Author Topic: Lesser Agent Can't Conceive of a Greater One?  (Read 3007 times)

Jack Knave

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8717
Lesser Agent Can't Conceive of a Greater One?
« on: December 08, 2015, 08:02:02 PM »
I'll just throw this argument for God into the arena.

In Descartes Cogito ergo sum his reason for believing in God was based on a supposedly necessary principle to the effect that the lesser cannot give rise to, or be the cause of, the greater. So because we can conceive of God, and God is taken to be greater than us and thus beyond our capacity to conceive of It, the only way that such an idea could enter our minds is by God placing it there in the first instance.

What arguments would the non believers give for showing this to be a bad reason for believing in God.
« Last Edit: December 16, 2015, 12:28:19 PM by Jack Knave »

Shaker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12309
Re: Lesser Agent Can't Conceive of a Greater One?
« Reply #1 on: December 08, 2015, 09:01:30 PM »
Define 'lesser.' In what sense? In physical size? That's patent balls; electrons, protons and neutrons give rise to human beings. And mountains. And planets. And stars. And galaxies. So it can't be that. In power? That happens all the time too, so it can't be that.

The phrase 'God is taken to be greater than us' is the weak link in the chain. It's the ontological argument isn't it - assertion by definition - and is as specious as it ever was. You can magic anything into "existence" by defining it to exist; unfortunately the universe doesn't actually operate like that. Saying that we could only have the idea of God if there's actually a God to implant the idea of God is one of the best - or worst, depending on your viewpoint - examples of begging the question/circular reasoning/petitio principii going. I hope they put this sort of thing into undergraduate philosophy textbooks these days; I'd be horrified if anyone who has gone through years of training to become in effect a professional clear thinker thinks this is a valid argument.
« Last Edit: December 08, 2015, 09:38:04 PM by Shaker »
Confucius say: only when mosquito land on testicles does man learn to solve problem without violence.

Hope

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 25590
    • Tools With A Mission
Re: Lesser Agent Can't Conceive of a Greater One?
« Reply #2 on: December 08, 2015, 10:16:13 PM »
Define 'lesser.' In what sense? In physical size? That's patent balls; electrons, protons and neutrons give rise to human beings. And mountains. And planets. And stars. And galaxies. So it can't be that. In power? That happens all the time too, so it can't be that.
But electrons, protons and neutrons aren't human beings or mountains, planets or universes, Shakes.  They are component parts of said things.  Andd the term component part can be used synonymously with lesser.  It isn't a judgement of value of importance,; but usually relates to scale.  In the same way that a human being isn't a society, but without a human being a society can't exist.

Quote
The phrase 'God is taken to be greater than us' is the weak link in the chain.
And how might that be? Using my explanation above, God may well exist, but without the natural world that he created what does that existence consist of?  To refer to a post I made earlier and 'purpose' on another thread, the Bible suggests that the natural world was made to enjoy existence with God.

Quote
It's the ontological argument isn't it - assertion by definition - and is as specious as it ever was.
Only if you want it to bean ontological argument.

Quote
You can magic anything into "existence" by defining it to exist; unfortunately the universe doesn't actually operate like that.
Doesn't it?  What about the Big Bang?  Isn't that 'magicing' something into existence?  If not, how did the process start otherwise? 

Quote
Saying that we could only have the idea of God if there's actually a God to implant the idea of God is one of the best - or worst, depending on your viewpoint - examples of begging the question/circular reasoning/petitio principii going
Is that why science has come up with the Big bang Theory?  After all, it is no different to existence being conjured out of nothing.

Quote
I hope they put this sort of thing into undergraduate philosophy textbooks these days; I'd be horrified if anyone who has gone through years of training to become in effect a professional clear thinker thinks this is a valid argument.
You are very good at conjuring 'valid' arguments out of very little, Shakes.  What makes you any better than anyone else?
Are your, or your friends'/relatives', garages, lofts or sheds full of unused DIY gear, sewing/knitting machines or fabric and haberdashery stuff?

