Click to expand
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#658 - isthisreallife has deleted their comment [-]
#657 - BobbyMcFerrin (10/21/2011) [-]
Some atheists are convinced of their argument because it is logical and reasonable, which indeed it is.
There is one major problem with this. The only thing that says logic and reason are infallible are well...logic and reason themselves. It defies the very laws of logic and reason to use an assumption to prove itself, and here we get into circular logic.
In order to base any arguments on logic and reason, you have to first make an ASSUMPTION that logic and reason form the basis of all truths.

I choose to put my faith in logic and reason, but FAITH is all it is. It is just as much of a mental leap to put faith in logic as it is to put faith in a deity.

I put my faith in logic and reason because it is the one tool that sets man apart from the other beings on this planet, and has allowed us to become the dominant species. I cannot be sure that this conclusion is correct, and this is why I leave myself open to the possibility of a deity through agnosticism . I used to be one of those "how can you believe in god it makes no sense therefore you are stupid" people but I realized I was being hypocritical for the reasons stated above.

I know this is long and some people won't read but I think it would be beneficial for some of the scientific-minded people like myself to read this.
#742 to #657 - John Cena (10/21/2011) [-]
I like how science states there are different dimensions, with probably different "laws" and think there couldn't be a god. I think the dimension where in are like rankings. and someones obviously at the very top. Just pulling the strings for fun. The biggest thing blocking freedom, is thinking you are actually free. The best thing you can do is realize it and try to become free, by doing the impossible, by which would become possible.
User avatar #750 to #742 - BobbyMcFerrin (10/21/2011) [-]
Careful with your use of the word "obvious". On the subject of dimensions, I think you might find this interesting: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Q_GQqUg6Ts
User avatar #699 to #657 - theracistpanda (10/21/2011) [-]
I'm assuming you're an atheiest, and I respect your beliefs. I also respect that you remain open to new ideas. An atheist lives down the road from me and I'm pretty sure he thinks Christains (and other religions that include a deity, I'm assuming) are stupid. You are not one of those people.
gave u a thum
User avatar #711 to #699 - BobbyMcFerrin (10/21/2011) [-]
Agnostic. The only thing I am sure of is my own ignorance to the truths of the universe. I live my life following logic and reason to keep myself sane but I am completely aware that this is a choice and I could be completely wrong. I also don't believe that logic and reason and religion must be mutually exclusive. It is entirely possible that a deity created the universe and implemented logic and reason to "govern" it, and the rest just fell into place. Who knows? Not me.
User avatar #685 to #657 - TheZohan (10/21/2011) [-]
I think you're misusing the "Faith" here. That is to believe that has no evidence for. Scientific theories however don't need faith, because they have evidence to support them. It doesn't take faith to NOT to believe in something. Does it take faith to deny the claims about bigfoot?
But anyways good comment. ;)
User avatar #702 to #685 - BobbyMcFerrin (10/21/2011) [-]
In order to consider this evidence valid you need to determine that the evidence shows causation. Cause and effect are products of logic and reason. Nothing says logic and reason imply truth other than our own intuition. Once again we hit a roadblock where we must take a leap of faith and assume that logic and reason are valid.
User avatar #897 to #702 - TheZohan (10/21/2011) [-]
I don't think we need a leap of faith to assume that reason and logic are valid.
Or I don't quite understand what you're saying, do you care to elaborate for me?
User avatar #1029 to #897 - BobbyMcFerrin (10/21/2011) [-]
My whole point is that logic and reason cannot be used as the be-all end-all argument for proving things right or wrong, simply because there is nothing that says logic and reason are themselves infallible. Our intuition may tell us that we can draw valid conclusions using logic and reason, but there is nothing concrete that says that this is true. How the human brain perceives the world is not necessarily how the world actually is, because our methods of observation are inherently flawed. Our eyes see only the visible spectrum, our ears pick up changes in air pressure etc, but the reality we create in our brains is based on the observations of only our 5 senses, and this does not necessarily imply that this reality is objective. Logic and reason make sense to us because we are logical and reasonable beings. Do you see the error in that statement? We cannot use our own subjective view of the world to prove that this view is correct. To do so would violate the very laws of the logic and reason that we give so much credit.

