42 ms·

> Do you have evidence that most people on Earth are involved in a volunteer activity that has no benefit for them in this life? I never claimed that, and sinc

> Do you have evidence that most people on Earth are involved in a volunteer activity that has no benefit for them in this life? I never claimed that, and since you responded to my request for evidence with a question implying that I hold a position I do not hold, I'll assume you have no evidence and dismiss your claim. > From the natural selection's point of view, it's true. From the point of view of one person, it isn't. Why? Natural selection is not a conscious entity and therefore cannot possibly have a point of view. And I feel that the benefits provided to me and my life, as I've previously described, make it rational for me to behave this way on an individual level. > This is a naive view of such entity. The world might be more complicated than this. For instance, some religions explain that it would not want you to know this, because you should have a free will and your own path to grow and not a path of a follower of a god. OK, let's break this down: the fact that there has never been any established scientific evidence for a creator means that those deities that are not described as remaining hidden are likely not to exist. For the others, if the claim is that the deity is well and truly hidden and there can never be evidence for their existence, then I feel it's rational to dismiss those claims, in kind, without evidence.

fsflover 3y ago
>> that most people (who do not have such instinct) will choose a different, more logical and beneficial, behavior. > Do you have evidence for any part of this statement? I do not understand which evidence you need. You yourself explained that your choice is the result of an instinct. I said that people who have no such instinct will behave differently. It's true by definition. Ok, the "most" part of my sentence is controversial. Maybe I'm wrong, but I definitely can't see a lot of volunteers in the world that behave counter to their own egoistic, logical goals. > And I feel that the benefits provided to me and my life, as I've previously described, make it rational for me to behave this way on an individual level. There are no benefits to you and your life. Prove otherwise. > there can never be evidence for their existence I never said this. You do not understand what all of this has to do with the meaning of Universe, because you fail to understand that, without it, there are no reasons to think long-term for each logical individual. You should explain where you find such reasons and I don't see that you could.
- angoragoats 3y ago
  > I never said this. I never claimed that you did, instead I was trying to categorize all god claims into one of two groups, and for each group give the reason why I don’t believe any claims that the deities in that group exist. > You do not understand what all of this has to do with the meaning of Universe, because you fail to understand that, without it, there are no reasons to think long-term for each logical individual. This is a claim and you should provide evidence for it rather than shifting the burden of proof to me.

fsflover 3y ago

>> that most people (who do not have such instinct) will choose a different, more logical and beneficial, behavior. > Do you have evidence for any part of this statement? I do not understand which evidence you need. You yourself explained that your choice is the result of an instinct. I said that people who have no such instinct will behave differently. It's true by definition. Ok, the "most" part of my sentence is controversial. Maybe I'm wrong, but I definitely can't see a lot of volunteers in the world that behave counter to their own egoistic, logical goals. > And I feel that the benefits provided to me and my life, as I've previously described, make it rational for me to behave this way on an individual level. There are no benefits to you and your life. Prove otherwise. > there can never be evidence for their existence I never said this. You do not understand what all of this has to do with the meaning of Universe, because you fail to understand that, without it, there are no reasons to think long-term for each logical individual. You should explain where you find such reasons and I don't see that you could.

angoragoats 3y ago
> I never said this. I never claimed that you did, instead I was trying to categorize all god claims into one of two groups, and for each group give the reason why I don’t believe any claims that the deities in that group exist. > You do not understand what all of this has to do with the meaning of Universe, because you fail to understand that, without it, there are no reasons to think long-term for each logical individual. This is a claim and you should provide evidence for it rather than shifting the burden of proof to me.