Lists of what is needed and a search engine to find your nearest collector (scroll to bottom for latter) are here:  http://www.twam.uk/donate-tools

Emergence-The Musical

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18371
  • Science is a tool.
Re: Lesser Agent Can't Conceive of a Greater One?
« Reply #3 on: December 08, 2015, 10:16:35 PM »
Define 'lesser.' In what sense? In physical size? That's patent balls; electrons, protons and neutrons give rise to human beings. And mountains. And planets. And stars. And galaxies. So it can't be that. In power? That happens all the time too, so it can't be that.

The phrase 'God is taken to be greater than us' is the weak link in the chain. It's the ontological argument isn't it - assertion by definition - and is as specious as it ever was. You can magic anything into "existence" by defining it to exist; unfortunately the universe doesn't actually operate like that. Saying that we could only have the idea of God if there's actually a God to implant the idea of God is one of the best - or worst, depending on your viewpoint - examples of begging the question/circular reasoning/petitio principii going. I hope they put this sort of thing into undergraduate philosophy textbooks these days; I'd be horrified if anyone who has gone through years of training to become in effect a professional clear thinker thinks this is a valid argument.
I was interested in your notion of an argument where God implants the idea of God in us,. I'm not sure how this can be somehow more circular than the argument for materialism or naturalism.

What fascinates me though is the idea of perfection. Many atheists I have spoken to try to get rid of the idea of perfection stating that nothing can be perfect......that doesn't get rid of the idea of perfection but rather reinforces it.....I would have thought.
wwaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrgggghhhhhh.......I FEAST on Sh*te New Atheist argument.

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20655
Re: Lesser Agent Can't Conceive of a Greater One?
« Reply #4 on: December 09, 2015, 07:43:49 AM »
Which atheists say nothing can be perfect? Can you define perfection? Can perfection change, create, bring about imperfection?

Shaker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12309
Re: Lesser Agent Can't Conceive of a Greater One?
« Reply #5 on: December 09, 2015, 09:16:51 AM »
But electrons, protons and neutrons aren't human beings or mountains, planets or universes, Shakes.  They are component parts of said things.  Andd the term component part can be used synonymously with lesser.  It isn't a judgement of value of importance,; but usually relates to scale.  In the same way that a human being isn't a society, but without a human being a society can't exist.
This is just a restatement of everything I'd already said.
Quote
And how might that be? Using my explanation above, God may well exist, but without the natural world that he created what does that existence consist of?  To refer to a post I made earlier and 'purpose' on another thread, the Bible suggests that the natural world was made to enjoy existence with God.
Do you not think then that this god of yours could/would exist without the natural world? As far as I can see the natural world (I assume you mean a universe of matter-energy) exists perfectly well without any gods.

Quote
Doesn't it?  What about the Big Bang?  Isn't that 'magicing' something into existence?  If not, how did the process start otherwise?
Don't know. It's one of those many, many things where the phrase "Currently unknown - need more data" applies. "I don't know" is a perfectly valid response until more facts become available; filling the gaps with any old nonsense isn't.
Quote
Is that why science has come up with the Big bang Theory?  After all, it is no different to existence being conjured out of nothing.
Science "came up with" the BBT for precisely the same reason as other theories are born: as over-arching umbrellas under which are gathered together disparate observations which are explained by the theory.
Quote
You are very good at conjuring 'valid' arguments out of very little, Shakes.  What makes you any better than anyone else?
I know a shitty, fallacy-riddled non-argument when I see one, as many here - you included - do not.
« Last Edit: December 09, 2015, 09:22:56 AM by Shaker »
Confucius say: only when mosquito land on testicles does man learn to solve problem without violence.

Outrider

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10857
Re: Lesser Agent Can't Conceive of a Greater One?
« Reply #6 on: December 09, 2015, 09:23:33 AM »
But electrons, protons and neutrons aren't human beings or mountains, planets or universes, Shakes.  They are component parts of said things.

