I'm afraid my IM discussions with my Christian coworker have gone about as far as they're likely to go. Last night, the Christian started making liberal use of entirely capitalized sentences and then turned openly conceited. It seems he's reached the end of his patience.

One of our primary points of contention, and the one we always came back to was whether or not thoughts arise from purely physical processes. I know little about neuroscience, so it was a difficult subject for me to argue. Of course, my coworker knows even less about it, so that was a moot point. Anyway, I maintain that thoughts are the result of physical processes, and I feel the evidence fully supports it. The Christian obviously does not. Even when I point out that specific portions of the brain show electrical activity during thought formation or that damage to specific regions will render a person unable to feel the emotions or thoughts generated by that area, the Christian insists that the evidence is only correlation, not evidence of origin:

but if you cannot explain physically where a thought comes from originally (NOT HOW IT'S EXPRESSED) then should you hold to your materialistic beliefs or look for another explanation?

In response, I pointed out that we simply don't understand the workings of the brain well enough yet to properly "read" thoughts. Why dismiss a possible and explanation before it's falsified, especially when there's a strong correlation? In response, the Christian accuses me of taking it on faith that we will eventually be able to read thoughts simply because I have an irrational belief in materialism. As he says it, we can't completely explain the origin of thoughts now, so there's no reason to assume natural causes. We automatically have to go with the supernatural.

While the fact that I have a "belief" in naturalism is certainly true, we can only build judgments based on our beliefs and experiences, I feel the history of science shows that you can't assume anything is unknowable, especially when natural causes have explained so much already. Just because people couldn't imagine or even measure the presence of relativity before the 20th century doesn't mean it wasn't a property of the universe.

Nevertheless, the Christian went into a diatribe that one must consider the supernatural for things we cannot measure, such as thoughts. Really, it was nothing more than a "god of the gaps" argument dressed up in a way that sounded philosophically pleasing enough to make his faith sound science-based. When I pointed the obvious fact that his insistence on the supernatural is wholly dependent on his preferred beliefs, he threw the following down:

philosophical naturalism... not science. I'm honestly kinda disappointed you won't consider intelligent causes

Despite the gross misunderstanding of science, the Christian's declaration of his superiority kind of pissed me off. I didn't say anything about it, and just let him continue on his tirade for a while. I made a couple of attempts to further explain my argument, but the Christian was pretty much done with the debate at that point and decided to call it a night shortly after that. I never expected any sort of victory. We view the world in fundamentally different ways, which means we will never agree on certain aspects.

Nevertheless, the fact that I kept it cool and reasoned, while he was the one to make it personal gives me a small degree of satisfaction. No, it won't change a damn thing, but I'll take it. Still, I think I'm about done talking with him about religion. Now that he's made his disdain open, I see little reason to continue.

--Cross posted from The Iron Chariot

Views: 5

Tags: Christians, Debating, with

Comment

You need to be a member of Atheist Nexus to add comments!

Join Atheist Nexus

Comment by Bradley on February 24, 2010 at 12:43pm
The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence,simply because you dont have evidence that something does exist dosent mean you do have evidence that something dosent exist there are known known's and there are known unknowns but there are also unknown unknown's things that we dont know that we dont know

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

AJY

 

Latest Activity

Freethinker31 replied to Freethinker31's discussion We Are One
11 minutes ago
John Jubinsky added a discussion to the group ORIGINS: UNIVERSE, LIFE, HUMANKIND, AND DARWIN
12 minutes ago
Brent Feeney posted a discussion
19 minutes ago
Craigart14 replied to John Loq's discussion The Bible is Evil
20 minutes ago
Freethinker31 replied to Freethinker31's discussion We Are One
20 minutes ago
Patricia replied to Freethinker31's discussion We Are One
25 minutes ago
Gabrielle Smith posted a video

Viking Trance - This Generation

What is the meaning of this video ? / Quel est le sens de cette vidéo? The video is entitled 'This Generation' and looks at the world our children will inher...
26 minutes ago
Freethinker31 replied to k.h. ky's discussion Edward Snowden
27 minutes ago
Bertold Brautigan replied to k.h. ky's discussion Edward Snowden
33 minutes ago
Freethinker31 replied to Freethinker31's discussion We Are One
34 minutes ago
Freethinker31 replied to k.h. ky's discussion Edward Snowden
41 minutes ago
BarbaraSATX replied to k.h. ky's discussion Edward Snowden
57 minutes ago

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service