Here is an example:
God exists because God said in the Bible that God exists.
This is obviously logically flawed, because one assumption cannot be used to prove itself according to the laws of logic.
Now compare that statement to this one:
Logic and reason are valid tools to prove truths about the world because logic and reason themselves are logical and reasonable.
See the similarity?
Ironic as it may be, logic itself prevents us from "proving" that logic is infallible, because it cannot be used to prove its own validity.

This is where the leap of faith comes in. Since we cannot "prove" through logic that logic is valid, we must ASSUME that logic is valid. This assumption is just the same as the assumption that God exists. The only difference is that logic seems intuitive to you and me, and God seems intuitive to others.
User avatar #1237 to #1029 - TheZohan (10/21/2011) [-]
"Logic and reason are valid tools to prove truths about the world because logic and reason themselves are logical and reasonable. "
What about science and evidence? That contradicts religion, and a lot of things that are in the bible for example. Because it's not reality. To me personally, the idea of a deity is just ridiculous.
Although I must give you thumbs up for your insight.
User avatar #1238 to #1237 - BobbyMcFerrin (10/21/2011) [-]
You're still missing my point. Science and evidence are LOGICAL entities. The scientific method, the method used to connect cause with effect, is a LOGICAL process.
Carbon dating looks at what percentage of the original radioactive carbon-14 atoms are left in an object. Since the half-life of carbon-14 is known, once the percentage of intact carbon-14 is known, it is a simple calculation to find out how old something is.
But between the evidence and the solution there is a logical assumption. If we are to believe our calculation, we must assume that the carbon-14 behaved as it logically should have over time, and decayed exponentially.
We use logic to piece together all cause and effect pairs such as this. Science and evidence are just branches of logic and reason.
Since logic and reason have no firm basis which validates them, neither do science and evidence. They make sense to us, but we cannot PROVE them, sadly.
Do you see my point yet? It is easy for us to say that nothing in the Bible makes sense scientifically, but what we are saying is the logical equivalent of saying "Science is wrong because God said so". You cannot use an assumption to prove another assumption wrong. Since logic is an assumption, you cannot use it to prove religion wrong.
User avatar #1243 to #1238 - TheZohan (10/21/2011) [-]
I understand what you're saying. But that doesn't mean that science is wrong.
Does that mean science's wrong (Which it isn't.)?
Does that mean all scientific theories wrong? Is science no longer valid to debunk ridiculous desert mythology? If so, I do not share your view on this.
User avatar #1248 to #1243 - BobbyMcFerrin (10/21/2011) [-]
Read the comment below first, but once you are done I have a question for you that I think will illustrate my point.

PROVE to me that logic and science are infallible and can always be used to form an accurate representation of the truth.

If you can do that, I will concede the discussion to you.
You will also probably win a Nobel Prize...
User avatar #1249 to #1248 - TheZohan (10/21/2011) [-]
I'll have to admit to admit that this is probably the hardest riddle I've ever encountered.
However, thanks to research and evidence we know how stuff works that brings us further to the truth, but since those words are just branches of logic and reason, I guess they're invalid. (You know, when you said, "Science and evidence are just branches of logic and reason")
But what if you made a mistake about what word would be the root of science, how do you know that it's "logic and reason" that is the root of all those things? Maybe there's another word?
I'll admit, I can not solve your riddle and prove that logic and science are infallible.
But I will still accept science and there's nothing that will make me change my mind about that. I rather want a real answer for things even if it means I'll die before I get the actual answer, I will always reject idea of a deity and supernatural things.
User avatar #1255 to #1249 - BobbyMcFerrin (10/22/2011) [-]
There that's all I'm saying. I choose science too but we have to realize that it is indeed a choice. These things make sense to us as logical beings and so we are comfortable with accepting science as truth. I'm not saying that we need to live our lives thinking every day that everything we know is wrong, but I find that the science folk aren't as quick to ridicule and discredit religious folk when they look at it from this perspective. Good talk though.
User avatar #1247 to #1243 - BobbyMcFerrin (10/21/2011) [-]
*sigh* I never said anything was "wrong". All I am saying is that it is short-sighted and ignorant to blindly accept science as absolute unconditional truth. It is also short-sighted and ignorant to blindly accept religion as absolute unconditional truth.
Arguments that use science to disprove religion are pointless because both are base on initial assumptions.
At the root of the science vs. religion discussion is just a simple decision that is made by each individual to put faith in logic or to put faith in god. There is no proof, no amount of science that can disprove religion because when it comes down to it there is nothing that can prove science itself. You cannot build a house without a solid foundation, and since a solid foundation does not exist for either science or religion, neither view can be used to build an argument against the other. Try as you might, it is simply impossible to present a valid argument using one against the other.

