₦airaland Forum

Steep:
you took my words out of context. understand context is key.

Harming someone is only right if it is just in which case it is not subjective.
Understand that justice is part of morality meaning if someone trys to harm another or harms another then that person has lost his or her right not to be harmed because everyone is made by God.
Atheism allows no such, if there is no God then justice is meaningless.

For example not Harming innocent person is objective morality, self defense is objective, the onus lies on context not subjective
So morality is ultimately not subjective but objective.

Is a baby innocent?

Steep:
defending yourself is not wrong.
When I said not harming anyone I mean going out of your way to cause harm to anyone.

Then harming someone is not universally wrong. If there is any situation in which something you would have said to be morally wrong turns out to be morally right then that action cannot be UNIVERSALLY morally wrong. If I save your life by lying am I morally wrong?

Steep:
I have not said morality is subjective, it is you that said so, don't try to spin it.
According to you rape can be good it all depends on peoples choice.

Steep:
So according to rape rape can be a good thing? Right

Nope according to you

Steep:
If God says rape is good then it will be good.

Steep:
It means universal rights and wrongs.

There is no such thing. Even your god is not purportedly recorded as acting by such a standard.

Steep:
So rape can be morally good according to you?

No according to you rape can be morally good if your god says it is morally good,

Steep:
If God make rape to be a good thing then rape becomes good, ultimately without God no basis for morality.

what is the basis of morality as an atheist?
But free will does not exist in the atheistic world view.

Exactly why I said even your so called objective morality is subjective, your god is who you think decides what is morally good or bad.

The basis of my morality as an atheist is wellbeing.

Steep:
My world view is that God created everybody so doing harm to anybody is wrong universally, atheism has no room for this.

So doing harm to someone about to kill you is wrong?

Steep:
objective morality means what is wrong or right is not dependent on individual choice

All moral systems are subjective, even the one you think comes from your god.

Steep:
objective morality means what is wrong or right is not dependent on individual choice

So when the god is said to have killed the god wasn't being objectively moral?

Steep:
You cannot be an atheist and have an objective morality meaning morality values that is true to everyone regardless of region, tribe, race or gender?

Meaning you cannot say murder, lying, fraud, cheating, or any vice is objectively wrong but that does not mean that atheists are not moral only that they have no basis to say this or that is absolutely wrong.

Define objective morality.

ValeeLove:
you see, that's the problem. You can't believe what you don't know, so how do you ascertain he isn't a scammer. You claim you can't be scammed, but even the best of us can be. We only trust because we have to, not because we are a 100 % sure. This is where faith in God comes in; the Bible says he that comes to God must believe he exists and is a rewarder of those who deligently seek him. Bro, to KNOW God, you must first BELIEVE.

Still waiting for you to point out where I said I can't be scammed.

Lucifyre:
It's obvious u'r an atheist hence the combative and defensive nature of ur response. I said a lot but because of your defensive stance u ignored all context, zeroed in selectively with tunnel vision on what u didn't like, went on a tangent and basically missed all nuance. Respect for being civil though. So I'll try to explain better so u get my thought process again while addressing ur concerns.

First of, the quantify I used in describing then is "Many" and not "All".

You used all. See what you wrote:

Lucifyre:
Basically u're all close minded.

And how abd why did I reach that conclusion u ask?! Well, if u pick any arbitrary sample set of any category of anything (or most things to be safe), ud have more negative traits than positive traits. So for example if u pick school children, you have more non-intelligent children than intelligent children, if u pick a sample from the population, u have more non-beautiful people than beautiful people, if u pick open minded people, uld find more u reasonable ones than reasonable ones. Same applies to atheists, that combined with anecdotal evidence from dealing with em.

So if I pick any category and ask you to bring evidence that I will find more negatives than positives you can provide the data to back your assertion?

How does blanket attributing to a group of people a trait simply because some members of the group have that trait make sense? So if I call you a fraudster because some of your sex and age group has been a fraudster I would be correct?

Now for the rest of your concerns, I wanted to address them individually but saw it was pointless cause I already adresssed them in my previous comment. So its either u didn't read it(hence the earlier tunnel vision comment) or u read it with some serious bias. Either way read it again with an open mind..

Your post did not address any of the posers I gave which why I gave them in the first place. How does your post address why you think only one planet, in a universe that has billions of planets, has life. You can quote the relevant part of your post.

Lucifyre:
Ok.
"Only a fool says there's no God"

I recently began to really respect this statement. As it is today, nobody has definitve proof that'll appeal widely across board as objective fact that there is a God or there is none, so every view is obviously subjective. From my pov i know there is a God. If i really want to explain how i came to that conclusion i'ld write a lot way more than this. And i honestly don't really want to, cause i don't know if u'r close minded or open minded and can partake in an open healthy discussion.

Anyways one thing i'll point out is that u atheists are most times just as bad as religious folks/christains. Strong baseless opinions held as facts when not verifiable and unwilling to shift ground when presented with facts to the contrary. Basically u're all close minded.

So you came to the conclusion that all atheists are close minded even after expressing that you are yet to know if the person is close minded or not. Is this how you reach conclusions?

