Atheism

@layman,

I generally agree with edgarblythe, oh, 95 percent of the time re anything, but I don't consider you, layman, and argome and posting agnostics as trolls. Well, maybe Frank (hi, Frank) but he can't help it. We've argued for twelve years, or more than twelve years, if you consider another old website, now long gone.

Part of those 600 or so pages were taken up by religious people trying to overwhelm us all. Part of the anger from some of us is that this has been circular, and we who want to talk about not being theists as such have kept having to wear others out, which gets old.

Actually, our newest religious person on the boards, Neil Griffiths, was highly courteous and I appreciate him.

1 Reply

@argome321,

Quote:

I said I don't believe in god. I never said there was no god but typically you passed right over that

Yeah, I know what you said, Arg, but apparently you didn't read what I said too carefully, which was:.

Quote:

You are effectively asserting, whether you deny it or not, that there is no god of any conceivable type.

See the word "effectively" there. You said you were STRONGLY atheistic, didn't you. You said you wanted religion GONE, didn't you? You said you were 99% sure, didn't you. As Frank point out, you made an assertion about "low probabilities," didn't you?

Quote:

Do you want to be honest or be disingenuous... because you know I said that.

If it makes you feel better to pretend that I'm some kind of liar, help yourself.

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

Don't go away, Layman.

Argome will be back.

This is too good and interesting a discussion for it to be abandoned for now.

Ah you know me so well

0 Replies

@layman,

Quote:

See the word "effectively" there. You said you were STRONGLY atheistic, didn't you. You said you wanted religion GONE, didn't you? You said you were 99% sure, didn't you. As Frank point out, you made an assertion about "low probabilities," didn't you?

Come on, you know saying I want religion gone isn't the same thing as saying I know god doesn't exist. That putting words in my mouth. And if you can't make that distinction that's on you.

if you insist on that, that I did, then you know there is no where to go from here.

And that low probability is a rational assessment based on the lack of any viable evidence, since there's no empirical data and no sound reason to believe otherwise. so quit the straw man arguments.
lets debate the reason why people believe, Do you have any?
or what is the high probability that a god exist?

1 Reply

@argome321,

It's probably not al dente.

0 Replies

@argome321,

Quote:

And if you don't know anything about it isn't that tantamount to nothing since you can't prove it?

If beliefs are "nothing" then, yeah, I suppose so. Frank has made no claims to know (or even believe) anything, in particular, about these matters. Nor have I.

You have. But you want us to "prove" something that, as I said, I don't think is capable of being "proved" empirically even if it was 100% true.

0 Replies

@layman,

Quote:

See the word "effectively" there. You said you were STRONGLY atheistic, didn't you. You said you wanted religion GONE, didn't you? You said you were 99% sure, didn't you. As Frank point out, you made an assertion about "low probabilities," didn't you?

So if I say that tomorrow that there is a very slight chance, a very slim chance, .01 %, that it might rain, is that the same as saying I said it will rain even if it does rain?

1 Reply

@argome321,

Quote:

So if I say that tomorrow that there is a very slight chance, a very slim chance, .01 %, that it might rain, is that the same as saying I said it will rain even if it does rain?

I have to presume that you meant to say "that the same as saying I said it will NOT rain even if it does rain?"

No, it isn't. But you said you had a belief, as I understood you. I'm paraphrasing, so forgive me if I don't get it down, word for word, but....

1. You said that you assumed there either was, or was not a god(s)
2. You said there was no middle ground
3. You emphatically said you did NOT believe there was a god, and that, therefore,
4. You were compelled to believe there is no god.

Did I get that wrong?

1 Reply

@layman,

Quote:

I have to presume that you meant to say "that the same as saying I said it will NOT rain even if it does rain?"

No,I actually meant what I said. Despite there is a very slim chance . almost no chance of rain tomorrow, that just because it rain I could not say with absolute certainty that it would not rain or that it would actually rain. It is just that one had a great chance of happening the other of not happening.

Quote:

No, it isn't. But you said you had a belief, as I understood you. I'm paraphrasing, so forgive me if I don't get it down, word for word, but....

I have beliefs but as I keep insisting belief doesn't require knowledge or certainty. I think we both agree at this point

Quote:

1. You said that you assumed there either was, or was not a god(s)

Pretty much, god(s) exist or god(s) don't.

