herman Bergson: No indeed Max...
herman Bergson: I read about some event....
herman Bergson: at the end of the school year there would be some gathering and they had planned a prayer to be said as one of the items...
Max Chatnoir: Seems like countries that are awash in both guns and religious fervor are especially dangerous.
Bejiita Imako: bad combo indeed
herman Bergson: someone pointed out that that was not allowed in a public school...
Max Chatnoir: Ah, this was in the US?
herman Bergson: was in the US..2011....
Max Chatnoir: Football game?
herman Bergson: this came out....this complain....
herman Bergson: the man was threated....ortracized...from the community...even had to fear for his life!
Max Chatnoir: My school is formally Methodist, and our faculty assemblies always begin with a prayer.
herman Bergson: no was a school gathering...a public school
CB Axel: Yes, Max, but yours isn't a public, tax-funded school. Right?
Max Chatnoir: No, it's private, and we don't get funding from the church, so far as I know.
CB Axel: But it's not a school run by the state.
Max Chatnoir: No.
CB Axel: So go ahead and have group prayer.
herman Bergson: Then they are allowed to follow their own rules
herman Bergson: but praying has no effect on the real world....:-)
herman Bergson: The experiment was really done...
Max Chatnoir: Yes, nominally it is a religious institution.  We have a chaplain and so forth.
Max Chatnoir: Chaplain.
CB Axel: I get a little perturbed, though, when a kid, or even a group of kids, want to say a prayer in a public school and are stopped.
herman Bergson: one group prayed for sick people...another group dint....
herman Bergson: something like that :-)
herman Bergson: no difference in recovery in both groups of patients
Bejiita Imako: thus non existence of god proved
CB Axel: And that's why there are no faith healers in hospitals.
Bejiita Imako:
herman Bergson: I must admit..this result was regrettable...
Bejiita Imako: or god maybe just don’t care
CB Axel: Chaplains, yes. But not faith healers.
Bejiita Imako: about prayers
Bejiita Imako: i dont know
herman Bergson: Well..you know....
CB Axel: Praying didn't help Tim Tebow's football career.
herman Bergson: we have thousands of years of religions now..of all kinds....
herman Bergson: and not a single god ever has shown up
Bejiita Imako: yep
Bejiita Imako: very true
Bejiita Imako: just in peoples minds
Bejiita Imako: same with ghosts
herman Bergson: and still people believe....
Bejiita Imako: or ghosts maybe just don’t like me
Bejiita Imako:
Bejiita Imako: indded
herman Bergson: Like those of IS who believe that they can create the end of times and may see the return of the big Madi....
herman Bergson: anno 2015!
Max Chatnoir: THAT is scary!
Bejiita Imako: well creating the end of time they sure tri to do, wipe out all life from the planet
Bejiita Imako: try
Max Chatnoir: And fundamentalist christians, ditto.
herman Bergson: so absurd...
Bejiita Imako: yes
Max Chatnoir: Worse than absurd.  Leads to very bad political decisions.
CB Axel: That's why a lot of American Christians support Israel. They think a war there will bring about Armageddon.
.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): if they wipe out all life..who is left to see the big Madi?
herman Bergson: oops....did they think of that?
Bejiita Imako: well suicide bombers believe they come to allah when they blow themselves up
Bejiita Imako: i guess IS thinks same, if they could they would blow the entire planet to cosmic dust
herman Bergson: yes a nasty islamic sect....
Bejiita Imako: very worrying and they strike everywhere without warning, just hope they don’t here
Bejiita Imako: they have to be stopped but how?
Bejiita Imako: they and boko haram
CB Axel: Cut off their supply of weapons?
Max Chatnoir: It's a tough problem.
Max Chatnoir: Yes, that would help a lot.
Max Chatnoir: But some people don't care how they make their money.
herman Bergson: the only way to stop this is EDUCATION....
.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): and that is a big problem there
CB Axel: That helps, too, but some of the kids going to the middle east to join are educated.
.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): they only have the Koran
Bejiita Imako: indeed, in sweden for ex we export weapons to places like that, with the motivation, "but people loose their jobs at the factories"
CB Axel: Kids from the US and Europe.
herman Bergson: yes...I guess 90% of these IS fighters can not read nor write...
Bejiita Imako: well manufacture other stuff then weapons then
CB Axel: I agree, Bejiita.
Bejiita Imako: like finish the Max 4 synchrotron light source and ESS facilities
herman Bergson: First we have to put those who finance this against the wall and shoot them
Bejiita Imako: much better use of that money
herman Bergson: they are war criminals
Bejiita Imako: to do good research that benefit all of s
Bejiita Imako: us
CB Axel: Well, I don't really believe in murder, but shooting them with their own guns is tempting. °͜°
herman Bergson: I agree CB :-)
herman Bergson: Exposing them to the public would be better
Max Chatnoir: Yes, it's hard to change minds by blowing them up.
Bejiita Imako: ill smash them to higgs bosons with LHC
.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): no..i think that is worng..we lower our selves to their level then
Bejiita Imako: problems they are to fat to go into the machine
CB Axel: Max, they are getting cooperation from people by threatening to blow them up.
Bejiita Imako: hehe
Max Chatnoir: Yes, I think public disclosure of how large amounts of money are spent would be socially useful.
Bejiita Imako: yes me too
herman Bergson: yes
herman Bergson: and you know....
CB Axel: I feel that most problems in this world can be traced to who supplies the money.
Max Chatnoir: Unfortunately, that's just the lobby that would prevent that legislation from being passed.
herman Bergson: for all this you even dont need to be an atheist ^_^
Bejiita Imako: very true
.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): IS is not about religion, it's about money and power
Bejiita Imako: yes very true
CB Axel: Yes, you don't have to believe in a god to be against killing. You just need to have empathy.
Bejiita Imako: and they use religion as cover up
Bejiita Imako: to motivate killing and oppressing
Max Chatnoir: and the ease of recruiting young men with few job options.  Offer them guns and glory.
herman Bergson: So weird, Max....
Bejiita Imako: yes
.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): they think that they will get virgins in heaven..who says those virgins are woman?
herman Bergson: But again.....if these young ones had a proper education, they wouldn’t have gone
CB Axel: Good one, Beertje!
Bejiita Imako: indeed
herman Bergson: They are grapes, Beertje....
Bejiita Imako: hehe yes
Bejiita Imako:
.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): yes I know Herman..but do THRY know?
.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): THEY
herman Bergson: there is a problem with the translation of this term that refers to these "virgins"...
herman Bergson: the word also can be translated as "grapes", so I read
.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): yes
Bejiita Imako: ah
Max Chatnoir: I think Texas is about to pass an open carry law for public colleges  I think that is REALLY scarey.  I'm glad are not public.
CB Axel: I like grapes better than virgins.
Bejiita Imako:
Bejiita Imako: ah
herman Bergson: what means "open carry", Max
Max Chatnoir: gun in your pocket.
CB Axel: I will never understand why people think that the antidote to gun violence is more guns.
Max Chatnoir: I don't get that either.
CB Axel: Open carry means you can carry a gun around.
herman Bergson: Well..in fact....it is all so silly....
herman Bergson: IN Europe not a single person is allowed to wear a gun....
herman Bergson: private persons...
Bejiita Imako: indeed, only the police
Bejiita Imako: a good thing
herman Bergson: and we live a perfect comfortable life here...no guns around...except under criminals
.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): not all the police Bejiita
Max Chatnoir: Conservative religions and gun loving seem to go together.
Bejiita Imako: no not all those either
CB Axel: Do people hunt in Europe still?
Bejiita Imako: US claim its to defend themselves but thr result is opposite
Bejiita Imako: knock on wrong door and you get shot in te head
herman Bergson: so why do they believe in guns in the US, while a whole continent proves on a daily basis that you can live safely without them?
Bejiita Imako: totaly crazy
CB Axel: Can one still go and shoot pheasants or deer or whatever?
.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): no CB
CB Axel: Hmmm.
herman Bergson: Here...going to hunt....yes..you can....seriously regulated yet
Bejiita Imako: you have to have hunters and weapon license
Max Chatnoir: It's framed as a second amendment issue.
.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): just to regulate the popularity
Bejiita Imako: and strict rules about storage of weapons
Bejiita Imako: need to have a weapon safe
herman Bergson: yes..you need licenses...special areas and so on
Bejiita Imako: ah
herman Bergson: yes indeed Bejiita...same here
CB Axel: The jerks carrying their guns into stores are not a militia. So the second amendment doesn't cover them.
Max Chatnoir: Right.
CB Axel: Hunters here have to be licensed, too, but the laws are not very strict, IMO.
Max Chatnoir: Just makes it likely that somebody with a nasty temper turns into a killer.
Bejiita Imako: ah
CB Axel: The people I see who want to have open carry are not the people I want as a militia to protect me.
herman Bergson: I guess we area bit off topic now...so a good moment to dismiss class ^_^
Bejiita Imako:
Max Chatnoir: Yes, I guess we are.  :-)
CB Axel: We did ramble, didn't we.
Max Chatnoir: Sorry about that.

