Scientists / Atheists do you believe we exist?

Question

Scientists if we exist, why is there no physical proof? Pain? A tree feels no pain or does it? Plants don't feel pain, do they? A rock has never doubted it's existence has it? Philosophy has only proven the obvious "man can think".

Ironically a scientist can tell me how fast light travels, but can't change a flat tire. They are so intelligent, but can't prove this their own existence. Ever wonder why there are things you just can't explain? How about, there is no reality. We made it up. Along with logic; justice; religion; etc...

Atheists, you know all the things you own; all the things you crave; all the things you adore; their value is all in your head. People? Are a mere reflection of your actions. Hate and be hated. Love and be loved. However, real? Never. Everything amounts to nothing. Rich, poor, famous, enlightened, we're all walking the same path leading to the same destination. So go on value your kingdom of dirt and your so-called "loved" ones. They're imitating you.

No proof of what I say, scientists....lmfao...look around you !!!

What has value of its own? Death keeps everything we will ever do; evolution or no evolution; it all amounts to -0-. I dislike that guy who says you can't prove a negative. We are living proof a negative can exist within a positive.

You want proof we don't exist? We are that proof. We have nothing. We own nothing. Everything around us is junk, human waste.

Doubt me do you? Doubt this, everything we make is nothing more; nothing less than nothing at all. Every tomorrow is blank page; our lives are written on a page we throw away. Do you see the past? It's gone. We are the past? No, we are nothing. Lmfao we are the past, that's ironic...we are the future, we are the past, yet what are we? We don't know, we only assume. LoL @ Descartes "i think therefore I am" that's admitting you know nothing. At least Socrates realized it. Following Descartes logic is like jumping off a cliff, monkey see; monkey do.

Answer 1

Why do you lump scientists with Atheists? Do you know how many scientists are Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Hindu and Pagan. NOT ALL SCIENTISTS ARE ATHEISTS! Not all Atheists are scientists!

Answer 2

I don't care for relativism. I think it's very sloppy, philosophically.

Why would you say a scientist can't change a tire? I bet there's plenty of them who can. Some probably know the mechanics, the dynamics, the chemistry of it at levels beyond yours (the woman who can see all the beauty of a sunset is not a painter but an astrophysicist). Scientists probably designed some of the parts the tire is made of. Ever heard of the gas laws?: Boyle's Law, Charles's Law, Avogadro's Law?

We don't know anything with 100% certainty but we know quite a lot with 99.9999999% certainty or more, and some things less but that are being studied more and more.

We accept that we exist and other things exist because we don't have any serious reason to think otherwise and because it would be more improbable if all of our gathered knowledge were wrong than at if all of it was right.

*You* think *you're* so smart and defiant to challenge scientists, so answer this: if you believe that scientists didn't discover but created the laws and theories, and that there is no objective reality, how can two scientists of two different cultures converge on the same set of facts? What about in the scientists' culture of competition, when one scientist tries to disprove the research of another scientist for greater recognition but ends up with the same data? If they create instead of discover and there's no reality then how can they double-check each other with an accuracy that's way beyond chance? Freudian telepathy?!

I submit to you and to the other readers here that on those semi-frequent occasions where someone spouts some metaphysical or epistemological bunk like "How you know the chair you're sitting in is real?", thinking they've said something mindblowing, they are not conducting "deep thought" but more accurately "murky thought", and the only thing they have going for them is that they're not thinking shallowly, as the fundamentalists do.

I don't understand the obscurantic criticism you are trying to level against atheists and so won't answer it.

Answer 3

The only reason I could put up with this crap from Descartes is because he revolutionized the study of math. So until you could do the same, shut the hell up with this nonsense.



And by the way, your pathetic rant doesn't hold a candle to what Rene wrote in A Discourse on Method.


Edit:
You got some nerve putting any of this trash amongst the works of Plato. You've yet to form a single coherent argument. Plato was one of the most brilliant men to ever walk the face of the earth. I say Plato because Socrates himself didn't write anything. If you want Socrates opinions on god, try reading Euthyphro, Republic, and Apology (I doubt you'll even understand them but it's worth a shot if it can pull your head out of your as$).
And you obviously didn't finish Discourse (that is, if you started it or just read cliff's notes), because if you did, you'd know that it didn't end with cogito ergo sum. Rene contributed more before he was 23 than you ever will to society and mankind in general. You're not in any position to insult his grocery list.


In no part of your rant did you even approach the greatness of Descartes' shoe shine boy. It was pitiful and you should be ashamed if this is the best you can do.

Answer 4

Existentialist arguments spectacularly fail when religion is dicussed. You simply can't prove anything.

Science makes a few basic assumptions, one of which is that reality is an existing objective reality. Believe it or not, theism makes the exact same assumption, with an addendum. Theism assumes that reality is an existing objective reality created by a deity.

In any case. We're all the product of an oppossum's nightmare. There you go.

Answer 5

There's a lot more proof for my existence than there is for any Gods' existence. Looks like you've got a bit of a repressed anger issue there, sparky.

By the way, I'm guessing that rocks don't doubt because they aren't alive. You've noticed that, right?

Answer 6

"Scientists if we exist, why is there no physical proof?" You need to reevaluate what both physical and proof mean. And what they mean together. I have a hand. I can see it. Smell it. Feel it. If i clap I can here it. You couldn't ask for more proof than that. If you could provide have that proof for a god I'd be in church tomorrow.

Answer 7

All I know is that Chuck Norris exists and will end all atheists for their non belief

Answer 8

Are you really dense enough to say that there is no physical evidence of our existence? That's more than absurd.

Cogito, ergo sum.

Answer 9

Then I shall attempt to think as a stone does.

Answer 10

Yes.

I can see myself and others.
I can smell myself and others.
I can taste myself and others.
I can hear myself and others.
I can touch myself and others.

All these things contribute to the evidence that I and others exist.