I think the answer to life is like a puzzle we are tryin to solve. Atheists and Christains(religious peeps), view the puzzle from one angle that stops them from viewing the whole concept of the puzzle and come to differing conclusions while viewing the puzzle from the same limited angle.

How can u solve the puzzle when ure not viewing from a good unlimited angle that shows the whole concept of the puzzle before you come to a logical conclusion. U guys have not even gotten the complete peices of the puzzle but you claim to have solved it. Stop looking through religious lenses only for proof of God. I didn't find my proof of God in the bible, i ironically found it in science. Understanding how the world works and how everything interacts with each other through science made me know there's definitely a God/Gods/Being/Energy.

Which scientific facts point to the existence of a god?

Releigion for me is simply a precursor to science. Basically how we explained the world before we got more answers through science to know how it really works. Life is really complex and if u view the whole complex system, its quite incomprehensible that this beautiful mad complex design doesn't have a designer. Space, planets, minerals, air, gas, the literal one in a million chance of how the earth exists and how the conditions are somehow favourable is not by accident if u look at the process by which it was formed. Living things and their body structures and how their bodies function, the food chain, the eco sytem, language, behaviors and traits of different species., the vast amount of varying species and how they all interact, music, language, the laws of nature and physics, shapes. How all these things interact is with one another is crazy and complex. Then Life and death.

Our universe contains billions of stars and planets Why do you think only 1 planet out of billions contains life?

All these can't just come out of nothing. Just like with all our advancements we've not been able to create a process to create something out of nothing. The system is far too complex to just start out on its own, coupled with the low probabilty of everything been just the right conditions and amount to happen. Instead of seeing this complex world as evidence, the athiests looks through the lenses of religion and sees its filled with man made flawed concepts and take it as evidence that a God like that can not exist. When it is most likely not an accurate depiction of God. God is most likely complex that we can't comprehend, sort of like time dilation and quantum mechanics are. We ubderstand but can't fully comprehend.

Which atheists told you the universe came from nothing?

Most of all those religious texts are filled with man made crap and i don't think its the true accurate depiction of God and what he wants.. Not discounting that there's some truth in there though. I believe, all religions, all psuedo religions, all sciences and all psuedo sciences hold pieces of this puzzle we trying to solve on the question of what is life? and the purpose of it?. The different religions are just trying to reach God and answer the question in thier own way. Science's answers the question with facts and evidences to get closer to the truth.

You acknowledge that the religious texts are full of crap so I wonder you think we need to pay any attention to what is obviously crap.

We are all seeking for answers and have been seeking for answers. We've got some answers but are still a million miles away from the truth. So anyone holding a stance based on about 4000 yrs of happenings according to religion, when the earth has existed for 4.5 billion or doesn't consider the vast complex world and its workings is a joker. Just be open minded bro that's all. My position on all these could change by next year as im always looking at new eveidences and learning everyday. So don't just be fixed. No one has all the answers.

Making up crap as answer because you are seeking answers is unjustified.

Steep:
God by definition is uncreated, you are illogical.

Why does the god get that definition? How do you know the god is uncreated?

sonmvayina:
Where is the firmament the bible spoke off?

And water above it...


Who has heard of the Van Allen belt?

So radiation is water or there is water in space?

Cekpo34:
Data from Think Tanks such as, Pew Research, shows that more Nigerians, especially the youths, are becoming atheists and agnostics as day passes by . However, it is not clear why this demography is growing. The dominant explanation has been the secularism thesis which assumes that the movement from the primitive sacred to modern secular is driven by science.

But Nigeria, in my opinion, is yet to attain the Comptian positive or scientific age for obvious reasons. Thus, secularism may not sufficiently explain the rising number of nonbelievers in Nigeria.

BIG QUESTIONS FOR ATHEISTS AND AGNOSTICS

1) How did you become a #NigerianAtheist or agnostic?

2) Where and when did it happen?

3) Why do you think that decision is, presently, justified?

Please share your story and enlighten others.

Caveat: your response will provide primary data for an ongoing research. You, through your moniker, will be acknowledged.

I think that the challenge by someone to examine my beliefs at the time was what lead me to atheism. When I was still held a belief in a god I was very critical of other competing beliefs. The challenge caused me to examine my beliefs with the same level of critical thinking, lo and behold my beliefs did not hold up to the scrutiny. I think many people are subconsciously aware that their beliefs will wilt under rigorous scrutiny so they try to shield those beliefs.

It happened at a time when things where looking up for me and I had every reason to believe that all the positive outcomes were a result of divine favour. I was in my office and then I decided to apply critical thinking to my beliefs to settle the matter. I emerged from that exercise without belief in a god. It felt weirdly liberating, as if all fear disappeared and an immense relief came over me. And to be candid my life has not changed dramatically except for internally that belief in a god is gone.

I think my lack of faith continues to be justified because many of my previously held beliefs have shown to be easily dispelled during my period of deconstruction. Right now I am pretty much at peace with my lack of faith, it feels way less internally disconcerting and way more internally peacefully not to have those beliefs.

kkins25:
Oh somy you haven't seen water curve on a sphere both you have raindrops and can produce water droplets with spherical shape here on earth. 💦💦💦
N
Haiyaaaaaa... Closed Antarctica system....