And gods are a concept created by the component thoughts of human communities. Peope's thoughts are component parts of the idea god; as yet, that's all gods have been shown to be, an idea.

Quote
And the term component part can be used synonymously with lesser.  It isn't a judgement of value of importance,; but usually relates to scale.  In the same way that a human being isn't a society, but without a human being a society can't exist.

Which suggests that without humanity, god can't exist... and if we can exist without gods, but gods can't exist without us, how can gods be considered 'greater'? In scale, you say, fine, but as some sort of claim of 'worth' or something?

Quote
Doesn't it?  What about the Big Bang?  Isn't that 'magicing' something into existence?  If not, how did the process start otherwise?

The big bang is a conclusion from the available evidence. How it started is something that we currently don't have sufficient evidence to determine, though there are some hypotheses out there.

We don't presume there's a universe because we've decided it must be, we presume there's a universe because we can reach out and touch it, breathe it in, look at its expanse through telescopes.

Quote
Is that why science has come up with the Big bang Theory?

Again, the Big Bang theory is an explanation for the available evidence. All objects in the universe are moving away from each other, which means that at some point in the distant past they were all in close proximity. Deduction from that produced the notion of a 'Big Bang', with associated predicted phenomena which subsequent tests and experiments have verified. We have the Big Bang theory because that's where the evidence has taken us.

Quote
After all, it is no different to existence being conjured out of nothing.

No, it's very different: you go from evidence of the existence through examination of that evidence to deduce from it a predicted model of how it came to be. By contrast, with gods, you are deciding there is a god and then attempting purely linguistic assertions to try to demonstrate that it 'must' be the case. The methodology is the difference: you are trying to justify claiming something for which there is no evidence, the big bang tries to explain something for which there is ample evidence.

O.
Universes are forever, not just for creation...

New Atheism - because, apparently, there's a use-by date on unanswered questions.

Eminent Pedant, Interpreter of Heretical Writings, Unwarranted Harvester of Trite Nomenclature, Church of Debatable Saints

Outrider

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10857
Re: Lesser Agent Can't Conceive of a Greater One?
« Reply #7 on: December 09, 2015, 09:26:40 AM »
I was interested in your notion of an argument where God implants the idea of God in us,. I'm not sure how this can be somehow more circular than the argument for materialism or naturalism.

Reach out and touch god. Demonstrate a methodology for measuring god. Then do the same for material.

That's why there's a qualitative difference.

Quote
What fascinates me though is the idea of perfection. Many atheists I have spoken to try to get rid of the idea of perfection stating that nothing can be perfect......that doesn't get rid of the idea of perfection but rather reinforces it.....I would have thought.

Perfect is situational, and subjective. One of the ontological arguments rests on the idea that an 'actual' god must be better than an imagined one, and therefore because you've defined god as the greatest thing imaginable it must be real: forgetting, for a moment, that your definition could be wrong, it's a subjective opinion on whether an actual god is better than an imaginary one, and it depends on the circumstances you're considering.

O.
Universes are forever, not just for creation...

New Atheism - because, apparently, there's a use-by date on unanswered questions.

Eminent Pedant, Interpreter of Heretical Writings, Unwarranted Harvester of Trite Nomenclature, Church of Debatable Saints

ProfessorDavey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7934
Re: Lesser Agent Can't Conceive of a Greater One?
« Reply #8 on: December 09, 2015, 09:28:18 AM »
I'll just through this argument for God into the arena.

In Descartes Cogito ergo sum his reason for believing in God was based on a supposedly necessary principle to the effect that the lesser cannot give rise to, or be the cause of, the greater. So because we can conceive of God, and God is taken to be greater than us and thus beyond our capacity to conceive of It, the only way that such an idea could enter our minds is by God placing it there in the first instance.

What arguments would the non believers give for showing this to be a bad reason for believing in God.
The main problem with the 'something complex must be created by something more complex' argument is it is totally self defeating - as everything would need to have been created by something more complex and that thing created by something more complex again and so on ad infinitum.

