xSilverPhinx Posted May 7, 2011 Share Posted May 7, 2011 This is a topic I find interesting. I personally don't see as much of a causal relationship between intelligence and beliefs or lack of beliefs in god(s) that studies like that want to suggest. Also, I have my doubts on just how broad an intelligence IQ tests can measure besides the logical, mathematical, linguistic and spatial abilities. Also, I'm curious to know based on what do the people who have stated that they they consider the most intelligent people they've met to be theists. Based on what is that assumption made? IQ score? Perceived wisdom or common sense? I think there might be a higher tendency for atheists to be better critical thinkers than theists and that those who engage in magical thinking reach less pragmatical outcomes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xSilverPhinx Posted May 7, 2011 Share Posted May 7, 2011 [quote name='Socrates' timestamp='1304634269' post='2237688'] It is very reasonable to believe the universe had a Creator who is an Uncaused Cause and Pure Act, rather than the universe bringing itself into being. [/quote] I would dispute that the "creator" is "intelligent" but yes, it is reasonable. Physicists are saying that the universe apparently didn't need a cause and that whatever cause outside the universe could not have any effect on the universe once it existed, and I'll take their word on it, because it is reasonable to accept what actual authorities on the subject are saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Posted May 8, 2011 Share Posted May 8, 2011 "Quotient" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AudreyGrace Posted May 8, 2011 Share Posted May 8, 2011 (edited) [quote name='xSilverPhinx' timestamp='1304728182' post='2238158'] I would dispute that the "creator" is "intelligent" but yes, it is reasonable. Physicists are saying that the universe apparently didn't need a cause and that[u] whatever cause outside the universe could not have any effect on the universe [b]once it existed,[/b][/u] and I'll take their word on it, because it is reasonable to accept what actual authorities on the subject are saying. [/quote] If the creator is unintelligent, then what does that make anything created? I would assume it to also be unintelligent. Even if you do believe in evolution as the means of our existence as we are today, then that gives the creations some degree of intelligence to be able to adapt to their surroundings. Therefore, I'd say the Creator is pretty intelligent, to have created with the intent of giving its creations the capacity to evolve and adapt. The basis of what physicists are saying is that the universe could not be affected after it existed, but the fundamental belief held by Christians is that God created the universe, not just the Earth. So really, even if one were to say that the universe allowed for the Earth to exist, that still doesn't make the concept of a God null and void. Rather, that God created the universe and therefore all things within it under His "jurisdiction". It is most definitely reasonable to accept what "actual authorities" on the subject say, but you need to define "actual authorities". You are looking at evidence from one side, not both. For example, physicists can be looked to as authorities for atheists and agnostics in regards to their views, while philosophers, and theologians such as Thomas Aquinas are definitely actual authorities for the case of God's existence. To say that your authorities are the only valid authorities is wrong, ignorant, and discriminatory. If you read Summa Theologica or other works, and then came to the fully educated conclusion that there isn't a God or cause for the universe, then that's one thing. The beauty is that our "side" can embrace science and give glory to God for all findings. Yours intends to leave any spiritual intelligence out of things, leaving yourselves close minded and missing pieces of the puzzle. Personally, I love science. (Especially physics and bio). Any and all courses I've taken have only made my faith grow more and more. "Science can purify religion from error and superstition. Religion can purify science from idolatry and false absolutes." -Blessed John Paul II. "Hear the other side." - St. Thomas Aquinas (edited to add some statements by actual authorities) Edited May 8, 2011 by AudreyGrace Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xSilverPhinx Posted May 8, 2011 Share Posted May 8, 2011 [quote name='AudreyGrace' timestamp='1304833493' post='2238638'] If the creator is unintelligent, then what does that make anything created? I would assume it to also be unintelligent. Even if you do believe in evolution as the means of our existence as we are today, then that gives the creations some degree of intelligence to be able to adapt to their surroundings. Therefore, I'd say the Creator is pretty intelligent, to have created with the intent of giving its creations the capacity to evolve and adapt. The basis of what physicists are saying is that the universe could not be affected after it existed, but the fundamental belief held by Christians is that God created the universe, not just the Earth. So really, even if one were to say that the universe allowed for the Earth to exist, that still doesn't make the concept of a God null and void. Rather, that God created the universe and therefore all things within it under His "jurisdiction". It is most definitely reasonable to accept what "actual authorities" on the subject say, but you