Bejiita Imako: hehe

572: About the non existence of gods

The more I study the subject of atheism, the more I get puzzled. Why spending all this energy on profiling yourself as an atheist.
.
Ok, there are cultural reasons. Religion is often a source of inequality. Inequality in social chances, inequality regarding the sexes.
.
To give you an example, my newspaper reported that the UN Commission on the Status of Women published a document of the rights of women, which was accepted by the UN Assembly.
.
And hurray, hurray! The documents refers twice to women rights as human rights, 
.
but what is not mentioned at all are sexual rights, female circumcision, honor killings or the rights of lesbians and transgenders.
.
Reason? There was a strong conservative opposition led by the Vatican (!) and some muslim countries. And since a few years Russia has joined this group too.
.
So it is understandable that  people try to fight the deeply entrenched religious ideas in our culture, but I am not interested in sociology or social psychology or politics.
.
I try to deal with the issue of atheism and related to that the issue of religion from a philosophical point of view. And then I already run into so many questions.
When I was a child I loved the stories about gnomes, elves, wizards and witches. At a certain age I was convinced, that there lived elves in our backyard.
.
The stories were read from a thick book, fairytales by Grimm. When I was in high school, gymnasium, I learnt of all the gods, who lived on the Olympus.
.
History class told me about the gods of the tribes in Northern Europe; Wodan, Donar, Thor, Freia… Whole families of gods.
.
And then there was that other book, called the bible, which told stories about a god who murdered 30.000 Philistines with one blow,
.
split a whole sea apart and then closed it again so that a whole Egyptian army was drowned. Stories about a man who did miracles, gave the blind eyesight again, even woke people from death.
.
How can it be that some of these examples are called fairytales or mythology and some are called religion, by which they all of a sudden get a completely different epistemological status?
.
Of course I know history and how this came into being, the social role of religion and so on, but that doesn’t prove anything from an epistemological point of view.
.
If we could prove the the nonexistence of a gnome, Zeus or god, we were done. All the written sources I mentioned are then just storybooks.
.
A common objection to atheism, is that it is impossible to prove the nonexistence of God. The quintessence of this claim is the meaning of “existence”. 
.
But before dealing with that let’s give it a try. We have two options: one option is to prove that something cannot exist because it leads to contradictions.
.
Take for instance the famous square circles or married bachelors. Ever met a virgin prostitute? We can demonstrate a logical contradiction in the very concept of the thing in question.
.
This also applies to states of affairs involving several objects. In other words, it may be logically impossible for two objects to exist simultaneously. 
.
For example, some gods cannot coexist with other gods. The god of Islam, Allah and the god of Christianity, Jehovah, despite their common origin in the god of Judaism,Yahweh, are mutually exclusive. 
.
Jehovah and Allah, at least as traditionally understood, cannot both exist at the same time. Both claim to be the Creator of the universe, but they have contradictory attributes.
.
Christianity claims that there are three "persons" known as God but Islam claims that there is only one. Therefore, Allah and Jehovah cannot both be "God"; at least one cannot exist.
.
Thus, the Christian theist who makes the positive existential claim that the Christian god exists, is implicitly making the negative existential claim that all gods contradictory to the Christian god do not exist. 
.
The other way to prove the nonexistence of something is, simply by searching for empirical evidence of the existence of something. I already referred to the discovery of higgs particle in this regard.
.
And here is the sting. As I said in the previous lecture: A naturalistic worldview holds the hypothesis that the natural world is a closed system in the sense that nothing that is not a part of the natural world affects it.
.
But yet people are for some reason willing to believe in weird things….. thank you…the floor is yours.
.


