Why?
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Log in or create an account to join the discussions on the Atheist Republic forums.
And you are still attempting the same distractions and changing the subject. And you are still wrong.
@Dave
LOL. Succinctly put!
Just ask yourself a few questions: Could you (qua life) exist without matter? How may matter express existence without your (life's) disquisition? (Current and retrospective)
@ quip
I am responding to your post ...
"We (life in general) are simply neccesary for existence itself."
And I pointed out that the universe existed billions of years before life appeared.
I understand that you are attempting to worm out of this post by injecting confusion and other topics. I will stay on topic and stick to what you said, despite your attempts to move the goal posts or change the subject.
You are still wrong.
@Dave
Yes, and so am I.
I'm simply expounding upon the initial statement. You don't seem to be following.
Well, that's a fine declaration though it fails to rebuke any premise. Focus on those two questions and show me where I err.
@ quip
"We (life in general) are simply neccesary for existence itself."
The universe existed billions of years before life appeared.
"And that is a conclusion necessarily affirmed by the experience of existence"
So you admit David's destruction of your claim is confirmed, good to know. You are also implying nothing exists if we don't experience it, that'll explain my atheism then, no more fruitlessly asking you god-botherers for evidence then.
"Life-less existence can never affirm itself."
The same as deities then, life less deities can never affirm itself. this explains why no one can demonstrate any evidence that any deity affirms anything.
@Sheldon
No and no implication required, the capacity of existence itself remains null sans the experience of it.
Just how many times must David point out the universe existed for billions of years before humans evolved to experience it? As he has said you are shamelessly trying to distort your original claim and shift the goal posts, but your claim is there for all to see.
Still not one shred of objective evidence that a deity exists, or that life was created, or that there is an over arching purpose for life.
Your why question remains specious in light of this.
@Sheldon
Meh, more unappraised posturing....
STILL beating the drum of that old trope?
Here, I'll revist those two questions for you two once again:
By whatever means DON'T ponder them..don't even allow them purchase in your mind lest they may infectiously germinate!
Good luck.
12 pages of trolling, and now all you have is "meh", do try and offer something cogent for a change.
http://www.atheistrepublic.com/forums/debate-room/why-0?page=11#comment-...
Sorry for interrupting David.
@ satirical wiseass (an actual synonym for "quip" in my thesaurus program)
This is a statement I made in an essay answer I wrote in a "celestial mechanics" test from quite some time ago.
"At least one planet must have developed intelligent life, else the question is moot."
The question?
Can there be other life in the universe?
Notice in my answer I DID NOT say "created" intelligent life. My use of the word "developed" implies the Theory of Evolution. Except of course in that tiny little prejudiced mind of yours.
There is no "why." There is. Or, there is not.
rmfr
Sooooo.... In trying to wrap my head around this, quip is claiming the only reason the universe exists is because we humans are here to experience it???.... *scratching head*.... Ummmm, so does that mean the universe will suddenly go *POOF!* and disappear the day our sun stops working and Mankind becomes extinct? (Assuming, of course, Mankind is actually still around by the time that happens.)
I can hear the universe now....
"Phew! Thank GOD! Those annoying-ass humans are FINALLY gone! Okay, boys, wrap it up! No need for a universe anymore. We're shutting down! After all these billions of years I FINALLY get a vacation."
@tin
BINGO! ...we have a winner. Kind of....change 'humans' to 'life in general'
No need for it to go *POOF*...the concept of existence itself would go *POOF*.
@ Squidling
Oh, do stop. This tedious rewriting of basic buddhist riddles/meditation aids is really tiresome. Get on with sweeping the garden and contemplating the moss child. You are very annoying.
WHOA!!!... *shaking head vigorously*... Whoa, whoa, whoa! I just had a doozie of a thought that about blew my mind! (What little I have left, that is.) Try to follow me on this....
So, if we (humans) are required to be here to experience the universe in order for the universe to exist, then what the holy fiddle-faddle happens to my HOUSE when I leave to go to the store and there is nobody left at home to experience it??? Where does it go? And at what point does it decide to return as I am on my way home? This is a disturbing realization, folks. I may not even sleep tonight. What if my house goes into another dimension and another family lives in it until I get back? That's just creepy.... *shudder*... Although, that DOES explain a couple of times when I returned home and discovered that everything we owned had been taken, but then replaced with an exact duplicate. Oh, dear... *nervously wringing hands*.... *distressed look on face*...
Another subjective claim. Evidence supplied = nada. This is not introspection, it's an exercise in mental masturbation and massaging your ego.
The universe as David pointed out is over 14 billion years old, humans in their current form approximately a couple of hundred thousand. This makes your subjective unevidenced claim absurd.
@Sheldon
Another out-of-hand dismissive assertion from Sheldon!?
It's plainly logical. You're a smart guy...are you familiar with the notions of a "necessary condition" and a "sufficient condition" and the differences between the two?
It's astounding isn't it, quip is actually claiming the universe is here because he experiences it, and better still that this represents objective evidence that there is a reason for human existence. It's painfully sad to see this kind of verbiage trumpeted as objective logic.
@Sheldon
Well no, It not just me it's all of being...including you.
Stop selling yourself short. Start thinking more holistically and less ego-centrically.
And yes, it is astounding.
So if I close my eyes you will go away? It it possible you exist only because I come to this atheist web site? If i turn my computer off, you will pop out of existence?
Geez, if I was 20 I would be asking what wonderful drugs you are taking. Your insanity would be comedic, if it was not so freaking stupid.
"We (life in general) are simply neccesary for existence itself."
Oh my fucking god, get a spellchecker, and this is a subjective claim, not objective evidence.
"To be extant IS the very subjective experience of it."
If you say so, but again this a subjective claim about subjective experience, it is not objective evidence. it seems like gibberish to me if I'm honest.
"That's the best demonstration of objective evidence logic may draw."
You haven't demonstrated any objective evidence, just made two subjective unevidenced claims. Your grasp of what represents 'logic' is high;y dubious. No one can base objective belief on this kind of desperate subjective verbiage, and just how it evidences a deity is not even hinted at?
This is just a spin on the "if a tree fell in the woods and no one heard it, did the tree fall?" mumbo jumbo.
But we can investigate by the evidence. If I am walking through the woods and encountered a fallen tree, based on the method on how trees grow, the splintered wood, and many other items of evidence, we can reach the logical conclusion that the tree fell. And the same goes with the universe. We have evidence, and it comes from different scientific disciplines.
There is very compelling scientific evidence, such as the cosmic microwave background, which originated at the beginning of the big bang. It was predicted in the math many decades ago, and discovered in 1964.
This is not a matter of philosophy or a debate on perception. These are hard facts that lead to an incredibly high level of probability that our universe began 13.8 billion years ago.
Fact, and unless one can refute the big bang (and thus earn a Nobel and become one of the most famous persons of all time), quip does not have a rebuttal.
@Dave
The answer is not until someone noticed the existence of a downed tree and used the powers of reason to deduce that...it must have fell. (As you aptly described.)
Though I'm familiar with the ending: "Did it make a sound?" The answers is still similar.
Was the universe privy to these scientific facts prior to mankind's discovery of them?
You are certainly not separate from the environmental phenomenon you directly experience....why do you assume that deduced phenomena is separate from you?
@ quip
"We (life in general) are simply neccesary for existence itself."
The universe existed billions of years before life appeared.
We are not dealing with concepts, we are dealing with hard facts. One can imagine anything. But hard facts are just that, facts. One cannot alter facts by imagination.
For clarity I said quip's posts were "headache inducing" and as I said it was not meant literally. Of course I was using hyperbole, if I'd said his posts were vomit inducing, would anyone believe I was literally nauseated?
Let the trolls keep posting, as long as we dont bite and keep offering cogent responses I guarantee they'll get fed up.
There now I've shown my hand, and way too soon. At least quip knows he's on a hiding to nothing. Though I suspect his specious nonsense was drifting off target already.
Does anyone really think I don't recognise trolling? From someone who opens with the idea he's both a non believer and not a non believer?
Sheesh, that's a more disconcerting than anything quip has said.
“To the dumb question "Why me?" the cosmos barely bothers to return the reply: why not?”
― Christopher Hitchens
@Sapporo
Nothing "barely" about it....except the attention we bother to give the reply.
Hey, quip!
Can you answer your own question?
"Why are YOU here?"
rmfr
Well, I see satirical wiseass (formerly quip) still cannot answer his own question.
Can we chalk this up as a complete victory?
rmfr
Why do I exist? Here are reasons which are independent of time, space, gender and race.
A) I really don't actually know.
B) To be courageous and learn and think about most everything.
C) To appreciate the wonder of nature.
D) To chose to be a part of an evolutionary process of survival and improvement of the species and the universe.
E) To be kind to and respectful of others.
F) See A above.
Pages