If you believe in logic, then it is contradictory to your own beliefs to believe logic to be unquestionably valid.
In order for a person to follow logic and not contradict their own belief system, they MUST acknowledge the POSSIBILITY that logic is invalid.
#1236 to #1029 - TheZohan has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #684 to #657 - robtheninja (10/21/2011) [-]
Yea, I'm the same way. I grew up around my dad being a strong atheist, so I became one as well. I opened myself up to agnosticism after taking a philosophy class in which I was assigned to defend the existence of God with the ontological argument. I wanted to ace it of course, so I read so deeply into the argument (as well as a couple of other ones) that I stopped and thought to myself "wow, this is way more complex than I thought. I shouldn't be able to adamantly say one way or the other that God exists. There is no undeniable proof for either of the two sides of the argument." That's way I am an agnostic as well.
User avatar #690 to #684 - robtheninja (10/21/2011) [-]
That's why*
User avatar #681 to #657 - joachimstraad (10/21/2011) [-]
This is why I am a nihilist. Well said.
#680 to #657 - punchguru (10/21/2011) [-]
#674 to #657 - sierramistfourteen (10/21/2011) [-]
<---- unrelated  
thank you for saying that, couldn't have said it better myself
<---- unrelated

thank you for saying that, couldn't have said it better myself
User avatar #654 - albinopanda (10/20/2011) [-]
His name is George Carlin, show some respect.
User avatar #651 - CRISPYCARROT (10/20/2011) [-]
this guy uses Tumblr.
#647 - ihaventsleptyetfml (10/20/2011) [-]
**ihaventsleptyetfml rolled a random image** is what i think about this comic
#640 - essyrix **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
#639 - Griketwentyten has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #634 - superclamsquared (10/20/2011) [-]
I foresee somuch religion ********* because of this.
#632 - John Cena (10/20/2011) [-]
*He forgives us* And we are cast down to hell because we have not accepted Jesus into our hearts. For proof of this see Romans 9:8
User avatar #666 to #632 - Patheos (10/21/2011) [-]
Just because the Bible says it, doesn't make it true.
User avatar #1259 to #666 - Patheos (10/22/2011) [-]
Anyone else find it funny that my anti-religious comment was #666?
#697 to #666 - John Cena (10/21/2011) [-]
The bible has yet to be disproven, And accounts from stories in the bible are seen in other religious books too, which just qualifies the bible even more. So I have reason to believe what the bible tells me.
User avatar #1260 to #697 - Patheos (10/22/2011) [-]
But it has yet to be proven, too. I don't care if you believe it, I believe some of it , too. Just don't say that a letter Paul wrote is proof of anything other than "Paul wrote a letter to Roman Christians."
#631 - thebigshow (10/20/2011) [-]
I don't like how people can make a post bashing religion ( I'm speaking generally of course not just this post) and its thumbed and congratulated, yet if someone was to make a post about religion it would be red thumbed like a mofo.  
I believe in A god and I don't shove it in your face, so don't shove your atheism( or whatever you want it to be called) in mine  
Thats my FJ rant for today
I don't like how people can make a post bashing religion ( I'm speaking generally of course not just this post) and its thumbed and congratulated, yet if someone was to make a post about religion it would be red thumbed like a mofo.
I believe in A god and I don't shove it in your face, so don't shove your atheism( or whatever you want it to be called) in mine