The Discussion

herman Bergson: yes take your time to think this over _^
Max Chatnoir: Is it also a theological claim in the different religions that God and Yaweh and Allah are not the same?
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): it is all very logical of course
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): in some religions yes
Max Chatnoir: Because within Christianity, there were disagreements with the idea of the trinity.
herman Bergson: I have no idea Max...
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): but some have been able to word it to recognize a relationship
Max Chatnoir: Some heresy, whose name I cannot remember.  Arian?  Athanasian?
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): back to abraham
herman Bergson: Bu tthey can't be identical because of their contradictory attributes
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): some have been able to do it
Max Chatnoir: Yes, that would make sense.
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): there is a good book about it
herman Bergson: Well to be honest....
Max Chatnoir: So these religions actually have different gods?  Stranger and stranger.
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): so the jewish , christian muslim are the same god
herman Bergson: the whole debate about trinity in godsd is complete meaningless babble to me
Max Chatnoir: I agree.  It's hard to understand why it's an issue.
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): thomas aquinas has a good explanation of the trinity
herman Bergson: they dont have the same god Gemma...they have the same historical roots and traditions
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): in his belief'
Max Chatnoir: Unless you want Jesus to be God.
herman Bergson: and where did Aquinas get his knowledge from Gemma?
herman Bergson: Nobody ever has seen god...let alone the three in one of them
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): this is the name of the book
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): Abraham: A Journey to the Heart of Three Faiths
herman Bergson: circumstancial evidence....as it is called..I guess :-)
Max Chatnoir: But you asked at one point about why make a point of atheism?  That is, why make a religion of it?
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): bruce fieler is the author
herman Bergson: yes MAx....
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): aquinas has his own logic
herman Bergson: Indeed Gemma ...
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): which to him leads to the explanation of the trinity
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate) GIGGLES!!
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): ...LOL...
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): just like all the philosophers
herman Bergson: yes, but his primary assumptions are based on nothing...
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): his own answers to questions
CB Axel: My favorite quote about religion is: Religion is like a penis. It's fine to have one. It's fine to be proud of it. But don't take it out and wave it around in public, and don't shove it down my throat.
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): omg
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): OMG!!!
Max Chatnoir: LOL  Where did that come from, CB?
herman Bergson: lol
CB Axel: I'm not sure. I saw it online.
bergfrau Apfelbaum: lol+
herman Bergson: real physical instead of philosophical CB :-)
.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): lol
CB Axel: True. Sorry.
Max Chatnoir: Well, if whatever god you are talking about has attributes, can you make an argument based on the attributes?
CB Axel: But we wouldn't be discussing this if people didn't keep trying to shove their religions down everyone elses throats.
herman Bergson: lol..what a saying...:-)
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): as well as atheists who do the same
CB Axel: True.
CB Axel: But back to proving God doesn't exist. °͜°
herman Bergson: Well that is a nice issue....the idea that atheism is just another religion.....
herman Bergson: OK CB....:-)
CB Axel: I'm not sure we ever agreed on what existence is.
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): i recall that issue
herman Bergson: stage one is the logical one....
herman Bergson: but that is just a battle between concepts...in language...
herman Bergson: the second was the empirical one....
herman Bergson: and THAT is the hard part....
Max Chatnoir: Anything that is part of reality and that interconnects with other parts of it exists?
herman Bergson: because here you have to agree on epistemological principles...
Max Chatnoir: Actually, there is this great line in the last Harry Potter book, where Harry asks if his conversation with Dumbledore (who is dead) is real or if it is only in his head.  Dumbledore says that of course it is only in his head, but does that mean it isn't real?
herman Bergson: Te basic question here is...HOW do we acquire knowledge....what means do we have
herman Bergson: Good point Max!
herman Bergson: But there is one huge problem with that kind of reality...
Max Chatnoir: Yes, it's private.
Max Chatnoir: Are realities that are only private part of the rest of the world?
herman Bergson: nobody can ever experience this reality in your head except you yourself
Max Chatnoir: exactly.
Max Chatnoir: So if somebody says he talks to God every morning at breakfast, well...
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): belief
herman Bergson: Such private realities are part of the world in the sense that your brain is part of the world
Max Chatnoir: Unless he invites me to breakfast and I get to talk to God, too....
CB Axel: A lot of people talk to God. The question is does God talk back?
Max Chatnoir: So there are public and private realities.
herman Bergson: let me put it this way....
herman Bergson: We call that reality, what can interact with the reast of reality....
Max Chatnoir: I'll go with that!
herman Bergson: so suppose you meet this god in your thoughts...ask him to get you a cup of coffee...., for instance
herman Bergson: that would make the thought reality independent of your brain
Max Chatnoir: But if I think that God is telling me to kill you and I do, then is my reality interacting with the rest of reality?
Max Chatnoir: Actually, I like the coffee thing better.
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): hope not
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): psychiatry enters in
herman Bergson: No Max...YOU are interacting with reality...with certain drives and motivations
Max Chatnoir: So you should only make public policy based on public reality.
herman Bergson: Would make sense, yes
Max Chatnoir: But what if there are 150 people who all agree that they talk to God at breakfast?
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): if only politicians believed that
herman Bergson: I don’t mind...
Max Chatnoir: Could we establish the reality of that by asking them separately about the conversation?
herman Bergson: just ask them how he looked like what he said and you get 150 different answers...
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): what if there are millions max
Max Chatnoir: That's what PsychData is for.  Millions of questionaires.  :-)
herman Bergson: there are Gemma....
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): yep
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): over generations
herman Bergson: the muslim world is a good example....
Max Chatnoir: But how do you keep them from cheating?
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): gazillions
herman Bergson: they all yell Allah akbar....
herman Bergson: exactly Max....so any knowledge claim should be foolproof
herman Bergson: so
.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): if they don't yell allah akbar they get killed
herman Bergson: when I claim I talked to god you have the right to have a possibility to check it out
CB Axel: Yes, what they say and what they actually believe can be 2 different things.
Max Chatnoir: Well, you know all those people who have near death experiences, and tell sort of similar stories?  Lights and relatives and all.
herman Bergson: Is completely explained by neuroscience, Max...
Max Chatnoir: I would think so.  Plus cultural expectations.
