1. A universe that follows 'laws' implies a 'law giver'

Comment #98337 by bartvdo on December 13, 2007 at 1:39 pm

semantics...

just because we call something a rule/law etc, doesn't imply a a rule creator or law giver, we could also call it a pattern, is there such a thing as a pattern maker?

I don't see why a "rational universe" would imply anything.

I think that any universe would be "rational" to it's inhabitants and might be irrational to those outside it in another universe.

2. Atheists are just as dogmatic as theists, and the only reasonable person is an agnostic.

Comment #98328 by bartvdo on December 13, 2007 at 1:30 pm

Well, there is a chance that God exists. Because from a scientific view you can't say god doesn't exist unless there is proof (note that the evidence of the existence of God from a science point of view needs to be supplied by those who say he does, not those who say he doesn't).

But, we don't need a god to explain why we are here (we have no scientific proof that God exist at all!). We also can think up alternative gods up to infinity (or at least an enormous number).

So the actual chance that God exist (that we'll find proof of his existence) is extremely small.

That chance is really so insignificant, that you might as well say it won't happen.It's far more probable that I'll win the lottery while being bitten by a shark that is hit by lightning while.. etc. Would you call yourself a Potential lottery winner that wins while being bitten by a shark hit by lightning while etc... ?

No, so we don't either.

3. What does atheism say about the purpose (or the meaning) of life?

Comment #98315 by bartvdo on December 13, 2007 at 1:14 pm

As an atheist I divide the question in 3:

1) Why are there humans?
2) Why am I here?
3) What am I supposed to do?

the answer to 1: because we are, no reason in particular, we just happen to appear due to evolution. Evolution is basically a side effect of the chemical and physics of the universe trying to get all the energy of the univers in evenly distributed.

2) because my parents had me. Why that happend, ask them.

3) that is personal, as a human being we're just working to evenly distribute the energy in a chaotic way. So have fun!

(note, I'm not saying that we should burn up all the oil and make the earth unlivable for us, but just that the meaning of your life is up to you!)

4. People who've experienced God KNOW that God exists

Comment #98305 by bartvdo on December 13, 2007 at 1:05 pm

define experienced....

People are very good at pattern matching, even to the point of seeing things that aren't a true pattern.

Many that don't understand what is happening to them, will point to a higher being as the originator of the experience. Even though it might just be the LSD in the water :-)
(Or something else, that pattern matching also makes us very impressionable).

5. If you don't have religion, where do you find your sense of community?

Comment #98302 by bartvdo on December 13, 2007 at 12:59 pm

Family, sport clubs, hobby clubs, online communities (like this maybe).

The reply should be whether the asker has a so limited world view to think that the only communities are based on religion. He should get out more.

The need for a community is human, but it in no way needs to be based on religion (a personal hypotheses is that religion came into existence to support/create the common denominator for groups that exceeded the size of a family/tribes)

6. What is the role of free will to an atheist?

Comment #98298 by bartvdo on December 13, 2007 at 12:53 pm

The question of free will might be philosophical , but is ( i think) mostly a neurological question (toxoplasma comes to mind). I don't think it's a religious question.
But to be honest, whether free will is an illusion or not only matters if we are capable of discerning between the two.
I don't think we can, for the most part, at the moment.

7. What are your qualifications to question religion anyway? Just who are you?

Comment #98293 by bartvdo on December 13, 2007 at 12:46 pm

Any body can start a religion (see the latterday saints and the scientologists for modern examples)

So my guess is that everybody can question it.

I get the feeling somebody has hacked the way to post, because most of the questions raised are answered in this book that is advertised on the right :-)

8. Ayaan Hirsi Ali: abandoned to fanatics

Comment #77503 by bartvdo on October 9, 2007 at 12:50 pm

For some more information on this please review the comments on http://richarddawkins.net/article,1725,The-Price-of-Freedom,Christopher-Hitchens-Slate

The articles by Harris and Hitchens are a bit one sided. Some of us have tried to show the other side of the discussion.

Note that no-one in the netherlands thinks she shouldn't be protected. The only discussion is on whether the Dutch goverment should pay for the protection of someone, who is intend on being a citizen of another country. Hirshi Ali actually agrees with the majority of the parlement that She should pay for her protection in the US.

9. The Price of Freedom

Comment #77266 by bartvdo on October 8, 2007 at 11:14 pm

A bit of factual background to this (from a Dutchmen).

- Hirshi Ali will still be protected while she is in the Netherlands. If she returns in the future she will still be protected.

- She agrees that the Dutch goverment shouldn't have to pay for her protection in another country.

-She needed a Green card to start to raise funds for her protection. The Dutch goverment was willing to protect her for some time to make this happen. It took longer than expected, the assignment was extended twice. She has one now and is starting to raise funds.

-The Dutch goverment went further in protecting a Dutch citizen than the US goverment would. The US was unwilling to do it.

-Getting Srebrenica involved is considered a very low blow. A goverment fell because of it, and it is considered a very black page in recent Dutch history. It is not even in the same universe as the discussion about who is responsible for the bill of Hirsi ali's protection.

For all you US citizens:
-why does Hirsi Ali need protection in the US?
-Would the US goverment protect people like Hirshi Ali at all (even when they are US citizens)?

Why attack the Dutch on this when your goverment wouldn't do it anyway?

10. Ayaan Hirsi Ali Feature

Comment #24313 by bartvdo on March 5, 2007 at 11:04 pm

Just a correction, she never lost her dutch citizenship. There was just some discussion whether she had lied to get it or not (which would have resulted in a retraction of her citizenship).