Thats my FJ rant for today
User avatar #678 to #631 - klaemint (10/21/2011) [-]
This is the internet... things like negros, religion, women are not talked about as in real life.
User avatar #655 to #631 - sicrights (10/20/2011) [-]
The post isn't here for the soul purpose of bashing religion. It's funny commentary from a great comedian, and this is FUNNYjunk after all... If you're that insecure about your faith that you can't have a good laugh about it get off the internet.
User avatar #663 to #655 - thebigshow (10/21/2011) [-]
I never said I didnt laugh I was only making an observation
#648 to #631 - John Cena (10/20/2011) [-]
**anonymous rolled a random image**
#646 to #631 - sammen (10/20/2011) [-]
I believe in a Goddess. If your God weren't shoved not only in my face but down my throat as I am branded a sinner and ranted at about how I am going to hell for believing so, so often... I'd probably sympathize with you more. For now I am just going to laugh, and thumb the content.
User avatar #650 to #646 - thebigshow (10/20/2011) [-]
Believing in something or not believing in something is like a PENIS, its fine if you have one just dont shove it in my face
#662 to #650 - neoexdeath ONLINE (10/21/2011) [-]
User avatar #643 to #631 - haker (10/20/2011) [-]
So true....
#637 to #631 - John Cena (10/20/2011) [-]
iso logic
#625 - fisticuffs **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #623 - barbwirepain (10/20/2011) [-]
It's sad, I ask who is the best comic of all time Carlin, or Pryor, and people always say idk who they are
#642 to #623 - breasticles (10/20/2011) [-]
Every time I ask people who their favorite comedian is, they all say either Dane Cook, or Daniel Tosh. They're funny, but Dane Cook just says things really loud and ecstatic and gets annoying fast. Christopher Titus is one of my favorite comedians, and not a lot of people know who he is.
User avatar #652 to #642 - barbwirepain (10/20/2011) [-]
i ******* love Titus, he gets true comedy comes from tragedy. It's like what Mel Brooks once said. "I cut my finger. That's tragedy. A man walks into an open sewer and dies. That's comedy."
#669 to #652 - breasticles (10/21/2011) [-]
Titus is ******* awesome, but it kinda bums me when people are ignorant and don't know other comedians than a select few, like NO ONE at my school knows who Rita Rudner is either.
#621 - pakatsui (10/20/2011) [-]
**pakatsui rolled a random image**
my god
#687 to #621 - icedcarbon ONLINE (10/21/2011) [-]
Good roll! The people on that isolated place actually consider him as a god lol!
Good roll! The people on that isolated place actually consider him as a god lol!
User avatar #665 to #621 - neoexdeath ONLINE (10/21/2011) [-]
Well he's SOMEONES god...
User avatar #629 to #621 - mererightnow (10/20/2011) [-]
Oh look, it's Bob and Harold.
#620 - detectableninja (10/20/2011) [-]
How dare you refer to the great George Carlin as "this guy!"
#619 - zhooker has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #638 to #619 - jonbjsig (10/20/2011) [-]
What kind of extreme conservative Christian source do you get your information from???
User avatar #661 to #638 - zhooker (10/21/2011) [-]
Because of negative thumbs, I deleted the comment, bet lest ye misunderstand, let me expound upon what I hath previously stated. I would have hoped everyone would realize by the picture that I was trolling, but I guess not. I am a Christian, but I do educate myself from evolutionists, books on evolution ( by evolutionists I might add ) the above information is only partly true.
#626 to #619 - detectableninja (10/20/2011) [-]
What is this I don't even...

Where the hell do you get the idea that single celled organisms are more complex? Hello--the only thing prokaryotes have are ribosomes and one piece of DNA. Not only do we have billions and billions of cells, they are also all eukaryotic--which are far more complex.
#617 - thesadness (10/20/2011) [-]
Comment Picture
#613 - wincest (10/20/2011) [-]
**wincest rolled a random image**
**wincest rolled a random image**
#612 - hokiefan (10/20/2011) [-]
**hokiefan rolled a random image** and here is what i worship
#610 - squallllll (10/20/2011) [-]
Is there a funny trollgod comic?
 Friends (0)