herman Bergson: The vision of the light is due to oxygen deprivation of the brain...
herman Bergson: for instance]
herman Bergson: the God helm has produced visions of ancestors etc...
herman Bergson: our brain can play tricks...
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): sure can
herman Bergson: take halluciantions...voices in your head.....
Max Chatnoir: It would be more interesting if one of those visions produced something really novel.
herman Bergson: god never showed up....:-)
Max Chatnoir: Yes, that's interesting, isn't it!
herman Bergson: and every time I say a thing like this I wonder...which god....?
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): good thing we dont start on teh hindus
herman Bergson: how do we know who is the real god? :-))
.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): aks a muslim:)
CB Axel: Ask him for his cv?
herman Bergson: what mental faculty do we have to know which is god and which is the real god?
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): only faith
Max Chatnoir: Well, I would say that the "real" god would have to have more interobserver reliability.
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): which is a mental faculty i guess
herman Bergson: WellCB....the CV of God is a long list of massacres as I referred to in my lecture to begin with :-))
herman Bergson: What should that mean Gemma " interobserver reliability"
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): who said that
Max Chatnoir: Lots of people from different backgrounds should agree on what the God experience is.
Max Chatnoir: It can't be an accident that muslim children have muslim parents and christian children have christian parents.
Max Chatnoir: That cultural.
herman Bergson: but they also agree on the experience what drunkeness is, Max...
Max Chatnoir: So it has to go beyond culture.
herman Bergson: in what way does it establish a real existence of a god?
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): it doesn’t
herman Bergson: real means for me.....the ability to interact with the physical world
Max Chatnoir: Well, I mean in the same way that you have agreement that there is only one sun in the sky.
CB Axel: But we can see the sun.
Max Chatnoir: But anything that is culturally restricted pretty much has to be  a cultural artifact.
herman Bergson: That is an empirical fact....
Max Chatnoir: So it's tradition, not reality.
herman Bergson: your claim that there are three suns around th eearth is easily falsified
Max Chatnoir: Yes, nobody claims that THEIR sun is the only one.
herman Bergson: the problem with the phenomenon religion IS, that it IS tradition.....so deeply rooted in culture...
herman Bergson: AND used by politics...
Max Chatnoir: Yes, that's where it gets dangerous.
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): very
Max Chatnoir: I think cultural traditions are fine, unless you try to make them universal, and especially by force.
herman Bergson: Next lecture I'll give you an example of it, which is happening this very day in this world....
Max Chatnoir: Oh, tell us now, so we can savor the anticipation!
herman Bergson: Then let me surprise you on Thursday......
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate) GIGGLES!!
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): ...LOL...
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): i think we already know
herman Bergson: The Middle Ages are closer then you think...:-)
Max Chatnoir: But it's religion that becomes a political tool that is dangerous.  Because politicians have access to armies.
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): yes
CB Axel: Not just politicians. ISIS has armies.
Max Chatnoir: Oh, all right... heavy sigh.
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): well the so called leader is a politition
herman Bergson: IS is an interesting case..
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): establishing a new world
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): caliphate
Max Chatnoir: Day light savings!
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): politician that is
Max Chatnoir: OK, guess not.
herman Bergson: The only way to beat IS is to conquer all land it occupies...
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): but who is going to conquer that
herman Bergson: No land ...no caliphate...
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): in several different countries
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): now
herman Bergson: caliphate
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): yep
Max Chatnoir: What an awful idea.  It's hard to beat ideas by conquest.  They just go underground and become romantic.
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): The countries themselves must stop them
herman Bergson: it is the only solution to this problem of this sect....
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): and some of the countries are a mess!!!!!!
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): Syria
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): Yemen
herman Bergson: and the biggest criminals against humanity are those who now finance IS
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): yes
Max Chatnoir: Somebody says that you need radicals to make liberals look moderate.
Max Chatnoir: so what FUNCTION does ISIS serve?
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): these radicals are way right
herman Bergson: you need republicans to make democrats look moderate ^_^
Max Chatnoir: Why are they not just treated everywhere like thugs and criminals?
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): that was my question
Max Chatnoir: ISIS, not the democrats.  :-)
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): WHO is doing that
CB Axel: I think at this point that they're too well armed to treat them as mere criminals.
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): In Syria is a real mess
CB Axel: And there are too many of them.
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): Jordan is trying
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): Iraq is fragmented
Max Chatnoir: AHA, and who is providing them with arms?
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): good question
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): Iran a lot
CB Axel: So maybe we don't have to conquer their land. Just their financers.
Max Chatnoir: Maybe they should be treated like thugs and criminals too?
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): ??
herman Bergson: My question for years, Max....WHO IS SUPPLYING WHO....
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): no
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): saudi?
herman Bergson: Qatar...
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): some billionaires there for sure
herman Bergson: indeed Gemma...
.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): why Qatar?
herman Bergson: Muslim and money, Beertje
herman Bergson: and aknwo participant in the region
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): have to excuse myself
.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): it's all about money and power...not about religion
CB Axel: IS is helping me to not believe in the existence of God. They make me believe only in the inhumanity of the human race.
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): right in some cases yes
herman Bergson: Bye Gemma
CB Axel: Bye, Gemma.
herman Bergson looks at his watch
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): hope to be here thursday
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate) GIGGLES!!
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): ...LOL...
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): yes
herman Bergson: oops...was a long discussion indeed!
Max Chatnoir: Yes, I guess we are running out of time.  :-)
.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont):
Max Chatnoir: Thanks again, Herman.
.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): it's early here in europe:)
herman Bergson: so..thank you all again....:-)
CB Axel: Thank you, herman.
CB Axel: ♣◦•∞ αρρу t. αţriςк's αy ∞•◦
CB Axel: Happy St. Patrick's Day
herman Bergson: Class dismissed...^_^
Max Chatnoir: I will hope to see you Thursday.  :-)
CB Axel: See you all Thursday.
CB Axel: God willing. LOL
herman Bergson: You're welcome Max :-)
























