Victor Stenger

What a pathetic lot some of you are. Perhaps there should be rejoicing when Sheldrake et al. die. I'm certain some will, but it won't be from me.
 
Last edited:
I never cared much for Dr. Stenger's point-of-view, but at the same time one can't help but feel some disappointment in seeing another life extinguished, even in old age. At the very least the man, like all of us, was a web of connections, and I'm sure he was important in many people's lives.
 
John Maguire said:
I never cared much for Dr. Stenger's point-of-view, but at the same time one can't help but feel some disappointment in seeing another life extinguished, even in old age. At the very least the man, like all of us, was a web of connections, and I'm sure he was important in many people's lives.
Click to expand...

Is it extinguished ? Not from my understanding, John but that's fine if you wish to look at it that way. At the very least Victor would have experienced the tunnel and the light and the meeting with deceased relatives, wouldn't he.
 
tim said:
Is it extinguished ? Not from my understanding, John but that's fine if you wish to look at it that way. At the very least Victor would have experienced the tunnel and the light and the meeting with deceased relatives, wouldn't he.
Click to expand...

Whether you look at it from a consciousness-survives-death perspective, or a mind-equals-brain perspective, that particular permutation of that particular person is no longer "around" in our usual sense of the word -- and of course the loss of being able to directly interact or "touch" that permutation is something at least a little bit melancholy I think.

We have similar perspectives, I'm just clarifying my point. Forums always seem to have an inherent "lost-in-translation" feature which is sort of annoying.
 
gabriel said:
Science leads to atomic weapons and religion to charity. Both are absurdly simplistic claims.
Click to expand...

Yup.

Some varieties of atheism

And here’s the thing: If there is anything new about the New Atheism, it is the greater prominence of atheists who at least approximate the A1 stripe. In Walter Kaufmann’s day, A1 atheism was represented by marginal, vulgar cranks like Madalyn Murray O’Hair. Now, equally vulgar cranks like Dawkins, Harris, Hitchens, Myers, and Coyne are by no means marginal, but widely regarded as Serious Thinkers. This is the reverse of intellectual progress. And we know what Walter Kaufmann would have thought of it.
Click to expand...
 
Bart V said:
Because it is true?
Click to expand...
Not really. I don't recall any religious text that specifically claimed to fly a plane into a building. I do however know there are multiple religious texts that support learning. If you want to get really technical, Catholic priests gave us the big bang theory, Muslim Imams gave us algebra, and I can promise you a sizeable chunk of the engineers on the Apollo missions were christians.

If you want to get even more gritty, you can also change the argument into " science => eugenics, religion => charity ". See? I can show each in a good and a bad light.

Of course, understanding this simple fact would require someone to be unblinded from their cognitive bias against anything religious. Maybe you're not at that point yet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tim
79 isn't a bad innings is it? I am sure his family and friends miss him. It's not like he killed anyone is it?
 
Sciborg_S_Patel said:
Some varieties of atheism
Click to expand...
I agree with Feser's take, but would make it even simpler. There are political atheists and instinctive ones. Political ones want an argument, with all that entails, instinctive atheists tend to avoid one. I know lots of instinctive atheists of the "Bah, Humbug!" variety, and support their lack of enthusiasm for the subject of deities, in the same way I uphold their right to be uninterested in many of the subjects I find compelling. They realise the debate will lead to stalemate via raised blood pressure on both sides, and understand logic is an uncertain guide to the mysteries of the universe. They don't impose their doubt where it hasn't been elicited, and will steer the conversation to more inclusive subjects.

Political atheists are a different kettle of fish.
 
brooke said:
Don't feed the troll.
Click to expand...
radicalpolitik said:
I hardly think you can compare the deaths of a tyrant and mass murderer, and a terrorist to the death of Stenger.
Click to expand...
Waiting for atheists to keel over is extremely inefficient. But it's not like you can teach a rational materialist new tricks. They are forever stuck in their ways and believe things that are very unscientific. For example, they still believe that everything that can exist, that does exist, is made of either mass or energy (or both), but nothing else. How unreasonably absurd is that?

Atheism is as unreasonable as a jar full of Higgs bosons.
 
Last edited:
ghost said:
Waiting for atheists to keel over is extremely inefficient. But it's not like you can teach a rational materialist new tricks. They are forever stuck in their ways and believe things that are very unscientific. For example, they still believe that everything that can exist, that does exist, is made of either mass or energy (or both), but nothing else. How unreasonably absurd is that?

Atheism is as unreasonable as a jar full of Higgs bosons.
Click to expand...

It's actually matter and energy. Secondly, you do disservice to material. It can't really be described as 'billiard balls' any more. What with the quantum cheshire cat, quantum pigeons, matter behaving like waves or particles. It's a damned weird thing physical stuff. And seeing as it's weird, I would not be surprised if something like neutral monism might me a good explanation for mind. But I digress here.
 
radicalpolitik said:
It's actually matter and energy. Secondly, you do disservice to material. It can't really be described as 'billiard balls' any more. What with the quantum cheshire cat, quantum pigeons, matter behaving like waves or particles. It's a damned weird thing physical stuff. And seeing as it's weird, I would not be surprised if something like neutral monism might me a good explanation for mind. But I digress here.
Click to expand...
I gotta go to a little girl's birthday party (my fiance's niece). So I wont have time to really examine neutral monism. However I would argue that real ghosts and real spirits (souls) exist, and more importantly, they are not that different from quantum fields and particle waves; other than the fact that ghosts/spirits/souls have consciousness.
 
malf said:
Let's celebrate someone's passing whilst reminding everyone that it's the "other side" who lacks humanity. Couldn't make it up!
Click to expand...
Why don't you silly buggers wake up and stop trying to deny your own inheritance ? Free... even to dogged materialists.
 
gabriel said:
Science leads to atomic weapons and religion to charity. Both are absurdly simplistic claims.
Click to expand...

I agree. I will admit while I belong to no one faith I am a champion and defender of faith and religion. I won't for a second say that it is not responsible for suffering, this is obviously well documented. To say that religion has not done great things for humanity, like many atheists will say is also silly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top