need to define "actual authorities". You are looking at evidence from one side, not both. For example, physicists can be looked to as authorities for atheists and agnostics in regards to their views, while philosophers, and theologians such as Thomas Aquinas are definitely actual authorities for the case of God's existence. To say that your authorities are the only valid authorities is wrong, ignorant, and discriminatory. If you read Summa Theologica or other works, and then came to the fully educated conclusion that there isn't a God or cause for the universe, then that's one thing. The beauty is that our "side" can embrace science and give glory to God for all findings. Yours intends to leave any spiritual intelligence out of things, leaving yourselves close minded and missing pieces of the puzzle. Personally, I love science. (Especially physics and bio). Any and all courses I've taken have only made my faith grow more and more. "Science can purify religion from error and superstition. Religion can purify science from idolatry and false absolutes." -Blessed John Paul II. "Hear the other side." - St. Thomas Aquinas (edited to add some statements by actual authorities) [/quote] The main problem I run into when reading what religious authorities have to say on their subjects is that there is no conclusive evidence to back them up. I wouldn't say it's close-mindedness on my part, I simply don't see what they refer to as "god" actually existing outside in objective reality as anything more than concepts. I know that religious authorities are authorities in the matter of religion, but religious philosophy is what runs into some serious problems for me, which leaves the authorities rather meaningless. They certainly give plenty of food for thought, but that's it. As for "intelligent creator", from my perspective it's the appearance of "intelligence" not actual intelligence. I will not dispute that there are creative powers since if there weren't we wouldn't exist obviously, but they're mindless IMO. [quote]"Science can purify religion from error and superstition. Religion can purify science from idolatry and false absolutes." -Blessed John Paul II.[/quote] I find it ironic that it's not the scientific view that claims absolutes and idolises in the first place... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AudreyGrace Posted May 8, 2011 Share Posted May 8, 2011 [quote name='xSilverPhinx' timestamp='1304841831' post='2238648'] The main problem I run into when reading what religious authorities have to say on their subjects is that there is no [u]conclusive evidence[/u] to back them up. I wouldn't say it's close-mindedness on my part, I simply don't see what they refer to as "god" actually existing outside in objective reality as anything more than [u]concepts[/u]. I know that religious authorities are authorities in the matter of religion, but[u] religious philosophy is what runs into some serious problems for me, which leaves the authorities rather meaningless[/u]. They certainly give plenty of food for thought, but that's it. As for "intelligent creator", from my perspective [u]it's the appearance of "intelligence"[/u] not actual intelligence. I will not dispute that there are creative powers since if there weren't we wouldn't exist obviously, but they're mindless IMO. I find it ironic that it's not the scientific view that claims absolutes and idolises in the first place... [/quote] Please define "conclusive evidence". Is it merely physical.. or... can be proven through experimentation? Help me out, here. Authorities are not deemed "meaningless" just because some people run into problems with what they claim. I acknowledge Obama as an authority and respect his position, even though I disagree with him morally and politically. I acknowledge Darwin as an evolution authority, even though I run into problems with the concept itself. After all, evolution is still only a concept at this point in time, while it does give plenty of food for thought. Can you please explain what you mean by "the appearance of intelligence" theory? I can't wrap my head around what it exactly means, and I don't want to misunderstand you. Specifically, what the appearance is and where it comes from. I think what the Blessed JP2 quote means is that we can purify our religion as time goes on from things that are obviously untrue. For example, it used to be taught that God legitimately created the earth in 7 days as we see them today. However, given modern scientific evidence of some possible evolution, rock formation, continent separation, all that jazz, we see that perhaps Genesis was written somewhat figuratively, at least the part about the Earth's 7 day creation. The belief still remains, however, that God is responsible for all creation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tab'le De'Bah-Rye Posted May 8, 2011 Share Posted May 8, 2011 pax domine sit sempre,vobiscum... And what iof my iq? before i came to church 7 or so years ago my iq was early to mid 90s and earlier this year i did an iq test and scored 103,i give this credit to practically no t.v.,meditating on the mysteries,prayer,worthy participation of the sacrements and reading the word of god heaps, please explain how is it that my i.q. has increased since converting? and also most stats are no where near the actual facts,lets say to take a responsible stat one would have to question like 50 percent of a nation,would cost a fortune to get a real stat fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xSilverPhinx