Just wondering.

A Glorious Dawn:

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="

if all of our disagreements could be resolved with ping-pong tournaments?

I wanna live on that world!

I will not miss the life I had because there will in fact be no me to miss it. On a personal level, it will be as if I never existed in the first place. There may be those still living who will perhaps remember me, but my personal point of view will have simply vanished. Mark Twain said "I do not fear death. I had been dead for billions and billions of years before I was born, and had not suffered the slightest inconvenience from it." Also, the song Highwayman by Johnny Cash (I don't know if he wrote it, but he recorded it) makes, in my mind at least, a decent statement on the subject.

he told me so.

Lies on those who claim there is something not those who claim there isn't. I could claim that there's a magical giraffe in control of the tides and I would have to prove it before anyone by right should take me seriously. The same is true for afterlife.

Neither of us know for a "fact" that there is or isn't an afterlife.

Or for that matter, define "proof."

Now, you're just playing mental gymnastics.

Just own up to the "fact" that you made an assertion that you can't prove. I can't prove there is a God, and you can't prove there isn't one.

I swear, some atheists act just like their evangelical counterparts.

from most other species and have further led to the development of the civilizations in which we live. Someday when mental gymnastics are even more pervasive in the population than they are now, ancient religious superstition will be on the shelf with Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny.

But still doesn't negate the fact that neither one of us knows if there is or is not an afterlife.

I wouldn't be so arrogant as to say, for a "fact," that there is one, and you shouldn't be so arrogant as to say, for a "fact," that there isn't one. We both just don't know.

It's not going to make any difference anyway. Reread my first post. In the sentence where I used the word "fact" I stated "As an atheist, I find some solace in knowing that once my death occurs I will not miss the life I had because there will in fact be no me to miss it." It's personal: "I find some solace" - "my death" - "I will not miss" - "be no me to miss it." What are you so afraid of that it matters to you in the least what I believe about what happens to people when they die - whether it be a transition to another form of consciousness or merely a transition to dust? If others wish to believe in some comfy fantasy, that's fine with me. I really couldn't care less. And because I'm that egalitarian, I can't understand why the hell any of this matters to you.

You say you wouldn't be so arrogant as to use the word "fact" and that I shouldn't be so arrogant as to use it either. There is a reason I suggested you define that word as well as the word "proof." Discussing this with you is like trying to discuss evolution with a creationist. Read Dawkins - not just on evolution but also on atheism. Creationists want "proof" (somebody up thread indicated to you that there is no responsibility to prove a negative) that god didn't create the universe. Those who believe in an afterlife want "proof" that there isn't one. As humans we cannot prove to an epistemological certainty that we ourselves exist. For all we can really prove, we might be just some anthropic dream state being experienced by some physical meta-dimension that has somehow managed to develop self-awareness. The actual facts may ultimately be nothing more than that. And yet while that possibility does exist, as the rational creatures we believe ourselves to be, we typically accept as "proof" evidence that is based on available "facts." Based on what we know about the universe and the language of mathematics that we use to help us understand it, it makes sense to accept that evolution suitably explains the existence of life on this and probably many other planets and further that each living thing's life will eventually end - period. Every indication is that when you're dead, you're dead. Sorry - no pie in the sky theistic god to extract our "souls" from our dead bodies and thereafter set us up in a nice apartment on the corner of Ecstasy and Eternity. You just die. At least that's my personal interpretation of the facts as they are known today. If you wish to interpret those facts differently; fine. Go for it. Depending on your particular interpretation, I may think you're unrealistic. But again, what the hell do you care what I think?!

You don't know if I'm an atheist or not. You're trying to explain evolution to me but it's like talking to a creationist? Are you kidding me?

I actually don't care what you believe. I purposely never espoused as to what I believe, because it shouldn't matter to anyone but myself. However, you did, in fact, state something factually that you can't prove. And it's not like proving a negative, so don't be intellectually dishonest. I'm also saying I can't prove anything, either (I can use bolded italics, too). Not to worry though; seems like you got hot and bothered because you were called out on expressing a fact, which you nor I could support (it's unknowable). You illustrate the hubris that the creationists use. That you know for a fact that you won't exist. Well, not that I care what you believe, but your statement was, in fact, incorrect. I called you on it, and now you're getting all huffy and puffy and trying to back-peddle it just enough to try and save some face.

Again, and let me make this abundantly clear; I don't care what you believe. It matters not to me. My only concern, as posed in my original question to you, is how do you know for a "fact?" The fact is, you don't. You're flippant response about "God" telling you so, shows how you were caught in intellectual quicksand. I explained why neither of us knew, and it seemed to have pushed your buttons, because you came back with a two-paragraph straw man.

As for the rest of it, I'm pretty sure there is a probability greater than n=0.05 that you could benefit from professional help.

but I'd rather relate a perhaps more clever witticism I once saw in a restaurant behind the counter by the cash register. To wit:

Arguing with a waitress is like wrestling with a pig in the mud. Sooner or later you realize the pig likes it.

Run along now, little oinker. I've grown weary of you.

You realize that I'm right, so you resort to ad hominem. You weren't even able to come up with your own "witticism." You had to come up with someone else's.

If I were you, I'd be embarrassed.

Sometimes, people are so busy pounding their chest, they ignore how embarrassed they should be.

And the thing is, I wasn't trying to impugn anyone's belief system or lack thereof; I was merely pointing out an inaccuracy, and apparently, that pushed someone's buttons. It was unfortunate that he had to resort to childish name calling, but hey, that's his dime, not mine.

On edit: It's also unfortunate that it had to happen in a thread about Carl Sagan who happens to be one of my idols (no pun intended).

The only way to win that game is not to play ("War Games&quot

I don't know what is really a fact, but I do know that I've been frustrated by others who can only hold on to their structure of "fact" by denying other's version of it.

This is why I really don't follow religion.

Always correct, never appreciated.

And my favorite, Mark Knopfler on guitar.

"The world is so exquisite with so much love and moral depth..."?

Frankly, the older I get, the more cynical I become about the widespread indifference by so many people toward the suffering of others. Life is full of pain and sorrow and oppression and injustice due to a distinct lack of "moral depth" that seems to be an persistent problem in a large segment of the human species.

I frequently see this Sagan quote and I don't understand why it's considered insightful or even quotable. Even though I'm not a believer, I kind of want to retch at the suggestion that life is so magnificently awesome we have no reason to look for spiritual comfort. Maybe it looked magnificent to Carl, from the viewpoint of his privileged life. Oh well, don't mind me... grumpy day in paradise.

To the mind of humanity I say, "Evolve already, damn it".

There are many days that I feel the same way.

But then I remember the words of many wise and enlightened people I have read or listened to that our reality is our perception. If you perceive the world is laking in love and morality, then that is your reality. If you clear the clouds away a little, however, you may see the world from a whole new and positive perspective. The truth is that both love and hatred exist in the world, it's just what we choose to focus our attention on and energy toward that we have control over.

Not trying to be preachy or anything, just letting you know what has helped me out of many depressing times.

MattSh

He was a great astronomer - and a great person.. But on a personal level, he was also the intro for me into space, and everything what is there... It was the book Cosmos, and the television serie who got me interested in astronomy, and the discovery of the marveles who are out there - just wainting for us to discover it...

When Carl Sagan died - I was indeed sadened, as it had been a friend, or a nabour, or maybe even a familiy member who had died...

Diclotican