Shaker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12309
Re: Lesser Agent Can't Conceive of a Greater One?
« Reply #9 on: December 09, 2015, 09:34:50 AM »
The main problem with the 'something complex must be created by something more complex' argument is it is totally self defeating - as everything would need to have been created by something more complex and that thing created by something more complex again and so on ad infinitum.
The usual way out of this, of course, is to completely arbitrarily terminate the infinite regress at the point you want ;)
« Last Edit: December 09, 2015, 09:39:48 AM by Shaker »
Confucius say: only when mosquito land on testicles does man learn to solve problem without violence.

Gonnagle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10888
Re: Lesser Agent Can't Conceive of a Greater One?
« Reply #10 on: December 09, 2015, 09:40:22 AM »
Dear Jack,


 
Quote
the only way that such an idea could enter our minds is by God placing it there in the first instance.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1211511/Why-born-believe-God-Its-wired-brain-says-psychologist.html

Quote
His work is supported by other researchers who have found evidence linking religious feelings and experience to particular regions of the brain.
They suggest people are programmed to receive a feeling of spirituality from electrical activity in these areas.
The findings challenge atheists such as Richard Dawkins, the author of The God Delusion, who has long argued that religious beliefs result from poor education and childhood 'indoctrination'.
Professor Hood believes it is futile to try to get people to abandon their beliefs because these come from such a 'fundamental level'.
'Our research shows children have a natural, intuitive way of reasoning that leads them to all kinds of supernatural beliefs about how the world works,' he said.
'As they grow up they overlay these beliefs with more rational approaches but the tendency to illogical supernatural beliefs remains as religion.'

We are born believers, we are all religious, yes even atheists.

Gonnagle.

http://www.barnardos.org.uk/shop/shop-search.htm

http://www.twam.uk/donate-tools

Go on make a difference, have a rummage in your attic or garage.

Shaker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12309
Re: Lesser Agent Can't Conceive of a Greater One?
« Reply #11 on: December 09, 2015, 09:43:07 AM »
Speak for yourself Gonners ;)
Confucius say: only when mosquito land on testicles does man learn to solve problem without violence.

BeRational

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7581
Re: Lesser Agent Can't Conceive of a Greater One?
« Reply #12 on: December 09, 2015, 09:55:28 AM »
I see gullible people, everywhere!

Outrider

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10857
Re: Lesser Agent Can't Conceive of a Greater One?
« Reply #13 on: December 09, 2015, 09:57:11 AM »
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1211511/Why-born-believe-God-Its-wired-brain-says-psychologist.html

Daily Mail story about science - I wonder whether this causes cancer or cures cancer this week? :)

Quote
His work is supported by other researchers who have found evidence linking religious feelings and experience to particular regions of the brain. They suggest people are programmed to receive a feeling of spirituality from electrical activity in these areas.
The findings challenge atheists such as Richard Dawkins, the author of The God Delusion, who has long argued that religious beliefs result from poor education and childhood 'indoctrination'.

It actually doesn't contradict the idea at all. Firstly, it can't, because the evidence of the negative correlation between education and religiosity is well-established and significant (Note: Professor Dawkins is at pains in several places to note that this correlation doesn't necessitate causation, and that it's equally likely that people will seek formal education in the absence of a sense of god.) Secondly, of course, we suppress any number of natural tendencies - the urge to violence, for instance - in the course of our everyday lives, and it's entirely plausible that formal education and actual understanding of thing would help in suppressing the activity of that part of the brain.

Quote
Professor Hood believes it is futile to try to get people to abandon their beliefs because these come from such a 'fundamental level'.

Indeed - methods of thinking are ingrained very early in the brain's development, which is why secularising education is such a hot-button topic.

Quote
'Our research shows children have a natural, intuitive way of reasoning that leads them to all kinds of supernatural beliefs about how the world works,' he said. 'As they grow up they overlay these beliefs with more rational approaches but the tendency to illogical supernatural beliefs remains as religion.'

