3 questions for atheists
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 8 Votes - 1.5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
18-01-2014, 02:18 AM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(17-01-2014 08:21 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  
(17-01-2014 12:26 AM)Brownshirt Wrote:  Your version of scepticism assumes nothing but your ability to assess the question of a god. If this is not true, tell me why you request evidence? I don't believe this to be a genuine request, simply one to prove your point. What evidence of a god has man ever had throughout history. It seems a concoction to justify atheism. The pretence of rationality is just that. If evidence is presented use it then.

For the dozenth time. I/skepticial views do not assume we can accurately assess the question of God. It's left at an open unconfirmed block. Your agnostic

This is why people say you don't understand. You keep asserting false concepts and not explaining why you think them.

And I don't go around asking for evidence. If someone is telling me their position though, I will ask them their rationale for it. That's how one LEARNS of positions. Again based on what do you find it not genuine of request? Is it different than your creation of this thread with those questions? Was that not genuine request? What separates those?

As I see it, the actual ideas matter far more than labels. I don't care if you call yourself a Huxley agnostic, anti-theist, satanists, or atheist. Labels are a weak form of attempting to categorize people. I would still enjoy being apart of this community here if it was called the intellectual agnostics or dragonblood worship center, as long as the ideas it was based on were the same.

The only purpose of a label like that which fits into non-belief is so people in a world that has a lot if religious power control, realize find out there is a growing movement of people who aren't accepting unconfirmed religious/deity claims. That may answer one of your original questions which may of been answered many times before if it wasn't stated in a form of asserting something.


Tell me what you're not sceptical of. The position eats itself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-01-2014, 02:35 AM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
Google image the position eats itself


Attached File(s) Thumbnail(s)
   

Swing with me a while, we can listen to the birds call, we can keep each other warm.
Swing with me forever, we can count up every flower, we can weather every storm.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Losty's post
18-01-2014, 03:07 AM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(17-01-2014 12:50 PM)Brownshirt Wrote:  
(17-01-2014 03:01 AM)Monster_Riffs Wrote:  .... and this is the pin point exactly where you and I disagreed much earlier in the thread. At the understanding of the word. ... Which happens a lot in life, then people waste time and energy debating a word arbitrarily when the persons intention and thought behind it are way more important. ... I was listening to a discussion about this exact subject, the word agnosticism, on themagicsandwichshow the other day. It seems that your classic definition of the word is technically correct. However, as skepticism and theology have continued to communicate over the years, it would appear that our use of the word is also academically and intellectually correct. Modern language evolves, like everything. ... So once again, interesting, yes. Important in the grand scheme of things? Not really.

Have you got any links/footnotes which backup your claim of your use of the word being used academically? Intellectually is a little bit more subjective I would like to see some use of the term in this way.

I work over the weekend mate. I'll take a look this afternoon and come back to you on it.

I'll just play the 'can I help you' lick!!!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-01-2014, 08:10 AM
Re: RE: 3 questions for atheists
(18-01-2014 02:18 AM)Brownshirt Wrote:  
(17-01-2014 08:21 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  For the dozenth time. I/skepticial views do not assume we can accurately assess the question of God. It's left at an open unconfirmed block. Your agnostic

This is why people say you don't understand. You keep asserting false concepts and not explaining why you think them.

And I don't go around asking for evidence. If someone is telling me their position though, I will ask them their rationale for it. That's how one LEARNS of positions. Again based on what do you find it not genuine of request? Is it different than your creation of this thread with those questions? Was that not genuine request? What separates those?

As I see it, the actual ideas matter far more than labels. I don't care if you call yourself a Huxley agnostic, anti-theist, satanists, or atheist. Labels are a weak form of attempting to categorize people. I would still enjoy being apart of this community here if it was called the intellectual agnostics or dragonblood worship center, as long as the ideas it was based on were the same.

The only purpose of a label like that which fits into non-belief is so people in a world that has a lot if religious power control, realize find out there is a growing movement of people who aren't accepting unconfirmed religious/deity claims. That may answer one of your original questions which may of been answered many times before if it wasn't stated in a form of asserting something.


Tell me what you're not sceptical of. The position eats itself.

You strive to be skeptical of everything, which includes your ability to be skeptical and the ability for information to be found/known. There is nothing wrong with the answer, you don't know, in fact it's wiser and more accurate than stating you know a limit exists.

Are you going to give any explanation about a one phrase comment you state?

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-01-2014, 08:23 PM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(18-01-2014 08:10 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  
(18-01-2014 02:18 AM)Brownshirt Wrote:  Tell me what you're not sceptical of. The position eats itself.