Posted May 8, 2011 Share Posted May 8, 2011 [quote name='AudreyGrace' timestamp='1304845082' post='2238657'] Please define "conclusive evidence". Is it merely physical.. or... can be proven through experimentation? Help me out, here. Authorities are not deemed "meaningless" just because some people run into problems with what they claim. I acknowledge Obama as an authority and respect his position, even though I disagree with him morally and politically. I acknowledge Darwin as an evolution authority, even though I run into problems with the concept itself. After all, evolution is still only a concept at this point in time, while it does give plenty of food for thought. [/quote] I'm not disputing that they are authorities in the matters of their own religion, but when it's their religion that I don't find to be meaningful, their authority on some matters is meaningless. To put it into perspective, would you say that a Muslim scholar defending something that makes absolutely no sense to you be an authority? You would have to accept their authority on a deeper level (convert to Islam). [quote]Can you please explain what you mean by "the appearance of intelligence" theory? I can't wrap my head around what it exactly means, and I don't want to misunderstand you. Specifically, what the appearance is and where it comes from.[/quote] Basically I think it's all in the mind, based on how our minds evolved to see patterns all around us and attribute meaning that sometimes isn't there and that people project "minds" onto things. I think that this is part of the bewilderment that some theists feel when they think that atheists can't see all the "obvious evidence" all around them. It's a matter of interpretation, and again, based on our experience a universe that isn't purposefully designed would be difficult to distinguish from one that was. [quote]I think what the Blessed JP2 quote means is that we can purify our religion as time goes on from things that are obviously untrue. For example, it used to be taught that God legitimately created the earth in 7 days as we see them today. However, given modern scientific evidence of some possible evolution, rock formation, continent separation, all that jazz, we see that perhaps Genesis was written somewhat figuratively, at least the part about the Earth's 7 day creation. The belief still remains, however, that God is responsible for all creation. [/quote] Yes, I get that and even agree with him. It's a good stance to have, regardless of one being religious or not. It's the [i]other[/i] part of his quote that I find to be a little ironic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xSilverPhinx Posted May 8, 2011 Share Posted May 8, 2011 [quote name='Tab'le Du'Bah-Rye' timestamp='1304846283' post='2238663'] pax domine sit sempre,vobiscum... And what iof my iq? before i came to church 7 or so years ago my iq was early to mid 90s and earlier this year i did an iq test and scored 103,i give this credit to practically no t.v.,meditating on the mysteries,prayer,worthy participation of the sacrements and reading the word of god heaps, please explain how is it that my i.q. has increased since converting? and also most stats are no where near the actual facts,lets say to take a responsible stat one would have to question like 50 percent of a nation,would cost a fortune to get a real stat fact. [/quote] I think a rise in IQ can be difficult to pin down. The brain is like a muscle, the more you use it the better it gets. How old are you? Are you are you still attending school/college? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AudreyGrace Posted May 8, 2011 Share Posted May 8, 2011 [quote name='xSilverPhinx' timestamp='1304876759' post='2238736'] I'm not disputing that they are authorities in the matters of their own religion, but when it's their religion that I don't find to be meaningful, their authority on some matters is meaningless. To put it into perspective, would you say that a Muslim scholar defending something that makes absolutely no sense to you be an authority? You would have to accept their authority on a deeper level (convert to Islam). Basically I think it's all in the mind, based on how our minds evolved to see patterns all around us and attribute meaning that sometimes isn't there and that people project "minds" onto things. I think that this is part of the bewilderment that some theists feel when they think that atheists can't see all the "obvious evidence" all around them. It's a matter of interpretation, and again, based on our experience a universe that isn't purposefully designed would be difficult to distinguish from one that was. [/quote] Well, I kind of did put it into perspective in regards to my examples with Obama and Darwin. To truly accept someone as an authority does not always mean that you convert to their ideologies. It is a matter of understanding that they have a superior knowledge of a subject, so you take what they say into account, discern it, and go from there. If we only accepted and dove into subject matters that were comfortable to us, we agreed with, or even that we found plausible, we would make no progress as individuals or as the human race in general. I can understand what you're saying about our minds evolving and projecting images. It seems like a decent argument for the case of atheism. I guess what my deeper question was is what, or who, was the first one? The first thing? Who created the first thing or person or organism that gave way to all the rest, that started the evolutionary process? I understand your arguments for living things evolving and projecting images to create our cultures today, but where did everything start? I've never heard/ grasped the atheist theory of all of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xSilverPhinx Posted May 8, 2011 Share Posted May 8, 2011 (edited) [quote name='AudreyGrace' timestamp='1304878762' post='2238742'] Well, I kind of did put it into perspective in regards to my examples with Obama and Darwin. To truly accept someone as an authority does not always mean that you convert to their ideologies. It is a matter of understanding that they have a superior knowledge of a subject, so you take what they say into account, discern it, and go from there. If we only accepted and dove into subject matters that were comfortable to us, we agreed with, or even that we found plausible, we would make no progress as individuals or as the human race in general. [/quote] Your relationship of authority with Obama would be different from mine, because you're an American (I assume?) and I'm not. This does not mean that he isn't a authority however. You accept catholic authorities on a deeper level because you're catholic. With Darwin (though his theory has been built upon since he lived) I would see him in the present day as not exactly a scientific authority in the same sense as Dawkins is (who is one of the people who built upon what Darwin observed). Darwin's observations have their validity, and his conclusions transcend who he (Darwin) was. (I'm not saying that [i]everything[/i] catholics say is useless - I'm of the opinion that every religion takes universal "truths" which do apply to all in some sense into their speculations. It's with the particulars that I don't accept as meaningful.) Would you accept a muslim scholar (authority) defending the punishment of infidels as an authoritative statement? What about their theological conclusions on who's going to hell and who isn't? [quote]I can understand what you're saying about our minds evolving and projecting images. [/quote] Well, not exactly projecting images, but projecting [i]minds[/i]. [quote] It seems like a decent argument for the case of atheism. I guess what my deeper question was is[b] what[/b], or [b]who[/b], was the first one? The first thing?[u][b]Who[/b][/u] created the first thing or person or organism that gave way to all the rest, that started the evolutionary process? I understand your arguments for living things evolving and projecting images to create our cultures today, but where did everything start? I've never heard/ grasped the atheist theory of all of this.[/quote] Why "who"? I would say "what", and the answer is I don't know. Not very intellectually satisfactory, but that's just the way it is. Edited May 8, 2011 by xSilverPhinx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AudreyGrace Posted May 8, 2011 Share Posted May 8, 2011 [quote name='xSilverPhinx' timestamp='1304880539' post='2238755'] Why "who"? I would say "what", and the answer is I don't know. Not very intellectually satisfactory, but that's just the way it is. [/quote] I'm sorry you settle. BTW, your avatar makes me lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xSilverPhinx Posted May 8, 2011 Share Posted May 8, 2011 [quote name='AudreyGrace' timestamp='1304885779' post='2238784'] I'm sorry you settle. [/quote] It's insatisfactory, but it's not an uncomfortable view to hold beyond that. And if I came across as too harsh or brash, I'm sorry. I could've been more careful in my wording. [quote]BTW, your avatar makes me lol.[/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AudreyGrace Posted May 8, 2011 Share Posted May 8, 2011 [quote name='xSilverPhinx' timestamp='1304889062' post='2238796'] And if I came across as too harsh or brash, I'm sorry. I could've been more careful in my wording. [/quote] Same goes for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MagiDragon Posted May 9, 2011 Share Posted May 9, 2011 [quote name='xSilverPhinx' timestamp='1304876759' post='2238736'] Basically I think it's all in the mind, based on how our minds evolved to see patterns all around us and attribute meaning that sometimes isn't there and that people project "minds" onto things. [/quote] Yeah, IMO there are some really weak arguments for intelligent design based on 'probability.' As a computer programmer, there's a rarely used algorithm known as a 'genetic algorithm' which is based loosely off of how evolution works. It's used in optimization problems where the solution is likely to be very complex, but the capability of that solution is easily measurable. The algorithm ends up producing results that can be shockingly intelligent in spite of no real 'intelligence' being used in the program itself. [url="http://www.damninteresting.com/on-the-origin-of-circuits"]Here's an example.[/url] I think the most convincing arguments for God come from the torture of the apostles. Assuming that you trust historical documents, we can show that 10 of The Twelve were tortured to death for their beliefs. There can be no personal gain in this life by being tortured to death, so they clearly believed what they taught. This seems to lend some credence to the idea that Jesus rose. If not, why didn't they just say "Please don't dunk me in the vat of boiling oil, it's all a lie! I'll stop preaching!"? Of course, there are a lot of other good arguments, but that argument is a pretty easy one to make. Peace, Joe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now