Yep. The whole 'survival benefit' argument of false-positive presumptions of agency over false-negative presumptions of agency.

Quote
We are born believers, we are all religious, yes even atheists.

Not quite - we are born with a propensity to see patterns and presume deliberate agency within them. That tendency can lead to belief and religiosity, but it doesn't need to. We can't be born as believers because, when we're born, we have no idea there's anything out there to believe in.

And, of course, even if we believe that's no guarantee that we're right - just look at Liverpool supporters... :)

O.
Universes are forever, not just for creation...

New Atheism - because, apparently, there's a use-by date on unanswered questions.

Eminent Pedant, Interpreter of Heretical Writings, Unwarranted Harvester of Trite Nomenclature, Church of Debatable Saints

ekim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2503
Re: Lesser Agent Can't Conceive of a Greater One?
« Reply #14 on: December 09, 2015, 10:37:09 AM »
It could be that the concept of a god is used to fill in the gaps to explain the powerful forces which have confronted man and over which he had no control like Thor for lightening strikes, Vulcan for volcanoes, Neptune for sea surges, Sol for the sun god etc. and the need was to placate those gods or evoke their favours.  It gradually became unmanageable for the priesthood to manipulate the worshippers, that it was easier to have one god with absolute qualities which was inconceivable and unimaginable (perhaps why one of the Commandments advocated 'no images').  An anointed high priest could then position himself as the intermediary between the worshippers and a God who works in mysterious ways.

Gonnagle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10888
Re: Lesser Agent Can't Conceive of a Greater One?
« Reply #15 on: December 09, 2015, 10:52:37 AM »
Dear Outrider,

Okay! it is the daily wail and it can't help having a pop at Vlads favourite pin up boy.

Quote
It actually doesn't contradict the idea at all. Firstly, it can't, because the evidence of the negative correlation between education and religiosity is well-established and significant (Note: Professor Dawkins is at pains in several places to note that this correlation doesn't necessitate causation, and that it's equally likely that people will seek formal education in the absence of a sense of god.) Secondly, of course, we suppress any number of natural tendencies - the urge to violence, for instance - in the course of our everyday lives, and it's entirely plausible that formal education and actual understanding of thing would help in suppressing the activity of that part of the brain.

Sorry but I need help in understanding just what you are saying here.

Quote
because the evidence of the negative correlation between education and religiosity is well-established and significant

What!! what evidence?

Quote
and that it's equally likely that people will seek formal education in the absence of a sense of god.

What!! again.

Quote
in the course of our everyday lives, and it's entirely plausible that formal education and actual understanding of thing would help in suppressing the activity of that part of the brain.

Suppress, yes, but not eradicate ( we are born believers, okay not religious, calm down Berational )

Quote
we are born with a propensity to see patterns and presume deliberate agency within them.

Why, why are we born to see patterns.

Quote
We can't be born as believers because, when we're born, we have no idea there's anything out there to believe in.

No, we are born as believers, the ideas come later.

Gonnagle.
http://www.barnardos.org.uk/shop/shop-search.htm

http://www.twam.uk/donate-tools

Go on make a difference, have a rummage in your attic or garage.

Gonnagle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10888
Re: Lesser Agent Can't Conceive of a Greater One?
« Reply #16 on: December 09, 2015, 10:56:20 AM »
Dear ekim,

Quote
It could be that the concept of a god is used to fill in the gaps

That concept, where did that come from?

Gonnagle.
http://www.barnardos.org.uk/shop/shop-search.htm

http://www.twam.uk/donate-tools

Go on make a difference, have a rummage in your attic or garage.

Outrider

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10857
Re: Lesser Agent Can't Conceive of a Greater One?
« Reply #17 on: December 09, 2015, 11:11:17 AM »
Sorry but I need help in understanding just what you are saying here.

