Thoughts on Russel's teapot?

>you can prove it exists
how?

I want proof any religion describes it correctly

Self-knowledge, not experimental data. Inner science, not outer

everyone who claim they do that come to vastly different conclusions

The problem with both those things is that to an outside observer they are indistinguishable from self-delusion and making shit up.

You can make a case for a philosophical first principle but dont pretend your religious interpretation of said principle isn't something you choose to believe in, sans proof.

The sad part is that people have such an easy time poking holes in hebrew mythology, that they do not realise that the theological teachings of the Twin Gods, Plato and Aristotle, cannot be so easily dismissed.

>how can you prove the sun exists
Getting out of your mom's basement would be a start

What do I care what others think if I'm honest and rigorous with my own search for the truth? You niggas need cucks in labcoats to pat you on the head for everything.

can you prove the sun's existence or just make shitty jokes?

Go ask a scientist. If user can't answer your question, then all you're doing is settling for your own ignorance as an argument.

I never said anything about science.

I just doubt you can arrive at anything other than "personal truth" by looking into yourself.

Guess what m8, there's only personal truth, or rather the only meaningful truth is personal, everything else is a compiling of objective data without an organizational frame.

prove science exists

Go outside and show it for them.
What kind of question is that?

you are free to believe anything you want, just don't expect others to abide by it.

That's one way of looking at it, but I could also argue that personal truth fails when it comes against the "wall" of that data

Man it's really funny how you think the relentless search for truth and self-understanding must be disqualified from being based on a thoroughly scientific understanding of the world. The subjective is not your enemy.

I never said it was. but your search is just as likely to arrive at self delusion as truth.

Literally just look in the sky

That sounds comfy as fuck desu.

*wolololo*

Please tell me this magical criterion you have for distinguishing between nonsensical and true beliefs about the world when both are, as I said, founded on scientific truth.

Your argument is "don't trust yourself to figure it out for yourself, here, read this textbook goy".

>true beliefs about the world when both are, as I said, founded on scientific truth.
science in its current form has failed to provide any real skills due to its empirical and faulty nature. Hence, disease and war ravages the earth while the poor starve, all while science scratches its head and occasionaly lashes out and points fingers at a scapegoat.

yes but Lindy Beige will be in charge of it.

Unironically this, it's a tangible concept

the sun is a machine. Its not alive

what in three fucks are you even on about m8?

and you know that how?

the truth provide skills or it cannot be the truth. If there is no skill attached to a truth it is not the truth. This is why all this popsci isn't taught, its scifi wankery. Even the fields fo sceicne like the immortal medicine has failed to simply keep bodies healthy. Hence, scientific truths do not form the basis of our world.

Alive means it has a soul, which it doesn't. A machine does work for a person, which it does by shining light and warming the Earth. I know those two things because I uderstand the platonic form of the sun.

close it up boys, this thread is done

fpbp

>what is an illusion

A teapot is a physical artifact created by humans. Since it is a physical artifact created by humans it cannot exist without human intervention, and since no human has gone through the substantial effort and expense to place a teapot into stable orbit between earth and mars, we can safely say that such a teapot does not exist.

So while God and the teapot may have the same amount of evidence supporting their existence, the teapot has substantially more evidence supporting it's non-existence than there is supporting the supposed non-existence of God. Russell's teapot is rhetoric for brainlets and pseuds.

The sun merely acts like something a scientist or scholar would call a sun or star. In reality it invokes its will on earth and decides its life by adjusting its light's strength.

It's easy to disprove the existence of Russell's teapot. The whole rhetorical trick relies on the target unconsciously realizing it's easily disproved and then linking it in their mind with the unsupported assertion that the existence of God can be disproved just as easily.

>The sun merely acts like something a scientist or scholar would call a sun or star
designations refer to hallucinations, not titles. Which you are invoking.
>the sun decides
the sun is slave if it has any will. Which it doesn't because it works 24/7 and has to show its bare ass and face to the earth.

that's what you think. The sun has just so far chosen to continue shining at the earth. At any moment it may black out or move a celestial body so it blocks the earth from the light of the sun.

That assumes the teapot must have been placed there by humans and not by space faring Aliens.

The sun is just as real as everything else user

>It's easy to disprove the existence of Russell's teapot
Then do it faggot

The baby god its in the sky again, Whats New?

look at... for like an hour

That would require me to believe in not only a teapot but also aliens that feel it worth the considerable effort and expense to place a mundane human teapot into solar orbit between the Earth and Mars.

>The sun is just as real as everything else user
prove everything else is real

Those aliens would have an intelligence superior to any of us. We are in no position to question or understand their intentions.

I already did.
A teapot is a human artifact and there is no plausible mechanism by which such a mundane human artifact could be placed in such a remote location that humans have never been to.

It's like claiming there's a Ming vase at the center of the Earth. There's no plausible way a Ming vase could be placed at the center of the Earth because Ming bases only exist where humans have been and no humans have ever been to the center of the Earth. Therefore no reasonable person would even consider such a claim.

Which is entirely different to God as God isn't claimed to be some agency less out of place artifact that requires external forces to exist, like the Ming vase or the meme teapot.

You are assuming the teapot must have been created by humans, there's many other possible explanations for how it came into existence.

Irrelevant.
In order to justify the existence of your evidence less OOPart, you need to invoke the existence of aliens for which there is no evidence. Aliens who are also conveniently of superior intelligence to us a claim for which there is even less evidence considering they waste considerable time and effort secretly placing mundane human items into orbit.

God on the other hand requires no such Deus ex Machina.

God reacquires evidence for the existence of god for which there is none.

So it's not actually a teapot then it's just an object that could hypothetically be used as a teapot like a stone can be used as a chair or a table.

Which completely undermines the memepot argument as it's no longer Russell's teapot but Russell's asteroid.

>No evidence for the existence of God
*looks out window at universe*

The teapot may be a teapot us influencing us humans to create copies of it.
It may be an exact copy of an earthly teapot created through an unknown psychical procedure.
It may have been sent there by an ancient, pre human civilization long lost due to some mass extinction event.
There's a bunch of explanations.

not an argument

>continues to add layers of evidenceless deus ex machina to justify his memepot argument
Sad.

it might be a hermetic teapot, unmanifest yet most manifest, of which all existing teapots are only a echo, and it can only ever be found by someone who is looking for it

It's just a thought experiment about the shifting of the burden of proof. That's all it is.

Make me you little spook