cdave: (Default)
Anyone free this evening? I've now got 2 spare tickets to Nine lessons & carols for Godless People tonight at the Bloomsbury (Euston).

Come see if Johnny Ball overruns denying climate change again!
cdave: (Default)
[ profile] andrewducker's hosting another conversation on the nature of changing belief. Well trying to. I hijaked one thread to argue for Agnosticism again. I wasn't joking when I set my religion to "Evangelical Strong Agnostic" of facebook. (I am somewhat tongue in cheek now having set it to match an equivalent from one of [ profile] paulcornell2's stories)

There's a couple of famous arguements for Atheism: {ETA not Agnostism}

Bertrand Russell uses the example of the celestial teapot. He argues that although it is impossible to know that the teapot does not exist, most people would not believe in it.

I often argue against strong atheism. For instance the argument that you can assert anything, even the existance a teapot orbiting the Sun too far away to see with a telescope. Or: "I am an agnostic only to the extent that I am agnostic about fairies at the bottom of the garden." Richard Dawkins

Both of those things, are things I'm happy to assign negligible probabilities of existence.

Gardens are seen all the time, and there is not the slightest evidence of fairies. While it may be argued that it's impossible to prove a negative (as I have done previously), I'm happy enough to say that the overwhelming lack of evidence is enough that on the balance of probability I don't beleive in fairies. [ profile] cdave claps his hands.

The contents of solar space on the other hand is not so thoroughly known. However there's no reasonable way an implicitly human made teapot could placed into a solar orbit without more finance that I be prepared to believe would be spent in secret on such a daft project. {ETA} Therefore I believe that such a teapot does not exist, although I cannot prove it.

However as most gods are defined, there's not a similar argument that can be made. Their existence is beyond the realms human experience, so cannot logically be dismissed {ETA} as their existence would be beyond our experience.
cdave: (Default)
Owing to being really busy at work, and (when I get out on time) in the evenings, I've not posted much recently. So here's my current list of things I don't have time to do justice to:

  • Dating
    • Having seen a couple of people point to a flawed article on dating amongst other things has made me want to try and write an Introspection post on the topic, so I can get my own head around my own thoughts on it.
  • RaceFail '09
    • I've spent many hours I don't have to spare reading up on the past three of months this fandom wide argument, and come to the conclusion that I don't have anything useful I could say.
    • I may or may not keep reading, but given that you would find it hard it hard to tell if I had, lets not worry.
  • Avenue Q
    • Went to go see this at the weekend with Dad. Very good.
    • Particularity enjoyed the song "Everyone's a little bit racist".
    • For some reason I got tunes from The Little Mermaid stuck in my head afterwards.
      • What is the correct way to include A Title in a sentence about "a title"?
  • Images

    • New Shelves (from Islington Council's version of freecycle)
      • Photobucket
        How do I get in my room now?

      • Photobucket
        I just put these up, how are they full already?
      • Also: That's a lot of cr*p on my door too. Time to clear that down.
    • "Northern Irish" flag

      • Remember that artsy new flag for Northern Ireland?
        Well over the weekend it got caught in the string, and today seems to have been torn in half. Nature causing art to imitate life?
  • My Mad war with [ profile] chiller
  • A repost from my Facebook wall explaining why I was explaining maths to Jehovah's Witnesses
    • Gödel's incompleteness theorem is a mathematical proof that in any sufficiently complex system of arithmetic, there will statements that you cannot prove as true or false.

      E.g. Tell me if the sentence on the next line is true or false:
      This sentence is false.

      You can assume the statement is true and develop a whole branch of maths off of that. Or you can assume it is false and develop a whole different branch of maths.

      This is what I personally believe about God. The question is undecidable. You can form a coherent set of beliefs starting from the assumption that there is a deity/pantheon of some sort. You can form a coherent set of beliefs starting from the assumption that there is no God. But since it's not provable either way this seems like a waste of time.

      This is why my religion on Facebook is Evangelical (I like telling people this) Strong Agnostic (I believe you cannot disprove a god).

  • Meta post
    • Given how little time I seem to have to blog I wanted to take a look at why I do again. Culminating in a poll asking you to pick one of my tags: Diary, Link, Introspection, Reveiws.

    • Ironically, I don't have time for this.
cdave: (Default)
"The Scout Association has been reported to the equality watchdog for allegedly discriminating against atheists by making them swear an oath to God."

Well it seems I was well ahead of times then.

I remember I was having doubts about Christianity when I joined Scouts, and asked if I had to swear an oath to "do my duty" to something I wasn't sure I believed in any more. They pointed out that the God mentioned is not explicitly the Christian God, so I could swear to what ever deity I wanted. When I said it was the whole God thing I had problems with, I was told that basically there is no alternative version, and if I wanted my woggle I'd have to swear the oath. So I did.

I don't think I would/could now.
cdave: (Brains)
Come my child, flip Jesus's switch.

Then Repent to iGod.
I think he's related to Alice, and Eliza.

Forwarded by the sibling

Agnostics are just atheists without the courage of their convictions: A rebuttal..

I consider myself to be a strong agnostic. I believe that there's no way to dis-prove a gods' existence. Therefore Atheism, as a belief that there is no such thing, simply isn't justified. But at the same time I cannot envision a set of circumstances that would lead me to beleive in a god. Essentially I think religion's are pretty much a moot point.

Having said that I can accept that others have had experiences that lead them to have a different belief structure to my own. I've just yet to hear one that's come anywhere near impacting me.


Dec. 19th, 2007 05:15 pm
cdave: (Default)
I've missed the first day of Agnostica, "the only truly secular winter celebration". but I'm not too late to participate in the global Random Bag of fun. I missed last year, but I've participated in the previous two. It's great. Slightly geeky gifts for all!

Macroeconomic effects (such as recession, and recoveries) in a 1970's babysitter's co-op.
seen at [ profile] major_clanger's moonbase.

Teach your geeklet to read with Cthulhu.
Illustrated by Erica Hhenderson

And finally a rather nifty recipe for Lemonade. I wonder if it works mulled?


cdave: (Default)

May 2017

 123 456


RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 26th, 2017 12:11 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios