Another question for athiests...?

Question

Imagine if you will you are way back in the past before the platypus was discovered. Now lets say you came across this animal that had fur like a mammal, a bill of a duck, tail of a beaver, layed eggs and spent a lot of time in water. According to logic back then such a creature couldn't possibly exist. would you be forced into changing your logic? if so wouldn't this cause your logic to contradict itself? Now lets say you were to see with your own two eyes a ghost/spirit or something else in nature that seems illogical, would you assume you were hallucinating or would you be forced to change your logic? And before you ask how I go from platypus to spirits it's "logically" the same thing to me.

Also I am trying to understand how athiests think before any of you calls me retarded or something.

The reason i say that an animal such as the platypus couldn't logically exist to those who first discovered it is this, A) If it is a mammal that lays eggs, mammals by definition don't lay eggs. B) If it is a bird with fur, by definition birds don't have fur. Then what the hell is it?

Answer 1

When I see church people with their weird beliefs it's sort of like seeing a platypus maybe, and I wonder how such things can exist, the funny beliefs. But since they do exist, yes I have to adjust my logic-- and acknowlege that seemingly rational humans are capable of idiocy.

Answer 2

If this is logically the same to you, we don't have much to talk about. If you can see spirits, then they exist in the natural world, and are not supernatural. Seeing requires light either generated or reflected, which requires mass and energy.

A platypus does not have the bill of a duck (the platypus "bill" is leathery, not bony), and since a beaver is also a mammal, why would it seem odd to have a mammal spend time in the water and have a similar tail. The only odd thing is laying eggs, and since there are other monotremes, it is logical that we just discovered another species.

You're using logic that does not make use of biology. We can figure out what things are related to not just from their physical appearances, but also from their bone structure, their digestive systems, their fit into their environments, etc. Your statement shows more naivete than knowledge. As you gain more of the latter, you will display less of the former.

Answer 3

New species of animals are discovered quite often so to find a platypus for the first time, while strange, would not be mind boggling. I do not see how you follow that drift to one about ghosts though. A platypus is a living, breathing animal that is there in the flesh to study and explore. A ghost or a spirit are nothing more than the things of stories. And there has been a lot of scientific study into ghosts without any proof that such things exists at all.

Answer 4

"According to logic back then such a creature couldn't possibly exist."

False assumption: it was never logically impossible.

"would you be forced into changing your logic?"

Logic has nothing to do with accepting new information. I would merely have to add the new knowledge that one species of mammal can lay eggs and inflict a poisonous attack.


The problem is you are throwing around the word logic without apparently knowing what it means.

Logic is the METHOD used to sort out valid information from false information.

Assuming before a platypus was ever discovered that mammals don't lay eggs or contain venom, is quite logical since NO other mammalian species out of all 300,000 + does.

Going from a natural example to a supernatural example is not logical. One only claims natural and well documented forms of reproduction and defense, the other is supernatural with no credible evidence.

The reason you see that they are logically the same is evidence that you don't understand what logic is.

Answer 5

If way back in the past I saw a platypus, I would say "WOW, never saw one of those, let's call it a platypus. If I saw a ghost, I would say "WOW never saw one of those, let's follow it & see where it goes".

My logic would tell me it was something new and I would want to investigate it. To say a playtpus couldn't exist would be illogical because there it is in front of you. Same with a ghost.

But I wouldn't make up stories about how that ghost got me pregnant or anything like that. And I wouldn't bow down & pray to the ghost or imagine that it had any control over my life at all. Unless it responded directly to ME, not to someone, somewhere, whom I know nothing about. Lots of people in "treatment centers" talk to ghosts, that's why they're in there.

Does that help?

Answer 6

If I came across a platypus without the knowledge I have now, I would conclude it evolved separately from the first very primitive mammals and therefore must have been geographically isolated at a very early time. And in fact I would be correct.

I really don't see why you would compare this to ghosts at all other than maybe you don't understand evolution and the comparison furthers your creationist agenda.

Answer 7

While a platypus might seem very unusual to me, it isn't something supernatural. It's there, it's flesh and blood, EVERYONE who looks at it can see it, touch it, feel it, smell it, etc. It is not supernatural. It is not beyond understanding.
A ghost is a supernatural being. The supernatural is a whole different thing. Whenever you hear of "ghost" sightings, you might have ONE person in a roomful of people who claims to see or hear something. (John Edwards for example.) And even when people DO see something, that something is not clearly identifiable, and you can't touch it. If it's up for debate whether or not it was actually there, then it is supernatural. If a group of 10 people are in the presence of a platypus, you don't hear one or two of them saying "I don't see anything." There's no question that it's there, and it's real.

Answer 8

>.<
Because logically a living creature and a spiritual apparition are totally the same thing.
*sigh*
If one sees a platypus, and is able to touch it, and it is still alive, then it exists. I'd like to mention that back then it wasn't that a creature like that 'couldn't possibly exist', but that they had never been proven to exist, and it seemed kinda crazy to them.
If one sees an apparition, then there's really no way to confirm its existence. It could be anything other than a true apparition. Also, atheists don't necessarily not believe in ghosts, as far as I know, they just don't believe in god, and the crap that goes along with it.
Nyar.

Answer 9

Why couldn't it exist? Just because it's weird? It's there, and it's adapted to it's envirnoment. Just because I probably wouldn't have thought of such a creature doesn't mean it can't exist.

If I thought I saw a ghost, I would go find out what it was. If I couldn't find an explanation, I would assume that I was hallucinating, yes.

I'm sorry you equate perfectly normal animals with things that don't exist.

Answer 10

okay, now that is actually not a very good argument against athiests, one, athiests dont care about god, 2, we can change our mind if we wished to, 3, things get discovered all the time, we actually deal with these things and ghosts? if they exist we wouldnt care less, we probrably think its cool, maybe theres friendly ghosts! XD
obviously if you think about it, if you were religious, and you something new was discovered, then it is allot harder to change your thinking to accept it, its just like back in the old days, when the world was proven to revolve around the sun, the ignorant religious fools decided that it was blasphemy and burned people for a time for believing that. you guys thought the scientists were crack smokers, crazy people, "not with god" people. obviously, if something like aliens apeared from out of nowhere, what would you guys do? would you think that god still existed? we wouldnt have a problem, we would either think its cool if they are friendly, or we would think it sucks if they arent. obviously if there actually are aliens, then humans would not be the only intelegint species, and we have to throw aside many of our religions, including Christianity, since it states that humans are god's children, so logically if we were actually an all mighty power's children, then we would be the only inteligent species of life, so inteligent aliens with superior technology would contradict that. think, if they are superior to us, then they would be gods children, we would be some lowly animal to them. so much for god, and his almighty power... when you are athiest, its easier to accept change, at least in my opinion, because theres less to hold on to.