>English professor goes on a rant on how atheism is stupid
>Says that string theory proves that consciousness exists in higher dimensions
>Says that this pretty much proves that god exists
>"Check-mate, atheists"
He said this. I'm not even shitting you. What should I say to him tomorrow?
tell em he's a fag and that hes doin you a laughin
>>7878216
Atheism is stupid though anon. We are all agnostic, like any good scientist would be.
>>7878216
Ask him if he's planning on using that "premise" he explained the other day in his next fiction novel, or if you can use it
>>7878220
Are you also agonstic about Santa Clause?
>>7878216
Ask him to describe a Calabi-Yau n-fold.
To be correct he must say either:
1. It is a Kähler manifold with trivial canonical bundle. Where a Kähler manifold is a complex hermitian manifold with a closed symplectic form defined on it.
2. It is a Kähler manifold with vanishing first chern class. Where a Kähler manifold is a complex hermitian manifold with a closed symplectic form defined on it.
3. It is a Kähler manifold with a Ricci Form that has vanishing cohomology class. Where a Kähler manifold is a complex hermitian manifold with a closed symplectic form defined on it.
If he doesn't give any of those responses. Tell him to stfu and he knows nothing about higher dimensions in String Theory.
>>7878220
OP here
So am I, man. But this guy is a conservative theist, as implied in the text. Furthermore, the bullshit he spewed about string theory is just unforgivable.
>>7878225
your logic is fallible, but if someone is agnostic about Santa Clause, they should consult an astro-physicist, and an aerospace engineer.
>>7878231
OP here
Not only does he not know anything about string theory, but his knowledge of science is mediocre at best. It's actually laughable
>>7878225
The idea of God is far deeper than that of Santa Clause, if you catch my meaning.
>>7878216
He's an English professor. Just learn whatever you can about English from him, ignore his other crazy comments. Get the grade and get out, you're not there to convince everyone to agree with your personal beliefs.
>>7878216
Tell him to keep on reading popsci nonsense! Yer be doing him some good encouragement maybe he can become a scientists
You should say "thank you for your service to the world." And shake his fucking hand.
>>7878233
Well string theory is a meme theory that changes hats to suit the person describing it. Anyone who invokes it should be almost instantly discredited unless they actually study it in some capacity.
Your professor using string theory is very similar to how early theologians used "Angels beating their wings" to account for the orbits of the planets, before gravitation was understood but after it was discovered that there were orbits.
You can always 'get away' with putting God in the gaps of current knowledge or understanding, it doesn't mean you're right, just a terrible gambler. Because unless you know for a fact that bit of scientific unknown you just used is ironclad, new discoveries will shit all over your ill formed position.
You said he is a conservative theist. So what is the point arguing him? Ask him if he believes in individual freedom, and then ask him if abortion should be illegal. If he argues that the state should protect the unborn individual, then ask him why doesn't the state protect the born individual, children for example, they can't defend themselves. Why not protect everyone, while you're at it, women, the elderly.
Surely some kind of device that monitors everyone and prevents crimes, murders, suicides, would be perfect. Eliminate sin, top down.
Explain to him how religion is just an authoritarian state that uses different types of coercion, soft methods such as guilt and transcendental promises of an afterlife or eternal suffering to insert this type of device into everyone's mind.
How it impugns on an individuals freedom much the same way a state would by enforcing violence. How could a divine being have set a template forward that shackles man into a position of false choice, obey or die.
>>7878216
OP, this is how you convert him:
you're gonna stalk and stalk and keep on stalking his ass until he notices you and freaks the fuck out. keep doing it. then when ye get to class, challenge em to an ultimate fight use pokemans or sweet fedoras it doedsn't matter. then you're gonna swing at em . yer gonna get em angry, so he's gonna throw punch. get down on yer ass, bring in your legs, and start shitting. make hard one noises as you do, like your fucking yer best friends mother. This will terrify him. You're then gonna start pissing. Try to vomit (use any method). Terrify him and the class. Writhe on the floor covered in thou anus fluids and piss. Chant "richard dawkings is lorde m'lady look at my fedora i've won sevral internet agruements oh why dont you watch mlp". Rise into your ultimate form, and allow the entire room to marvel at your glorious appearance. You have done well, op
> What should I say to him tomorrow?
"Would you please explain, specifically, how string theory proves that consciousness exists in higher dimensions?"
Or you could just blow the whole thing off because he's talking out his ass about stuff he knows nothing about.
>>7878216
>string theory
The ether of modern physics. The theology of modern ages. If he takes that shit seriously he's retarded.
>>7878216
This is clearly something you should be very upset about.
How could such an up and coming intellectual work in these conditions? Surrounded by simpletons.
His beliefs are interfering with your English education!
I recommend slicing him in two with your katana.
>>7878293
That pic made me kek so hard
thank you, anon
>not getting AP credit in HS for English classes so this shit doesnt happen
>>7878272
upboated
>>7878216
Report him to the head of his department for pushing his religion.
Your abortion analogy falls short since it is illegal to kill children, women, men, or the elderly.
>>7878274
>"Would you please explain, specifically, how string theory proves that consciousness exists in higher dimensions?"
Haha, you'll have to ask a physicist :^)
>>7878293
What has Einstein to do with all these pop scientists?
>>7878216
Ask him to show him the math.
Without math there is only shit
>>7878220
It's agnostic atheist.