Ok, so there is plenty of data from various sources, accounting for social and economic effects, which shows that as formal educational achievement increases, so tendency towards religious belief decreases - 'smart people' (by one measure) are less likely to be religious. That's just a statement of the fact of the situation.

Some people have presumed that, therefore, education is a counter to religion, and that if we educate people better they'll be less likely be religious. Professor Dawins has gone on record as saying the data doesn't show that, but it's his personal opinion that he thinks that's at least part of the explanation.

It could be, though, that people who don't find religion look for something else - like education - to explain things. It could be that both effects are a product of something else - formally educated people, for instance, are more likely to be earning well, and that also correlates negatively with religiosity.

Quote
Suppress, yes, but not eradicate ( we are born believers, okay not religious, calm down Berational )

The tendency to see patterns will always be there - I think it's part of the reason that otherwise rational people who are against the idea of religious belief still hold to conspiracy theories about aliens, UFOs and vaccine-induced autism, or why people follow astrology or homeopathy.

Quote
Why, why are we born to see patterns.

One of humanity's ancestor species is in the long grass, and hear something rustling. If they recognise that rustling as possibly a predator, they flee: if they're wrong, they've run from nothing, if they're right they've run from death, and either way they live to have more children. If they don't recognise the rustling as possibly a predator, they don't run: if there isn't a predator, they live and if there is a predator, they die, so only some of them survive to have children. Over time, that pattern-recognition ability is selected for in the gene pool. (This is the 'Survival benefit of false-positive pattern recognition over false-negative pattern recognition').

O.
Universes are forever, not just for creation...

New Atheism - because, apparently, there's a use-by date on unanswered questions.

Eminent Pedant, Interpreter of Heretical Writings, Unwarranted Harvester of Trite Nomenclature, Church of Debatable Saints

Gonnagle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10888
Re: Lesser Agent Can't Conceive of a Greater One?
« Reply #18 on: December 09, 2015, 01:01:35 PM »
Dear Outrider,

Quote
Ok, so there is plenty of data from various sources, accounting for social and economic effects, which shows that as formal educational achievement increases, so tendency towards religious belief decreases - 'smart people' (by one measure) are less likely to be religious. That's just a statement of the fact of the situation.

Some people have presumed that, therefore, education is a counter to religion, and that if we educate people better they'll be less likely be religious. Professor Dawins has gone on record as saying the data doesn't show that, but it's his personal opinion that he thinks that's at least part of the explanation.

Ah right! well I can't argue with Prof Dawkins, I agree it is in least part, I think least is the operative word here, small, very small part of the explanation.

Economics is also a part of the explanation, chasing the dollar sign, we all do it.

Education, does it make you smart? make you intelligent, does educated mean intelligent?

I have to go winging all the way back to Prof Dawkin's, a very highly educated man, but intelligent, is a sign of intelligence, the ability to see both sides of the argument, the ability to walk a mile in another man's shoes?

I don't think we become less religious as we become more educated, education does lift you from one cycle into another, how we use that education, we replace one kind of religion for another, jumping out of aeroplanes with a bit of clothe strapped to your back, climbing mountains, shooting guns, football :o sport in general, anything that gives us a high, drugs, drink, this all comes from having a better economy.

Education is a very small part of why we turn our backs on God.

Gonnagle.
http://www.barnardos.org.uk/shop/shop-search.htm

http://www.twam.uk/donate-tools

Go on make a difference, have a rummage in your attic or garage.

wigginhall

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15858
Re: Lesser Agent Can't Conceive of a Greater One?
« Reply #19 on: December 09, 2015, 01:12:13 PM »
Just looking at the OP, another awful argument, which I doubt is taken seriously by anybody.  It's a kind of sleight of hand, which uses linguistic tricks (lesser/greater) to conjure something up.  I can imagine a giant, who is greater than me, but I haven't brought him into existence.

