Controversial General Political Discussion

[Monster Zoro's Tesla Supplier]

You probably saw your own reflection in the mirror in the bathroom

Well, jokes apart, are you agnostic about God or Ghosts or both?

I guess both. I'm not against them existing but there's really no evidence for them existing either
Nobody has ever given me solid evidence on how god can exist, and on the other hand, nobody has ever given me solid evidence on how things like the big bang make sense either.

 

[Reborn]

I guess both. I'm not against them existing but there's really no evidence for them existing either
Nobody has ever given me solid evidence on how god can exist, and on the other hand, nobody has ever given me solid evidence on how things like the big bang make sense either.

What about Big Bang doesn't make sense to you?

 

[Etzel Andergast]

It's seems like you people believe in God's existence alot.

Well so my question is do you believe in ghosts as well? If not, then why you believe in God but not in Ghosts?

I dont believe in ghost if ghost means the soul of a person walking around to appear to someone

and god is not someone in the sky who created the universe because he simply wanted. God is supreme being, the being that support the existence of anything. The things can't exist by themselves, so they participate in the being to exist. And the being is god

 

[Monster Zoro's Tesla Supplier]

What about Big Bang doesn't make sense to you?

Where did all of that energy come from?

 

[Reborn]

I dont believe in ghost if ghost means the soul of a person walking around to appear to someone

and god is not someone in the sky who created the universe because he simply wanted. God is supreme being, the being that support the existence of anything. The things can't exist by themselves, so they participate in the being to exist. And the being is god

I have a question

Why people expect evidences or verifiable claims from science or ask about credible sources when it comes to information but then simply believe in philosophical interpretations of Gods as it is with no testable predictions or verifiable claims?

 

[Reborn]

Where did all of that energy come from?

We don't fully know that. We might never know that or about what existed prior to big bang.

See, theories are put to tests. And, the best way to tests theories is through predictions.


Einstein's General theory of relativity and Quantum Mechanics are so successful because these theories predicted stuffs and we found them out to be true.


Big Bang theory also predicted stuffs and we found them out to be true like existence of light elements or cosmic web or Cosmic Microwave background studies.

It has issues and people do question it again and again or test it but it's the best model we have as of now which fits our observations of the universe

 

[Etzel Andergast]

I have a question

Why people expect evidences or verifiable claims from science or ask about credible sources when it comes to information but then simply believe in philosophical interpretations of Gods as it is with no testable predictions or verifiable claims?

Because science is about evidences, is about to make test to prove that the claim is true or false

but this doesnt make sense when we are talking about philosophy. Philosophy is about inquires that doest require evidences, philosophy try to catch a true claim by logical inferences of concepts like being, knowledge, nature of something, goodness, mind, the physical, language.

and when we talk about god specifically, ask for evidences doesnt make any sense, because god is not a thing that can be find anywhere. its something complete different that no science can give an answer because of methodological reasons

 

[Reborn]

Because science is about evidences, is about to make test to prove that the claim is true or false

but this doesnt make sense when we are talking about philosophy. Philosophy is about inquires that doest require evidences, philosophy try to catch a true claim by logical inferences of concepts like being, knowledge, nature of something, goodness, mind, the physical, language.

and when we talk about god specifically, ask for evidences doesnt make any sense, because god is not a thing that can be find anywhere. its something complete different that no science can give an answer because of methodological reasons

So basically a convenient way out.

You know I do believe that Marx was right to an extent (a bit narrow but he did make sense) when he said "Religion is an opium for the people"

 

[Logiko]

Because science is about evidences, is about to make test to prove that the claim is true or false

Science is about the process. Not the evidence in itself.

You know I do believe that Marx was right to an extent (a bit narrow but he did make sense) when he said "Religion is an opium of the people"

Careful. This sentence is often missunderstood.

 

[Etzel Andergast]

So basically a convenient way out.

You know I do believe that Marx was right to an extent (a bit narrow but he did make sense) when he said "Religion is an opium for the people"

no lol
the idea of god is the result of a philosophical inquiry. if god exist or no is something that only philosophical inquires can deal. So its not a convenient way out.

its only a convenient way out only if you disregard the entire philosophy (but no one serious do that)

 

[Midnight Delight]

It's seems like you people believe in God's existence alot.

Well so my question is do you believe in ghosts as well? If not, then why you believe in God but not in Ghosts?

Because I believe in Reincarnation

 

[Etzel Andergast]

Science is about the process. Not the evidence in itself.



Careful. This sentence is often missunderstood.

yeah, i'm just simplifying to make clear to him the differences of science and philosophy

anyway natural science is the activity that describes, models, and predicts the structure and behavior of the phenomena of the physical environment without necessarily accessing the ultimate nature or essence of things.

philosophy try to understand the nature and essence of anything (from inferences, deduction, etc)

and by this definition of science its easy to understand why search for scientific evidences for god doesnt make sense, science doesnt deal with that my methodological reasons

 

[Logiko]

Where did all of that energy come from?

The concept of space-time loses its meaning beyond the big bang and a certain scale. There might not be a "before".

and by this definition of science its easy to understand why search for scientific evidences for god doesnt make sense, science doesnt deal with that my methodological reasons

More than anything. Science doesn't need god.

 

[Midnight Delight]

Marx himself believed in a religious lite system btw

 

[Etzel Andergast]

More than anything. Science doesn't need god.

meaningless sentence

 

[Etzel Andergast]

Because I believe in Reincarnation

aren't you islamic?

 

[Logiko]

meaningless sentence

On the contrary. It means that God only belongs to beliefs and philosophy. Science does not need God to explain the world, it's an irrelevant concept.

 

[Midnight Delight]

aren't you islamic?

No

 

[Etzel Andergast]

On the contrary. It means that God only belongs to beliefs and philosophy. Science does not need God to explain the world, it's an irrelevant concept.

science only needs someone following its metodological steps

it doesnt need any concept

 

[Etzel Andergast]

No

what are you