If you're not a theist, you're an atheist. If you don't claim absolute certainty about theism or atheism, you're agnostic.
a/gnostic is about how certain you are, not about your position. Or about if god is knowable in principle if you want it more specific.
if he goes off topic next time, tell him you want to learn about english.
and give him a bad review grade for talking about religion in class instead of english at the end of the semester
>>7878216
>That's just, like, your opinion man.
>>7878617
I know it's semantics, but this isn't quite right by the definition I'm familiar with. I understand agnosticism to be the certainty that one cannot know whether or not there is a higher being, not the nebulous zone between theist and atheist
>>7878225
I hate these fucking strawmen
>"If you believe in God you must also believe in Santa Claus!"
Lazy arguing
>>7878695
I see nothing wrong with this. They're both a figment of human imagination.
>>7878695
It wasnt an argument it was a question.
How did you make that category mistake?
>>7878216
>He said this. I'm not even shitting you. What should I say to him tomorrow?
Nothing.
Why would you give a shit what he personally believes?
Your goal in his class should be to get an A and then graduate.
>>7878220
Agnosticism is a meaningless word. I'm agnostic about my own existence or wheter or not the sun is going to rise tomorrow
>>7878695
> strawman
You can use the same argument you use to claim the existence of god for the existence of santa claus, spaghetti monster and any other fictional concept.
>>7879171
how is it meaningless ?
>>7879175
You're agnostic about literally everything. It doesn't add anything
>>7878216
He is right. Go tip your fedora somewhere else.
>>7879178
Not at all. some things I am completely sure of, somethings I know that I don't know and something I have no fucking idea, which I am agnostic about.
>>7879183
Ok then, tell me one thing you are sure of
Nothing, he's right
>>7878216
>Says that this pretty much proves that god exists
how and why?
>>7878220
one cant be just agnostic. at least that has no meaning
>>7879186
2+2=4
two parallel line will never touch each other
>>7879186
i'm sure you are a faggot
>>7879209
i luv you :3
>>7879167
You propose the question as an argument.
I want to think you are being intentionally stupid but after our initial argument I fear you are actually a tetard who is enlisting the aid of your handlers to type these posts for tou
>>7879208
Both of these are conjecture
>>7879218
what is the difference between believing in santa and believing in god?
>>7879220
not at all
>>7879220
no, they are not
>>7879222
This is also known as an argument
>>7879218
>nothing but insults
This indicates it "feels" wrong to you but you don't actually have an argument. Something to think about.
>>7879232
so, there is no difference. i see
>>7879260
2 apples + 2 apples = 4 apples
>>7879266
numbers are abstract concepts, not physical ones
>>7879266
kekd
>>7879260
First law of thermodynamics
>>7879282
How do you know it holds?
>>7878216
ask him to show you some of the mathematical calculations that prove what he said since he claims to know so much about string theory
>>7879286
empirical observation
>>7879275
well in this case there are 4 physical apples
>>7879260
so, you're saying that is just a coincidence that math describes the universe?
and you're trying to separate math from physics?
kek
>>7878338
upbloated and upfloated
>>7879291
You only know that it held those times, it might not hold tomorrow.
>>7879266
>>7879298
I'm not. Because it describes something doesn't mean it's somehow the same thing
>>7879300
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies
chosse one
>>7879319
nice rebutal nigger
why aren't you an agnostic thermodynamicus? You can't know for sure the law will always hold right?
>>7879321
>you cant know nothing1
>you cant even know, that you cant know nothing!
>>7879330
>the reading comprehension of a self proclaimed agnostic
>>7879321
you can go to stephen hawking and pretty much hold a "debate" by only saying this shit
" it might not hold tomorrow"
if you can assume that logical conclusion can change tomorrow, that by some reason, a line can be a line and a circle at the same time, or any other axiom.
nice argumentation nigger
>>7879321
>agnostic thermodynamicus
nice nigger, now fuck off
So many fedoralords in this thread holy shit.
>>7879338
I'm talking physics, not logic or axioms. God is obviously not an abstract concept since he can influence the world (if he were to exist)
>a line can be a line and a circle at the same time
take some complex analysis senpai
>>7879351
>>7879295
but do they have a certain quality of appleness?
>>7879336
>strawman
>good point
>>7879382
they are apples made of applecolored apllematter
If he's real or not, I still drive with a bible on the dash
>>7879338
The good thing about debating Stephen Hawking is you can keep on throwing shit at him while he takes half an hour to type out a response by twitching his eyelid.
>>7879469
You should keep a koran and a torah there too, just in case.
>>7878216
Nothing. It's best to just humor humanities-tards.
>>7878216
well, theoretically, there should be a so-called "final observer", according to Wigner, that is supposed to be God, or the Great Universal Mind, or Conscious Universe or whatever
>>7879801
Why?
>>7880162
Same reason you have a bible there, I guess.
>>7878216
I'd say the proof of a higher-dimensional intelligence isn't proof of a god-like being.
I'd also say that proof of a god-like being still isn't proof of a god.
I'd also say that proof of a god isn't proof of a Judeo-Christian Earth-centric deity.
Then I'd ask out loud why I even care and walk away.
>>7879178
It adds: those who call themselves agnostic are too lazy or scared or wimpy to make up their minds.
>>7880173
People don't trust Jews and Muslims as much as Christians, I take it you haven't heard the song