Wednesday, March 11, 2015

571: Is Intelligent Design an answer?

If  ontological arguments for the existence of a god don’t work out that well, we need another approach, more contemporary. Intelligent Design theory is such an attempt.
.
Intelligent design (ID) is an anti-evolution belief asserting that naturalistic explanations of some biological entities 
.
are not possible and such entities can only be explained by intelligent causes. 
.
A naturalistic worldview holds the hypothesis that the natural world is a closed system in the sense that nothing that is not a part of the natural world affects it.
.
As such, naturalism implies that there are no supernatural entities, such as gods, angels, demons, ghosts, or other spirits, or at least none that actually exercises its power to affect the natural world.
.
However, advocates of ID maintain that their belief is scientific too and provides empirical proof for the existence of a god or super-intelligent aliens. 
.
ID maintains, that evolution  and natural selection is wrong and therefor Intelligent Design is right. One example from Michael Behe, author of Darwin's Black Box (1996), Associate Professor of Biochemistry at Lehigh University
.
His argument hinges on the notion of "irreducibly complex systems," systems that could not function if they were missing just one of their many parts. 
.
”Irreducibly complex systems ... cannot evolve in a Darwinian fashion," he says, because natural selection works on small mutations in just one component at a time. 
.
He then leaps to the conclusion that intelligent design must be responsible for these irreducibly complex systems.
.
Typical for ID reasoning is, that rather than provide positive evidence for their own position, they mainly try to find weaknesses in natural selection.
.
But there is another more serious questionable point of view. ID  protagonists say….it is either evolution (which is wrong) or Intelligent Design.
.
We all understand the statement “It is either red OR  green”. We know it can not be both at the same time, so red excluded green and visa versa.
.
This dichotomy Intelligent Design versus evolution and natural selection also refers to such a dichotomy, but in this care it is a logical  fallacy. Why should they be mutual exclusive?
.
There is no evidence of design beyond what some people perceive there to be. In addition, given that we have evolved with an innate ability to recognize patterns, 
.
it is expected that we will find design all around us, but nothing suggests that anything about it was designed in any way. 
.
The "appearance of design implies a designer" is an argument from incredulity. The person making the claim, that something looks designed and so can not have come about from evolution, 
.
is relying on their own lack of imagination and understanding of evolutionary process, rather than it being an inherent fault in the theory. 
.
The reasoning is something like this. 
I can’t imagine or have not imagined how the world can be the result of a random process of evolution; thence evolution is not true.
.
What is not said here is the assumption, that if the world is the result of a random evolutionary process, then we could imagine  or would have imagined why this is the case.
.
However, if a state of affairs is impossible to imagine, it doesn't follow that it is false; it may only mean that imagination is limited. 
.
Moreover, if no one has yet managed to imagine how a state of affairs is possible, it doesn't follow that no one will ever be able to.
.
Last but not least there is the question of the relation between the Designer and our reality and the question who designed the Designer
.
or the question “What was the Designer doing before he actually designed the world” and last but not least,
.
what kind of designer designs a world where your child dies young of leukemia and you yourself can get the most horrible diseases yourself?
.
Thank you again….the floor is yours.. ^_^


The Discussion

Bejiita Imako: hmm indeed, dont believe in ID either
Daruma Boa claps
herman Bergson: I had to mention it because they fight atheism with a lot of energy
Bejiita Imako: who would create disease and such by will , unless it is a bug in their design that is not possible to correct
Bejiita Imako: a mistake in their design
Daruma Boa: but imagination is limited I do not think that...
herman Bergson: They went at least 50 time to court in the US to get ID in the educational program
CB Axel: It drives me crazy that people want ID taught in schools.
Bejiita Imako: dont make sense indeed
herman Bergson: But the most remarkable I find is that kind of reasoning....
.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): why fight the atheism? aren't we free to believe what we want?
CB Axel: Keep it in church school!
Daruma Boa: Sorry I guess I missed something. What is ID
Daruma Boa: Identity card?^^
herman Bergson: When you see something complex, it necessarily presupposes a designer....
CB Axel: In the US we have freedom of religion as long as that religion is Christian. :(
herman Bergson: Intelligent Design....
Bejiita Imako: ID , the idea that aliens made us, not evolution
Daruma Boa: ahh ok . thxs herman
herman Bergson: yes indeed CB....
herman Bergson: for that Designer is always and only the Christian god.....never Allah or Krishna or Brahman
Bejiita Imako: Prometheus movie is good example of ID, but this designer then tries wipe us out again
herman Bergson: Ahhh I watch that one twice now Bejiita....
Daruma Boa: the christians made a better marketing...
CB Axel: So the God in Prometheus is Shiva?
Daruma Boa: that was brutal power in the dark ages
herman Bergson: No...some aliens :-)
herman Bergson: But ID never has come up with a scientific explanation for the existence of this designer....
herman Bergson: and assuming the existence of the designer is a real leap of faith
Daruma Boa: ;-)
Bejiita Imako: closest we can get to this I think is what comes out of LHC when it runs at full power
herman Bergson: besides....on Facebook someone has shown us the origine of the world...:-)
Bejiita Imako: we can se building blocks but no designer
CB Axel: I'm looking forward to that, Bejiita.
Bejiita Imako: me to
herman Bergson: Gustav Courbet's L'Origine du Monde :-))
.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): what is LHC?
Bejiita Imako: they are in start up phase
CB Axel: Large Hadron Collider.
herman Bergson whispers: and what do we see there Bejiita?
Bejiita Imako: more power, better detectors, i really hope something unexpected and big comes out
Bejiita Imako: that explain some stuff to me
Bejiita Imako: like why cant anything go faster then light, does dark matter exist, what is it
Bejiita Imako: and so
Bejiita Imako: but chasing alien designers i think we can forget
herman Bergson: oh dear....hard stuff!
herman Bergson: But all explanations will be within the laws of physics....
Bejiita Imako: hard stuff indeed, makes my head spin when i think of it until i find out why cause it doesn’t make sense
Bejiita Imako: yet it is so
Bejiita Imako: wanna know why
herman Bergson: Keep us informed Bejiita :-)
Bejiita Imako: I will
.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): if we look at the universe , it is sooo large, why should anybody create us so tiny, we are in fact nothing
herman Bergson: next time I'll discuss the question whether we can prove the non existence of something and of course in particular a god...
herman Bergson: To play with, Beertje ^_^
.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): lol
herman Bergson: Lat night I watched the movie Dark Skies (2013)
Bejiita Imako: ok
herman Bergson: The plot is really that a normal family is invaded by aliens....just to be used for experiments ....and at the end to abduct a child
herman Bergson: The Greys are they called....those aliens.....
herman Bergson: Why do we come up with such stories...?
Bejiita Imako: cause there have een questions all time, are we alone and are they friendly or hostile
herman Bergson: All debate, especially among atheists is that the existence/non existence of a god is already assumed
Bejiita Imako: if there are other intelligent life
Bejiita Imako: in movies aliens are often hostile since it makes for a more interesting film,
Bejiita Imako: thats how it works
herman Bergson: Nobody asks the question...where did we get this god idea...?
herman Bergson: Some neuroscientific research is working on it, I have read tho
herman Bergson: Well if we cant make anything fo the existence of a god or designer...
herman Bergson whispers: let's see next Thursday if we can make something of the non existence :-)
.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): maybe in very early times when people count’s answer things they saw, they must have been thinking that there was a powerful force that made the thunder or something like that
Bejiita Imako: ah lets start up LHC and find out what we can
Bejiita Imako: hehe
Bejiita Imako: thats the best tool iI have at my hands anyway
herman Bergson: that is a general approach of the question indeed Beertje....
Bejiita Imako: alien chasing seems well a bit to tricky
herman Bergson: But the issue is that it seems so be so deeply entrenched in our cultures....
Bejiita Imako: SETI have not sound anything so far
Bejiita Imako: found
.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): it became a force of power over people
herman Bergson: The believers in a god are cheering Bejiita...
CB Axel: I remember reading that there is a part of our brain that makes us want to believe in a god.
Daruma Boa: No we only learned that over thousands of years
Bejiita Imako:
herman Bergson: Well...there has been research on religious thoughts....
Daruma Boa: But scientist found now - that the bible is really a fantastic story.
Daruma Boa: But it will be really hard to change in the world
Daruma Boa: A compete industry will break down.
herman Bergson: What I read was that when asked questions about belief the same brain areas as when asked about normal social activity were involved....
Daruma Boa: complete
CB Axel: I think the world is changing. I think every generation is becoming more skeptical about the existance of a god.
herman Bergson: I think so too CB....
Daruma Boa: and getting sceptic also in every thing in live. Straing with good, ending with media.
herman Bergson: The observation is pretty obvious....
Bejiita Imako: hope so, it just lead to war, well we have of course Putin destroying Ukraine at moment too
Daruma Boa: I hope peeps will not follow anything they get toldin the future
CB Axel: The believers are fighting that skepticism.
herman Bergson: when you go to the doctor you canbe treated....when you pray..that has no effect
Bejiita Imako: but IS and similar organizations would vanish at least
herman Bergson: yes Bejiita
CB Axel: They'd just find some other ideology to fight about.
herman Bergson: marxism and communism behave like religions
CB Axel: Exactly
CB Axel: And consumerism.
Daruma Boa: shopping for shoes also...
CB Axel: LOL
Bejiita Imako: ehehe
herman Bergson: and the free market
Daruma Boa: ja i really think that sometimes
Bejiita Imako:
herman Bergson: One last remark about fighting religion....:-)
Bejiita Imako: and Ayn Rand is the god
Bejiita Imako: lol
herman Bergson: In China the government takes measures to ban Western influences from education....
herman Bergson: Then someone remarked....but your Marxism isnt that a 100% Western ideology?
CB Axel: And then he was murdered, I'll bet.
herman Bergson: I liked this observation.....
herman Bergson: Indeed...you can't say that in China CB...:-)
herman Bergson: Is NOT funny ^_^
Bejiita Imako: china is a nasty place in general
CB Axel is glad she's not in China.
Bejiita Imako: not far from north Korea
CB Axel: The only good things about China are their cuisine and they only have one time zone. °͜°
Bejiita Imako: hehe
herman Bergson: Well...then let me invite you to SL and the lecture next Thursday :-))
Daruma Boa: and they have nice lamps...
herman Bergson: camps
herman Bergson: Thank you for your attention and participation ^_^
Bejiita Imako: YAY! (yay!)
Bejiita Imako: this was good
Daruma Boa: danke herman.
herman Bergson: Class dismissed
Daruma Boa: was leuk as always
CB Axel: Thank you, herman
.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): zeker Daruma:)
Daruma Boa: ;-)
herman Bergson: To be honest...
Daruma Boa: so Thursday 1 hour earlier?
herman Bergson: the whole atheism is a kind of funny subject to me ...
herman Bergson: Yes Daruma....we stick to the SL time....
Daruma Boa: we must see the hole world a bit funnier
Daruma Boa: also with the bad things
Daruma Boa: we can not change everything
herman Bergson: indeed we should..I agree!
Daruma Boa: but we can be the light to do it better
Daruma Boa: *GIGGLES* :)~~~~
Bejiita Imako: yes¨
Bejiita Imako:
herman Bergson: yeah it is a slow process.....
Daruma Boa: so hope to see u Thursday again
Daruma Boa waves goodbye
.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): bye Daruma
herman Bergson: I'll be there at 1 PM SL-time Daruma :-))
Bejiita Imako: cu soon
Bejiita Imako: bye all

CB Axel: Bye, bye.

Tuesday, March 10, 2015

570: The Ontological Argument evaluated

This whole debate on the Ontological Argument is a bit peculiar. iIt is not the question “Where does this god - idea come from among the many ideas in my mind?”
.
Like Thomas Aquinas said. God is self-evident. The only problem is to prove his existence.
.
For that we have a well tested scientific method. Take, for instance, Higgs particles. Scientists logically deduced from known data, that these particles should exist.
.
That means, they described these particles by defining its properties. If they would discover a particle with those properties they would say : “The Higgs particle really exists”
.
That doesn’t mean, that in their tests they had discovered existence, but they discovered that something instantiated the predicted properties.
.
which means that the expression “The Higgs particle exists” does say nothing else but “The Higgs particle properties are instantiated”;
.
that means that every scientist on this earth who performs the same experiments will observe the same result: instantiation of the Higgs-particle properties.
.
A strong ontological argument, I would say. What tests do we have to reveal the god particle? So far, only language.
.
Language is our tool to describe our reality and language has a certain structure. In some way it must reflect the structure of our reality. At least it works…
.
This structure is mainly that of attributing properties to objects and based on that observation we act on the object.
.
The  traffic light is red, so we stop. It is an example of red and being a traffic light, an instantiation of red. In “the traffic light is red and it exists” nothing more is said than that it is red.
.
Aristotle already realized, that existence can not be regarded as a property, but the scholastics needed to assume the opposite to be able to deduce the existence of god.
.
However, they forgot to come up with a proper test, to confirm this deduction. The reason is, that this “proof” is not a scientific conclusion, but just a way of using language.
.
Our question is whether existence is instantiated and, if so, whether it is instantiated by individuals like Obama, my car, and the tree in my backyard. 
.
Do individuals, in addition to ordinary properties like being human, being comfortable to sit in, and needing more water, instantiate a property expressed by the English verb ‘exists’? 
.
Hume  (1711 - 1776) argued, that there is no impression of existence distinct from the impression of an object, which is ultimately on Hume's view a bundle of qualities. 
.
As all of our contentful ideas derive from impressions, Hume concluded that existence is not a separate property of an object. 
.
Two philosophers of our time, who had strong arguments to show that “existence” is not a property like red or green were Gottliob Frege (1848 - 1925) and especially Bertrand Russell (1872 - 1970).
.
Both Frege and Russell maintained that existence is not a property of individuals but instead a second-order property—a property of concepts, for Frege, and of propositional functions, for Russell. 
.
What is the difference between a red tomato and a red existing tomato? To be red it must already exist, as only existing things instantiate properties.
.
Saying it is red and a tomato and furthermore exists is to say one thing too many. The thought seems to be that instantiating any property whatsoever 
.
presupposes existence and so existence is not a further property over and above a thing's genuine properties. 
.
Here we are talking about first-order properties, the thing we observe and its properties. Does the tomato exist?.
.
We can point at the red round object and say, due to its defining properties. So the statement is true.
.
Now we say “god exists”. What should we point at? Yet people attribute a lot of properties to this god. The answer is, that we are not talking about properties we observe in reality,
.
but to say that the statement is true, refers only to the fact that the concept is present in someone’s mind.  So it seems that the existence of god doesn’t get much further than
.
that the statement “god exists” just means something like “There is some thought in my mind which contains a concept, which I call god”.
.
Thank you again….the floor is yours