You strive to be skeptical of everything, which includes your ability to be skeptical and the ability for information to be found/known. There is nothing wrong with the answer, you don't know, in fact it's wiser and more accurate than stating you know a limit exists.

Are you going to give any explanation about a one phrase comment you state?

Ok, but I've probably said this all before.

I don't believe that we can know the reason or cause for our existence. We are simply a product of the environment (the universe) we are looking to observe and then rationalise not only our existence, but the environment which created us. It seems incredibly presumptuous to assume we can analyse what created us and provide an accurate account of it. The intelligibility of the universe does not lead me to believe that we can go beyond what we observe, or ever have observed. We may be viewing it 100% correctly but only assessing 1% of it, or a myriad of various other variables. The pretence of assessment and observation can lead to universe shattering discovery is just that, would should I believe otherwise? To attempt the rationalisation of everything you require a foundation.

How do you differentiate between the unknown and the unknowable? To me the unknown can be known, while unknowable is a constant state and will never be known. Making a claim that something is unknown is as much as a statement as unknowable. Or are you going to take the ground of it's unknown whether it's unknown? Then you enter Donald Rumsfeld territory which is just bullshit really, and you may as well not say anything about it.

I find it odd that many here state I need to rationalise this claim of it being unknowable. If you prove it is, I will change my mind until then I see no reason, based on human history and what science is, and seeks to do, to assume we will find anything out.

I see no reason to define my position based on a lack of belief in someone else's claim. Atheism traditionally negates a god, taking this label into an inactive position by asserting your lack of belief, which you actively claim yourself to be serves no purpose, unless you're anti-theist. I would be interested if you are sceptical of other things, away from this area. There are many things we believe to be true, but don't know for sure. So the know/belief divide is sometimes too grey to even bother.

I also believe some atheists are attempting to appear logical by the constant accusation of various fallacies. The use of these is stale, being sceptical requires that you CAN assess reality correctly, for some reason you're not sceptical of that. And if you are, why? Sooner or later you need to commit to something o just don't enter the fray.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-01-2014, 09:36 PM (This post was last modified: 18-01-2014 09:48 PM by Hafnof.)
RE: 3 questions for atheists
You don't know until you try son. You're as much an idiot for thinking we can't figure things out as others are idiots for thinking we can. One group of idiots makes progress. The other rests and rots. You are the Luddite here.

It is unlikely that we will ever get to know "everything", but we won't know what we can know until we set out to find out. Atheism founded on scientific scepticism is the position that we have no reason to believe ridiculous things until we have found out whether or not they are true, and to continue to strive to find out what is really true. Your big idea is to sit in the corner and laugh and sulk.

How's that working out for you?

Give me your argument in the form of a published paper, and then we can start to talk.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like Hafnof's post
18-01-2014, 10:51 PM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(18-01-2014 08:23 PM)Brownshirt Wrote:  Atheism traditionally negates a god

For me, traditionally I'm not keen on tradition, but I do hold to definitions when it comes to language because it is the best way to portray ourselves, especially in a place like the internet. My position doesn't negate a god, it fails to recognize one. Your logic is assuming and atrocious.

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like evenheathen's post
18-01-2014, 11:04 PM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(17-01-2014 03:09 AM)evenheathen Wrote:  
(17-01-2014 02:45 AM)Brownshirt Wrote:  Utilising the knowledge component from agnosticism misses what agnosticism is.
Dafuq? You are trying too hard, let's stick to words that we know.

I saw this today and it made me think of BS.

[Image: 3307CB86-5C59-442B-9575-959B8D5BD7E3_zpskwkqxfrz.jpg]

Swing with me a while, we can listen to the birds call, we can keep each other warm.
Swing with me forever, we can count up every flower, we can weather every storm.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Losty's post
18-01-2014, 11:32 PM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
HAHAHAHHA, Phteven for President

Theism is to believe what other people claim, Atheism is to ask "why should I".
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes sporehux's post
19-01-2014, 12:03 AM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(18-01-2014 09:36 PM)Hafnof Wrote:  You don't know until you try son. You're as much an idiot for thinking we can't figure things out as others are idiots for thinking we can. One group of idiots makes progress. The other rests and rots. You are the Luddite here.

It is unlikely that we will ever get to know "everything", but we won't know what we can know until we set out to find out. Atheism founded on scientific scepticism is the position that we have no reason to believe ridiculous things until we have found out whether or not they are true, and to continue to strive to find out what is really true. Your big idea is to sit in the corner and laugh and sulk.

How's that working out for you?

So you've presumed you can find out what is true.

Oh the Dawkins line of "but we're working on that". When you say progress what do you mean?

Keep striving and you can achieve the multiverse and Krauss' something from nothing....son.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: