Adonai888 - 09 July 2012 09:34 PM

philosophical naturalism helds, that the natural world is all there exists. .

  It often seems to me that a vast and common difference between people who embrace the idea of a supernatural God and people who don’t is that religious people want to believe that they have a complete understanding of existence and construct a “theory” of explanation, (i.e. the Bible, Torah, Bhagavad Gita), and atheists don’t. 

There are a multitude of questions which have not yet been answered, or more correctly, phenomena that are not deeply understood.  The fact that a person who holds to philosophical naturalism admits that there are such phenomena does not somehow prove the existence of the supernatural.  “We don’t know” may not be a satisfying answer, but it is an honest one.

Adonai888 - 16 July 2012 09:39 PM

DarronS - 16 July 2012 08:59 PM

There is no objective standard of good and bad.

Do you live according to this worldview ? If this is true, you cannot say, what Hitler did, was wrong.

Yes I can. As I suggested before, you need to study some modern philosophy. You are quite wrong here, and I am not going to waste my time explaining it to someone who refuses to educate himself.

Thats what i am asking you : based on what can you tell human life has more value, based on your world view ?

Read Peter Singer and educate yourself.

Write4U - 16 July 2012 10:58 PM

Adonai888 - 16 July 2012 08:00 PM

Write4U - 16 July 2012 04:41 PM

To assume an unnatural causality other than pure Potential, beyond such absolute limits, is ridiculous.

Again, your pure Potential is not something , but is the atribute of something. Again : ” X ” has the potential to create the universe. What is ” X ” ?

Potential for “X” exists before “X” , just like your god. Prove me wrong.

Abstract objects and properties cannot stay in a causal relation . Your potential is a abstract property of ” X “, and cannot cause anything.

Zero evidence of supernaturalism is a pretty good reason for philosophical naturalism.

Pragmatic Naturalist - 17 July 2012 11:21 AM

Zero evidence of supernaturalism is a pretty good reason for philosophical naturalism.

We have good reasons to believe in dualism. That alone is evidence of the supernatural.

Adonai888 - 17 July 2012 11:30 AM

Pragmatic Naturalist - 17 July 2012 11:21 AM

Zero evidence of supernaturalism is a pretty good reason for philosophical naturalism.

We have good reasons to believe in dualism. That alone is evidence of the supernatural.

This is why I refuse to continue discussing things with Adonai. He is speaking from ignorance, and in three years on these forums has shown neither the ability nor the inclination to educate himself. Trying to get through to him is a waste of time.

Adonai888 - 17 July 2012 11:30 AM

Pragmatic Naturalist - 17 July 2012 11:21 AM

Zero evidence of supernaturalism is a pretty good reason for philosophical naturalism.

We have good reasons to believe in dualism. That alone is evidence of the supernatural.

Adonai888 - 17 July 2012 11:30 AM

We have good reasons to believe in dualism. That alone is evidence of the supernatural.

We have NO REASON to believe in dualism.  Anyone who does has either a mental genetic or educational defect.

Occam

Adonai888 - 17 July 2012 08:52 AM

Write4U - 16 July 2012 10:58 PM

Adonai888 - 16 July 2012 08:00 PM

Write4U - 16 July 2012 04:41 PM

To assume an unnatural causality other than pure Potential, beyond such absolute limits, is ridiculous.

Again, your pure Potential is not something , but is the atribute of something. Again : ” X ” has the potential to create the universe. What is ” X ” ?

Potential for “X” exists before “X” , just like your god. Prove me wrong.

Abstract objects and properties cannot stay in a causal relation . Your potential is a abstract property of ” X “, and cannot cause anything.

I disagree, X (Potential) is the abstract property of everything. If god is a physical being then it was preceded by potential. If god is an abstract quality then it is either Potential or God itself could not be in a causal relationship, your words.