Quote:

2. You said there was no middle ground

I have no memory of saying this or what it refers to. If I did say this remind me what this is about and I'll answer then

Quote:

3. You emphatically said you did NOT believe there was a god, and that, therefore,

yep, the god concept makes no sense to me. we are talking about belief not knowledge

Quote:

4. You were compelled to believe there is no god.

I know I never said this, you can't compel people to believe anything even if you put a gun to their heads. History bears that out.

Quote:

Did I get that wrong?

I think some parts,

1 Reply

@layman,

Well said.

0 Replies

@argome321,

Testing is the way to progress slowly and methodically . True advances come from the radical and the unorthodox, an idea that doesnt fit the mould of what we do know . If you say you can only believe in what is already known, we will get nowhere fast . There is an assumption that we have the knowledge to prove whether or not God exists but I see no reason to presuppose that .

1 Reply

@argome321,

Quote:

I want religion gone

What will fill the lives of the people who need religion ? Not the fundamentalist who are 9 out of 10 parts psychotic but the ordinary people who find it helps them in their lives ? Do you imagine a world where everyone worships science ?

1 Reply

@argome321,

Here's the post I was trying to summarize:

Quote:

I am a very strong atheist and anti theist.
1) I am not a theist. I never have been.
2) is self evident by the negation of no.1, using my definition either god(s) exist or god(s) don't.

A can't be true and false

.

This is why I said no middle ground (again paraphrasing). You say it's (1) either A or B and (2) it can't be both A and not-A (the "law of the excluded middle" in logic). So based on that, you say:

Quote:

3)Though i am 99% sure that there is no god(s) it would be foolish of me to say so absolutely

In science, a 99% "confidence factor" is EXTREMELY high.

Now you say: "I have beliefs but as I keep insisting belief doesn't require knowledge or certainty. I think we both agree at this point" Yes I agree.

Quote:

"4. You were compelled to believe there is no god." I know I never said this, you can't compel people to believe anything even if you put a gun to their heads.

I merely meant logically compelled, not forced at gunpoint.

This is one reason I kept asking you if you thought it was even possible to not have any beliefs, one way or the other. The way you put it, if you don't believe there is a god, then you have to believe there isn't.

A third possibility would be (or so I say, and Frank says, as it applies to him) to say that you don't have a definite belief on the topic either way. Not saying you (or anyone in particular) have to take that position, only that it seems quite possible to me.

1 Reply

http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb192/DinahFyre/10471431_1084058004942983_601130369613038764_n.jpg

1 Reply

@FBM,

I see here that it says DeWitt "hosted the first meeting of the Community Mission Chapel, which DeWitt calls an "atheist church". An "atheist church," imagine that.

"DeWitt joined the Clergy Project, a group which lends confidential support to preachers who no longer believe in God. The Clergy Project was founded by Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Linda LaScola, and former preacher Dan Barker. DeWitt's outing as an atheist occurred in October 2011 after a photo circulated online of DeWitt and Dawkins, taken at a meeting of freethinkers."

I'm not sure Dawkins and Dennet quite got through to him though, FBM, because he uses the word "agnosticism" in the quote you posted. Most atheist churches these days preach that there is no such critter, from what I've seen.

2 Replies

@layman,

People have been arguing over these silly labels for years. If someone says s/he's agnostic rather than atheist or vice versa, nobody can force them to accept the label that they don't agree with. Nobody is privy to what goes on between someone else's ears.

3 Replies

@FBM,

Quote:

. If someone says s/he's agnostic rather than atheist or vice versa, nobody can force them to accept the label that they don't agree with

Oh, I agree completely. "Force" would not be the method used. More like "indoctrination," I would think.

0 Replies

@FBM,

I find it somewhat interesting that atheists choose to refer to themselves as "freethinkers." What does that mean? That anyone who is not an atheist is a "slavethinker," or something?

Quote:

Susan Jacoby is an American author. She is an atheist and a secularist...Her book Freethinkers: A History of American Secularism was named a notable book of 2004 by The Washington Post and The New York Times...In February 2010 she was named to the Freedom From Religion Foundation's Honorary Board of distinguished achievers.[8] Also in 2010, she was awarded The Richard Dawkins Award by Atheist Alliance International.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_Jacoby

Maybe it just means "free from the chains of religion." eh? Whatever...if it's "free" I want me some of it!

2 Replies

@layman,

I reckon it would be best to ask the people who use that term. I wouldn't presume to speak for them.

2 Replies

@FBM,

DeWitt may call himself a free-thinker, but he's really jumping on the bandwaggon by growing a beard.

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know