But nobody (as far as I'm aware) actually takes these arguments seriously, do they? 

one City, United, Love MCR!

wigginhall

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15858
Re: Lesser Agent Can't Conceive of a Greater One?
« Reply #20 on: December 09, 2015, 01:15:13 PM »
Dear Jack,


 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1211511/Why-born-believe-God-Its-wired-brain-says-psychologist.html

We are born believers, we are all religious, yes even atheists.

Gonnagle.

I think many people look for something beyond themselves.  For example, a lot of political ideas such as socialism have a kind of utopian aspect, which appeals to some.  Or some people find something in music or art, which takes them 'out of themselves'. 

And then there's football.   
one City, United, Love MCR!

Outrider

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10857
Re: Lesser Agent Can't Conceive of a Greater One?
« Reply #21 on: December 09, 2015, 01:16:13 PM »
Ah right! well I can't argue with Prof Dawkins, I agree it is in least part, I think least is the operative word here, small, very small part of the explanation.

I think, personally, that the modes of thought required to excel in factual regurgitation (which is, historically, the essence of formal education) and the modes of thought required to put faith in the unevidenced have very little cross-over.

Quote
Economics is also a part of the explanation, chasing the dollar sign, we all do it.

Economic situation presses strongly on educational achievement and religiosity, and although statisticians try to mitigate that influence when making their determinations, statistics tends to be subjective.

Quote
Education, does it make you smart? make you intelligent, does educated mean intelligent?

That's one that's been raised repeatedly, with this issue and in other places. Intelligence is a vaguely defined term, at best, and incredibly difficult to measure. When the correlation is reported, therefore, it's specifically formal educational achievement - some people will see that as indicative of intelligence, or at least one form of intelligence, that's why I tried to qualify the idea with 'at least by one measure'.

Quote
I have to go winging all the way back to Prof Dawkin's, a very highly educated man, but intelligent, is a sign of intelligence, the ability to see both sides of the argument, the ability to walk a mile in another man's shoes?

I'm pretty sure that, in the main, Professor Dawkins can see both sides of the argument, but that's because one of the sides doesn't really have an argument - they don't think in terms of 'arguments' and 'evidence', that's why they take things on faith. The likes of William Lane Craig and the deep-thinking theologians aren't typical of people of faith, they're in the crossover group capable of thinking both ways. As to which of those ways demonstrates 'intelligence' - who knows.

Regurgitating facts could be considered intelligence, or it could be redundant now that we have google. Seeing things from another point of view is considered by some to be part of 'emotional intelligence', but how intelligent is it to be able to understand the wrong answer - and some of them will be wrong. It's more important to understand that the people who have the 'wrong' answer aren't necessarily bad people because of that.

And walking that mile, that's not any sort of intelligence at all, that's empathy, compassion and plain old human decency - unfortunately, given that you can't measure it, and can't charge for it, it doesn't seem to get a let of attention from anyone these days.

Quote
I don't think we become less religious as we become more educated, education does lift you from one cycle into another, how we use that education, we replace one kind of religion for another, jumping out of aeroplanes with a bit of clothe strapped to your back, climbing mountains, shooting guns, football :o sport in general, anything that gives us a high, drugs, drink, this all comes from having a better economy.

Well, the evidence is against you - the more educated we become the less religious we become, in general. Which precedes the other, which causes the other, whether they're both caused by something else, that's a different issue.

If you want to 'redefine' religion as seeking the excesses of human experience fine, but I suspect most believers wouldn't recognise that any more than most non-believers would. Seeking some sort of 'fulfilment', that's something we all do, but I think religion is one particular way of doing it, not the whole of it.

O.

Education is a very small part of why we turn our backs on God.

Gonnagle.
[/quote]
Universes are forever, not just for creation...

New Atheism - because, apparently, there's a use-by date on unanswered questions.

Eminent Pedant, Interpreter of Heretical Writings, Unwarranted Harvester of Trite Nomenclature, Church of Debatable Saints

Gonnagle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10888
Re: Lesser Agent Can't Conceive of a Greater One?
« Reply #22 on: December 09, 2015, 02:00:42 PM »
Dear Outrider,

Quote
I think, personally, that the modes of thought required to excel in factual regurgitation (which is, historically, the essence of formal education) and the modes of thought required to put faith in the unevidenced have very little cross-over.