The Discussion

Max Chatnoir: The inter-observer reliability on the properties of God is also not very high.
herman Bergson: Is there any Max?
Max Chatnoir: Like, how do you measure omniscience?
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): so we still do not have a clear definition of existance
herman Bergson: IN soem way we have Gemma...
herman Bergson: it is a precondition to be able to talk about properties of things
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): true
Max Chatnoir: So you can only attribute properties to things that exist.
herman Bergson: no....
herman Bergson: No...
Max Chatnoir: Oh, right, unicorns.
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate) GIGGLES!!
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): ...LOL...
Bejiita Imako: hehehe
herman Bergson: Yo can also attribute properties to dragons and ghosts
CB Axel: So all things that exist have properties, but not everything with properties exist.
herman Bergson: the only problem is...these properties will never be instantiated...
Max Chatnoir: So having properties is necessary but not sufficient?
herman Bergson: that is right CB
Bejiita Imako: aaa yes thats true
herman Bergson: To put it in a simple way...
herman Bergson: you define an object by its properties....
herman Bergson: so...
herman Bergson: go look for it...
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): that i know
Bejiita Imako: we can imagine certain properties on a ghost for ex but these properties will also be just fantasy since the ghost is non exixtent and thus also just fantasy
herman Bergson: But here is the catch!!!!
herman Bergson: the method of looking for it...!!!!!
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): right
Bejiita Imako: yes
Bejiita Imako: exactly
herman Bergson: The empiricist says...uses your senses....
Bejiita Imako: thats how you look for higgs for ex because you know it have certain properties
Bejiita Imako: looking for these confirms the particle
Bejiita Imako: sort of
herman Bergson: But some others say that we have more ways to acquire knowledge...
Bejiita Imako: if you find the properties you find the object
herman Bergson: hold on Bejiita....
herman Bergson: !!
herman Bergson: That is a serious issue....
Max Chatnoir: Yes, that's the hole in the scientific argument.
Bejiita Imako: ah
herman Bergson: We never have seen higgs particles like we have seen tomatos....
herman Bergson: we have only seen readings of instrumetns....
Max Chatnoir: Two different objects might have similar properties.
herman Bergson: but you could say that these readings WERE predicted...
herman Bergson: Careful Max........similar properties..not the SAME properties
Bejiita Imako: higgs are more complex indeed, you can directly observe a tomato and taste / see its properties but you can never observe a higgs boson directly
Max Chatnoir: same measurements, then?
herman Bergson: if the measurements are the same we are talking about the SAME objects
herman Bergson: not different objects
Bejiita Imako: yes
Max Chatnoir: I'm not sure about that.
Max Chatnoir: For example two different things might be the same size, color, weight, but not be the same thing.
Bejiita Imako: can there be 2 objects with 100 % identical properties
herman Bergson: yes...like two tomatoes...
Max Chatnoir: Probably not if you consider all properties, but have we measured all properties of the Higgs?
Bejiita Imako: 2 tomatoes never for ex have exactly same shape
herman Bergson: but they are totally different in their space coordinates
Max Chatnoir: Yes, there is that also.
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): wants a fresh tomato
Bejiita Imako: aaa yes coordinates can never be same for 2 different things
Bejiita Imako: then they are 1 and the same
herman Bergson: in SL two prims might occupy the same XYZ values....tell that to two tomatoes :-))
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): ;-)
herman Bergson: mee to gemma :-)
Bejiita Imako: hehe
herman Bergson: It is impossible that two objects have 100% the same properies...
Max Chatnoir: So we have to decide which ones matter.
herman Bergson: What do you mean Max?
Max Chatnoir: An interesting feature of the God argument.
Max Chatnoir: What is the essence of tomatoness.
Max Chatnoir: For organisms, you can always appeal to DNA markers.
herman Bergson: for tomatoes too..isn’t it?
Max Chatnoir: But before DNA..  type of fruit, edibility, etc.
Max Chatnoir: Yes, so you can make that a criterion for defining a tomato.
Bejiita Imako: shape taste
herman Bergson: an individual tomato?
Max Chatnoir: But what is the equivalent of a DNA marker for something that isn't an organism?
Bejiita Imako: the important thing is there is a range you need to have for the properties since they are never 100 % identical
Bejiita Imako: the tomato range for shape taste color etc
herman Bergson: even when it has the dna similar to the other 10.0000....it has its ow spacial coordinates
Max Chatnoir: Yes, that's the "essence of tomatoeness"  :-)
CB Axel: Max, chemical makeup?
Max Chatnoir: Yes, you could do some kind of chemical profile.
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate) GIGGLES!!
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): ...LOL...
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): now wants a tomato more
herman Bergson: But what is your point Max?
Bejiita Imako: hehe
herman Bergson: To prove that god is a tomato?
Bejiita Imako: hahahahaa
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): oh dear
.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): what about electricity?...we can't see it but we use it every day, does it exist?
herman Bergson grins
Max Chatnoir: Oh, I was wondering how you would apply that principle to God, where even the properties are at issue.
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): i think to prove a tomato is a tomato
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): yes me too max
Bejiita Imako: it exist cause if u touch it you get a lethal shock
herman Bergson: Well...as such ...the idea of properties is rather irrelavant....
Bejiita Imako: and lighthing as well is visible electricity
herman Bergson: Already fro the scholastics it was important to regard existence as a property...
Bejiita Imako: and most important if it didn’t exist, what the power computers motors ect
herman Bergson: But it didn’t work out...
.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): and magnetism?
herman Bergson: so the idea of a god with all its properties...is ..whatever you like...
.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): we can't see that either
Max Chatnoir: Is is there any good argument for God?
herman Bergson: except that it lacks real existence except in a mind
Bejiita Imako: ah
Max Chatnoir: If you decide you want to call a tomato an apple.
Max Chatnoir: Well, bad example, because I think maybe they used to be apples?
herman Bergson: then your thesis is immediately falsified Max
Bejiita Imako: hmm interesting idea
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): relatives anyway
Max Chatnoir: If you can apply any properties you like to God then how can you tell an apple from a tomato?
herman Bergson: go to the supermarket....
herman Bergson: buy some apples...
Bejiita Imako: but we know what a tomato is but we don’t know what god really is
Bejiita Imako: and those don’t know the properties a god would have
Bejiita Imako: so could be anything
herman Bergson: and check the bill ...and be surprised it says you bought tomatos...
Max Chatnoir: Well, that's THEIR opinion, isn't it?
Max Chatnoir: But we don't have much trouble agreeing about tomatos.
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): no
Bejiita Imako: no
herman Bergson: you would say that the cash register malfunctioned...
Bejiita Imako: i know what a tomato is and what it taste like and also what u can make of them, ketchup for ex
Max Chatnoir: Because a lot of people have been around tomatoes, and they have some experience of it.
herman Bergson: there are apple s in your basket...not tomatoes
Bejiita Imako: yes everyone have seen and tasted tomatoes i guess
Max Chatnoir: Then the cash register is miscoded or something.  :-)
Bejiita Imako: not same about god
herman Bergson: guess so :-)
Max Chatnoir: no interobserver reliability.
herman Bergson: so far the "property" existence" doesn’t add anything to the concept of god except that you can have this concept in your mind...
Bejiita Imako: no
Bejiita Imako: exactly
Max Chatnoir: Now, if tomatoes became extinct, and we just had old books describing tomatoes, then there might be disagreement about what a tomato was.
Max Chatnoir: Tomatoes are Dead.
herman Bergson: Not if the books describe them accurately, I would say
Bejiita Imako: and u can not use a particle accelerator or similar to find god either plus for that to even be possible we need to have properties to look for before we smash out god with LHC
Max Chatnoir: True, if all the books gave the same description, there might be agreement.
Bejiita Imako: otherwise we have no known things to look for
Max Chatnoir: But what if you didn't have pictures?
Max Chatnoir: Nobody has pictures of God, and indeed in some cases such pictures are forbidden.
herman Bergson: The Dodo is extinct....and we have descriptions of it...but they differ in degrees
Bejiita Imako: dinosaurs we know existed because we found skeletons
Max Chatnoir: Well, there is that stuffed Dodo in the British Museum.
herman Bergson: Oh my, Max....you are running ten miles ahead of the herd!
herman Bergson: :-))
herman Bergson: Pictures of god....:-)
Bejiita Imako: hehe
.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): i'm already lost in this discussion.....
herman Bergson: Is there. MAx...never knew...lol
Max Chatnoir: Well, we were discussing properties...
herman Bergson: Anyway...existence can not be a property, is my conclusion...
Max Chatnoir: I would agree.
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): got that
CB Axel: This reminds me of the child who told her mother that she was going to draw a picture of God. When the mother said, "But no one knows what God looks like" the child answered, "They will when I'm finished."
herman Bergson: The scholastics used the Subject - Predicate relation to come up with the ontological argument...
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): :-)
herman Bergson: but is doesnt hold...
Bejiita Imako:
herman Bergson: One interesting observation....
Bejiita Imako: classic image of god, old man with a beard sitting on a cloud
Bejiita Imako:
herman Bergson: Bertrand Russell, who showed that existence is not a property said, that it also is impossible to prove that god does NOT exist...
Max Chatnoir: patriarch
CB Axel: Or the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
Bejiita Imako: hehe
Max Chatnoir: Well, I guess it might also be impossible to disprove unicorns.
herman Bergson: I have to think about that remark :-)
Bejiita Imako: Pastafarians
Bejiita Imako:
Bejiita Imako: hehe
herman Bergson: yes Max...that is what crossed my mind too! when I read it
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): actually i think they found bones of a creature similar to a unicorn
herman Bergson: Well I guess we did our best again today to deserve a pleasant weekend....:-)
Max Chatnoir: But if I can raise this again, unicorns might have been a conclusion based on some observation.
Bejiita Imako: might be
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): or might have been very skinny rhinos
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): once upon a time
Max Chatnoir: So on what observations is the conclusion of God based?
herman Bergson: As I said ..^_^ I guess we did our best again today to deserve a pleasant weekend....:-)
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate) GIGGLES!!
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): ...LOL...
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): yes
herman Bergson: So..thank you all again ..:-)
Max Chatnoir: The odd goat gets born with a single horn.
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): ♥ Thank Youuuuuuuuuu!! ♥
herman Bergson: Class dismissed ^_^
CB Axel: Thank you, herman.
Bejiita Imako: nice again
Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): bye for now
Bejiita Imako: and my head is into overload again
Bejiita Imako: hehe
Bejiita Imako: but that s good
CB Axel: I think I'll go make a nice tomato salad.
Max Chatnoir: Thank you, Herman.  Do you know what is the next topic?
Bejiita Imako: hehe
Bejiita Imako: sounds tasty
herman Bergson: Do so CB..will taste godly...
Max Chatnoir: I had caprese for lunch today!  The tomatoes are just getting edible.
Bejiita Imako: