deep down that's a real fear for most everyone. Including atheists. It seems that most (if not all) monotheists would not worship a God if not granted eternal life. Polytheists probably wouldn't pray to a water god if they didn't think it was going to grant them safe sea passage.
There are several rational arguments for a God of the universe that have been logically evaluated by the philosophers. They have been classified and categorized: Philosophical Arguments for the Existence of a Supreme Being The Teleological Argument The Cosmological Argument The Ontological Argument The Argument from Morality The Argument from Miracles The Argument from Religious Experience The Psychology of religion is a well studied and developing science in the field of cognitive development. It's come a long way since Sigmund Freud's sexuality-driven theories.
A psychopath will do anything to fulfil his needs coming from the Id. The rest of us have a conscience that governs over the Id. Hence, we don't rob a bank when we need money or kill a person when we get angry. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Swarm said: On the one hand you say matter/energy can be neither created or destroyed. On the otherhand The majority scientific view says matter/energy, space and time have only existed as long as the universe has existed. Before the universe existed, where was matter and energy? How could either of them exist without space or time?
the millions of Jews supposedly wander around in the desert for 40 years... in a area the size of Vermont...... and you look to them for directions ...lol.....jews,muslims xian.. . still lost in the fucking desert
Scientists ignore the first law as well because it is irrelevant to the origin of the universe. The origin of the universe doesn't fit any of the laws of physics as we know them. On the otherhand the law of excluded middle says every effect must have a cause, and proves the universe was "created" by a foundational cause that is outside of the universe. No scientist worth his salt would argue this point. The laws of science exist by the laws of logic which govern them.
oxymoronic. People don't expect an evolutionary reward for sending out hunger relief to another part of the world. They do it to reduce human suffering.
Even if they exactly cancel, it took something to separate them, and in the process of cancellation something must be lost. Otherwise you have a perpetual motion machine, and that's impossible in a natural universe. Sorry -- no free lunch.
“ Helping one another is a selfish act that has evolutionary rewards. ” Not expecting a reward & doing it to reduce human suffering do not contradict the statement you quote.
ok so If I see you drowning and I rescue you, I'm being selfish. If I just let you drown, then I'm being selfish. If I call 911 so someone else can rescue you, I'm being selfish. If I throw you a boat anchor, I'm being selfish. This is a logical fallacy, because it begs the question: What distinguishes a selfish motive from an unselfish motive? :shrug:
People know that there could be a time when you yourself need to be saved from drowning, or you need someone to call 911, so altruism has become a value codified in common morality.
Unselfish is an act that involves the destruction of self, such as throwing yourself on a grenade to save your friends, one that includes no possibility of reciprocation.
Interesting definition, Spider, but it sure as hell limits "unselfish acts", don't it?? And curiously, what would you say about that same man who jumped on the grenade to save his friends .....and the grenade was a dud? Was his act unselfish? Sorry, Spider, I think you're definition is far too limiting. Baron Max
What if they all fight each other to dive on the grenade? Is the selfish one the guy that gets killed? If they all get killed jumping on the grenade when only one had to die, were they all being selfish or unselfish?
http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/11/30/34-unconvincing-arguments-for-god/ point 34 says: point 29 says: Point 34 says something can't be created from nothing, but point 29 says it can. Am I reading this wrong?