Factual regurgitation, I like it ;) well that's one of the reasons I dislike Dawkin's approach, he only regurgitates facts to back his case, for a more unbiased approach to theology ( which is not his subject ) I would say, read Armstrong, she gives all the facts, backed up by years of research, a very intelligent woman who does try to walk in another mans shoes, which I do think is a very intelligent thing to do, understanding another man's argument, his point, is a highly intelligent thing to do ( although walking a mile in an atheists shoe's, you don't give much away ).

Quote
Economic situation presses strongly on educational achievement and religiosity, and although statisticians try to mitigate that influence when making their determinations, statistics tends to be subjective.

No argument, the evidence is out there, the more economically we become the less we need Church, but that does not say anything about what we replace our religious feelings with, do we agree that we never totally rid ourselves of violent urges, we do suppress them, is it the same with our religious feelings.

Quote
That's one that's been raised repeatedly, with this issue and in other places. Intelligence is a vaguely defined term, at best, and incredibly difficult to measure. When the correlation is reported, therefore, it's specifically formal educational achievement - some people will see that as indicative of intelligence, or at least one form of intelligence, that's why I tried to qualify the idea with 'at least by one measure'.

No argument again, what makes a person intelligent, what is intelligence.

Quote
I'm pretty sure that, in the main, Professor Dawkins can see both sides of the argument, but that's because one of the sides doesn't really have an argument - they don't think in terms of 'arguments' and 'evidence', that's why they take things on faith. The likes of William Lane Craig and the deep-thinking theologians aren't typical of people of faith, they're in the crossover group capable of thinking both ways. As to which of those ways demonstrates 'intelligence' - who knows.

Regurgitating facts could be considered intelligence, or it could be redundant now that we have google. Seeing things from another point of view is considered by some to be part of 'emotional intelligence', but how intelligent is it to be able to understand the wrong answer - and some of them will be wrong. It's more important to understand that the people who have the 'wrong' answer aren't necessarily bad people because of that.

And walking that mile, that's not any sort of intelligence at all, that's empathy, compassion and plain old human decency - unfortunately, given that you can't measure it, and can't charge for it, it doesn't seem to get a let of attention from anyone these days.

I think I have covered this part of your post, only to say, don't mention WLC, leave him for when our Alan ( Alien returns ) ;)

Gonnagle.

http://www.barnardos.org.uk/shop/shop-search.htm

http://www.twam.uk/donate-tools

Go on make a difference, have a rummage in your attic or garage.

Hope

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 25590
    • Tools With A Mission
Re: Lesser Agent Can't Conceive of a Greater One?
« Reply #23 on: December 09, 2015, 02:15:39 PM »
And gods are a concept created by the component thoughts of human communities. Peope's thoughts are component parts of the idea god; as yet, that's all gods have been shown to be, an idea.
Do you have any evidence for this assertion, O?
Are your, or your friends'/relatives', garages, lofts or sheds full of unused DIY gear, sewing/knitting machines or fabric and haberdashery stuff?

Lists of what is needed and a search engine to find your nearest collector (scroll to bottom for latter) are here:  http://www.twam.uk/donate-tools

Hope

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 25590
    • Tools With A Mission
Re: Lesser Agent Can't Conceive of a Greater One?
« Reply #24 on: December 09, 2015, 02:17:22 PM »
This is just a restatement of everything I'd already said.
Havng readf your original post again, twice, I find this claim rather far-fetched, Shakjes.  It might be similar to what you wrote, but it actually extends and ultimately contradicts what you said
Are your, or your friends'/relatives', garages, lofts or sheds full of unused DIY gear, sewing/knitting machines or fabric and haberdashery stuff?

Lists of what is needed and a search engine to find your nearest collector (scroll to bottom for latter) are here:  http://www.twam.uk/donate-tools