What have you been digesting?

All the bad fiction he can find it seems.

Flat earthers tried to prove a flat earth with lasers and ended up proving curvature. Another set tried with a gyroscope and proved the earth was indeed rotating.

Sonmvayina you are consuming and internalising bad content and it is showing.

budaatum:
He is being endarkened.

Seriously.

sonmvayina:
I like what I am discovering...

It is enlightening

Actually what is happening to you is the opposite of being enlightened.

Almiron:
Arnold Schwarzenegger says heaven is a ‘fantasy’: ‘Anyone that tells you something else is a f–king liar.



https://www.google.com/amp/s/nypost.com/2023/06/06/arnold-schwarzenegger-says-heaven-is-a-fantasy-we-wont-see-each-other-again/amp/

Yup. They don't know, they just hope that Heaven is real. Be like 419, buy house wey you go see unless you die first.

sonmvayina:
@correctguy101.
My knowledge that the earth is round and not spherical comes from my observation of the natural world. I went to visit my old class mate it Australia in 2016, and through out the flight we never experience any nose dive or curvatures. This can only happen on a flat surface.
Secondly I have also wondered how water curves on a sphere. We usually say water level because the seas and ocean are level.
And lastly the bible says the earth is round with a firmament above the earth and water above it. ...making the earth a closed system...there earth is surrounded by ice walls and beyond the ice walls there are lands....

No wonder a treaty was signed in 1957 that nobody should go to Antarctica. Because it is not a continent, it is the ice wall.

Dude you have gone too far down the rabbit hole. Turn back now before you get lost.

A001:
Natural and physical.

:Facepalm:

A001:
You said consciousness arises from physical phenomena, which I don't agree with. It is fundamental to the universe.

But you just admitted that the fundamental forces including consciousness are all physical!

A001:
Yes, both natural and physical. Natural because consciousness is embedded in the fabrics of the Universe even before the Big Bang, and physical because consciousness interacts with matter via sentons to produce physical processes.

Then why were you objecting before? Did I say consciousness was unnatural at any point?

A001:
They're natural and physical. Not only physical. Using the Big Bang model, a fundamental force like EM existed in the form of light during the inflationary stage before the physical world we know today came into being.

Fundamental consciousness is the same, too.

So fundamental consciousness is natural and physical.

A001:
The mind exists in the brain, which is the organ of consciousness in higher animals like humans. Thus, anything that affects the brain affects the mind as well.

Consciousness is a fundamental force and interacts with other fundamental forces, especially EM forces (via ions) in the brain. These interactions are mainly responsible for what we call the mind. Drugs affect the ions in the brain and therefore influence these interactions between the fundamental forces, including consciousness and EM, in the mind.

Are the fundamental forces physical or not?

A001:
I already said page 8 of the paper entitled "The Nature of Fundamental Consciousness". Just search for "dimension" in that paper.

I gave two links to that paper. Both of them are working at my end here.

OK I found it and I checked it. The author was listing POSSIBLE reasons why the senton is indistinguishable from a proton!

A001:
Okay, that's clarified.

That author is not saying consciousness is a PHYSICAL phenomenon. No, he calls consciousness a natural phenomenon in his papers. That's better and more reasonable because other dimensions or realms not physical may exist in nature and his proposition will also be applicable there if sentons are confirmed to exist experimentally.

By the way, he proposed that sentons are force particles or bosons that may have no mass and could be photons operating in other dimensions (check page 8 of the paper you said its link isn't working).

The author totally is and states it in the Pg 3 quote I gave. Furthermore when explaining what could be happen in on pg 4, lays out likely interactions between sentonically charged particles and the brain.

Point out on what page the author says sentons are not in the physical realm or dimension.

How can I check something that is not working?

A001:
You said physical elements in your original post. You do know what we call elements in Physics, I suppose.

You know in science, we use exact terms, not ambiguous words which I believe an enlightened person like you understand. Fundamental particles aren't physical elements.

I made mention of the bosons called sentons here already and that the mind is an emergent property.

It's all laid out in the STFC and FLA models in the previous pages.

You're merely repeating what I've already stated here.

Are you kidding? Fundamental particles are physical. You guys get so hung up on such trivialities its amazing. You getting hung up on my colloquial use of element as if you you don't understand what I am trying to say. The proposed sentons are PHYSICAL of course I know they are not elements in the precise meaning of the word scientifically. I called them fundamental particles didn't I. Oh Andromeda.

I was trying to point out that this paper is not supporting the position that mind and body are of a dual nature. If sentons exist and are bosons then consciousness is a PHYSICAL phenomenon.

Dtruthspeaker:
Now the world remembers that you are still a devil.

Dtruthspeaker:
Nobody shows power to dead people.

You are contradicting yourself. LMFAO!

Dtruthspeaker:
Who removes cancer from a dead body? Na fire go chop everything.

LMAO! You people and your fake powers that always needs an excuse. Bwahahahahaha!