why is "god is the creator of the universe" a bullshit dogma, but "1+1=2" "obviously" empirically (!) true?

[Prince of Pakistan]

for the record, I'm anything but religious

 

[Sprinkles]

the creator cannot be measured by traditional scientific means which is limited to the 5 senses

 

[Imretarded?]

1+1=2 isn't 'empirically true', it's an axiomatic assumption you have to make like all maths. It's a mental tool we use to help make sense of the world

 

[shia.jihadist]

for the record, I'm anything but religious

why not nigga
fake paki

 

[Prince of Pakistan]

1+1=2 isn't 'empirically true', it's an axiomatic assumption you have to make like all maths. It's a mental tool we use to help make sense of the world

good comment, but my point stands even if you replace that expression with "dogma" or an "axiom"

i'm asking why does anyone believe that ,relative to the context (era), that "mental tool" has more validity than even the most basic religion had centuries ago, in much worse conditions?

is 1 storm + 1 pencil = 2? it isn't, and you have to engage in additional mental gymnastics to explain that. which is exactly why i and other non-religious people cringe at religious people and their interpretation fallacy.

is electricity any more real than the conviction of medieval people that they are possessed? if you're gonna appeal to instruments and experiments, that begs the question - how close those are to perfection and full credibility? and the answer is: closer to the idea that jesus is coming back on a cloud than to that.

 

[Prince of Pakistan]

why not nigga
fake paki

 

[Imretarded?]

good comment, but my point stands even if you replace that expression with "dogma" or an "axiom"

i'm asking why does anyone believe that ,relative to the context (era), that "mental tool" has more validity than even the most basic religion had centuries ago, in much worse conditions?

is 1 storm + 1 pencil = 2? it isn't, and you have to engage in additional mental gymnastics to explain that. which is exactly why i and other non-religious people cringe at religious people and their interpretation fallacy.

They're completely different things man.

people only accept maths because it's useful in everyday life. Try not to use basic counting in day to day life lol.

God is an explanation for the origin of existence. What's the usefulness, the usefulness is so retards can confidently say what is moral or how things came to be.

God can not build rockets and land on the moon, maths can

but numbers don't actually exist, its just an abstraction to systematize the environment around you

 

[Harold O'brien]

my thoughts on this later

 

[übermog]

god is real you can feel him in ur heart if you genuinely ask if hes there with you in the room, its an actual feeling physically not something oh yeah i can feel it unaware, theres ur proof, but u need to understand god a little at least before you can feel him

 

[givemeheight]

are you really that stupid? If you buy one apple, and then another apple, how many apples do you have now? It's an objectively truth. Equal means it's the same, it's just another way to express it. 1+1 is the same as 2, it doesn't mean 1+1 needs a conclusion or any logical comprehension, it's only your "brain" who has to do the calculations. It's just like translating a english word into another language.

 

[Prince of Pakistan]

They're completely different things man.

people only accept maths because it's useful in everyday life. Try not to use basic counting in day to day life lol.

God is an explanation for the origin of existence. What's the usefulness, the usefulness is so retards can confidently say what is moral or how things came to be.

God can not build rockets and land on the moon, maths can

but numbers don't actually exist, its just an abstraction to systematize the environment around you

you have to engage in additional mental gymnastics to explain that

p.s. regarding the bolded part ... tell me you have 0 clue about physics, math and science without telling me so. what field does the big bang theory belong to, for example? comparative literature?

drink more water

 

[Imretarded?]

p.s. regarding the bolded part ... tell me you have 0 clue about physics, math and science without telling me so. what field does the big bang theory belong to, for example? comparative literature?

drink more water

Ah I see, you're retarded. Goodbye

 

[Freixel]

Mathematics does not exist in the material world, beyond human perception. Without humans there is no mathematics, it is just a cerebral tool of the species to order the world, as another user said above.

 

[einzigartig]

imagine wasting time explaining someone why God is real when OP isn't even interested in searching the truth

 

[moredatesmorerapes]

Mathematics does not exist in the material world, beyond human perception. Without humans there is no mathematics, it is just a cerebral tool of the species to order the world, as another user said above.

You can say the same for God