3 questions for atheists
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 8 Votes - 1.5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
31-12-2013, 03:19 PM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(31-12-2013 03:16 PM)Brownshirt Wrote:  
(31-12-2013 01:03 PM)WeAreTheCosmos Wrote:  You really have a hard time with comprehension and critical thinking. I clearly stated that being agnostic is reasonable when it comes to whether or not god exists. So we agree there.

The part you seem to have trouble grasping is that when someone makes a claim, you either believe it or you dont. You needn't dismiss it completely, but you do either believe it or not.

If I said "I have a $20 bill in my pocket"
You either believe it or not.
If you do not believe it, you needn't dismiss it. Perhaps you are waiting for proof. When proof is presented you may change your mind. "I dont believe and I dont disbelieve" doesn't work, because as soon as you decide its anything other than a true claim, you do not believe it. Even if you are indecisive, you technically have not accepted it as true, and thus do not believe it.

The point is, if I said "God exists." You either believe that claim or you don't. If you do not believe it, you may be waiting for proof. You may change your mind, but you either believe the claim or do not. Agnosticism is NOT in between, its simply admitting that you dont know for sure.

You can believe the claim and be agnostic. You can disbelieve the claim and be agnostic.

Your position is so typical of an atheist.

That is because it is the rational one.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
31-12-2013, 03:30 PM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(31-12-2013 12:27 PM)Brownshirt Wrote:  
(31-12-2013 12:00 PM)Taqiyya Mockingbird Wrote:  Proving that you have no idea what you are droning on about.




^^^ Removing any potential doubt that you are completely ignorant of the definition and origin of the word.

You don't understand what proof is do you? If you disagree that's not proof . In your limited world thay seems to be all you require, good on you for making things as simple as you.

[Image: h1E312051]

It's Special Pleadings all the way down!


Magic Talking Snakes STFU -- revenantx77


You can't have your special pleading and eat it too. -- WillHop
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-12-2013, 03:33 PM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(31-12-2013 01:03 PM)WeAreTheCosmos Wrote:  
(31-12-2013 12:33 PM)Brownshirt Wrote:  How wonderfully simplistic. If there's no evidence for the light bulb being on or off why should I make a statement either way? If you believe there's evidence for a reason for existence present it. Given what we do know about the universe tell me why I should make a decision either way.

You really have a hard time with comprehension and critical thinking. I clearly stated that being agnostic is reasonable when it comes to whether or not god exists. So we agree there.

The part you seem to have trouble grasping is that when someone makes a claim, you either believe it or you dont. You needn't dismiss it completely, but you do either believe it or not.

If I said "I have a $20 bill in my pocket"
You either believe it or not.
If you do not believe it, you needn't dismiss it. Perhaps you are waiting for proof. When proof is presented you may change your mind. "I dont believe and I dont disbelieve" doesn't work, because as soon as you decide its anything other than a true claim, you do not believe it. Even if you are indecisive, you technically have not accepted it as true, and thus do not believe it.

The point is, if I said "God exists." You either believe that claim or you don't. If you do not believe it, you may be waiting for proof. You may change your mind, but you either believe the claim or do not. Agnosticism is NOT in between, its simply admitting that you dont know for sure.

You can believe the claim and be agnostic. You can disbelieve the claim and be agnostic.


Conventional logic vs. BrownShit logic

[Image: funny-pictures-auto-comics-logic-371546.jpeg]

It's Special Pleadings all the way down!


Magic Talking Snakes STFU -- revenantx77


You can't have your special pleading and eat it too. -- WillHop
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-12-2013, 04:35 PM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(31-12-2013 03:16 PM)Brownshirt Wrote:  
(31-12-2013 01:03 PM)WeAreTheCosmos Wrote:  You really have a hard time with comprehension and critical thinking. I clearly stated that being agnostic is reasonable when it comes to whether or not god exists. So we agree there.

The part you seem to have trouble grasping is that when someone makes a claim, you either believe it or you dont. You needn't dismiss it completely, but you do either believe it or not.

If I said "I have a $20 bill in my pocket"
You either believe it or not.
If you do not believe it, you needn't dismiss it. Perhaps you are waiting for proof. When proof is presented you may change your mind. "I dont believe and I dont disbelieve" doesn't work, because as soon as you decide its anything other than a true claim, you do not believe it. Even if you are indecisive, you technically have not accepted it as true, and thus do not believe it.

The point is, if I said "God exists." You either believe that claim or you don't. If you do not believe it, you may be waiting for proof. You may change your mind, but you either believe the claim or do not. Agnosticism is NOT in between, its simply admitting that you dont know for sure.

You can believe the claim and be agnostic. You can disbelieve the claim and be agnostic.

Your position is so typical of an atheist.

Yes, an atheist tends to accurately grasp the difference between belief and knowledge.

I disbelieve "God exists" for its lack of evidence.
I disbelieve "Brownshirt is intelligent and honest" for the evidence pointing to the contrary.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like WeAreTheCosmos's post
31-12-2013, 05:04 PM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
[Image: 27.gif]

A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels. ~ Albert Einstein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes kim's post
31-12-2013, 05:49 PM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(31-12-2013 05:04 PM)kim Wrote:  [Image: 27.gif]

^^^ That must be KIM, STILL WAITING for your answers to her questions that you were too busy failtrolling at me and everyone else to get to.


Cool

It's Special Pleadings all the way down!


Magic Talking Snakes STFU -- revenantx77


You can't have your special pleading and eat it too. -- WillHop
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-01-2014, 01:01 AM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(31-12-2013 12:42 PM)Ameron1963 Wrote:  
(28-12-2013 12:36 AM)Brownshirt Wrote:  1. Why do you have an active lack of belief? The position comes across as one who wants to be recognised as one who negates any form of god but not have to prove anything.

2. What is the purpose of atheism?

3. Why believe evidence is (or will be) available to confirm or negate a god?


1. Do you believe that meatballs from South Carolina have rolled into a nuclear power plant, mated with termites and are currently attacking Italian restaurant's across the nation!??? I don't have to prove that god exists. You do!

2. Atheism does not have a purpose. It is: "a disbelief in the existence of deity". It's not a belief of something.

3. Since there is no evidence to support the existence of any god, but a great deal of evidence to support other reasons for all that exists, atheists kind of have the upper hand in the debate.

1. Nope I don't have to prove anything, nor would I bother to disprove your claim, or even comment on it. I realise you make your claim as ridiculous as possible to give your position the pretension of having a grip truth. All you have is a grip on is your lack of belief, well done, how marvelously pointless.

2. Of course it's a belief. If you discount a deity you must have a rationale for doing so, and believe you have some sort of proof for existence which discounts it. Given that there's no proof which does anything of the sort, yours is a belief. A leap of faith, a non-god of the gaps if you will.

3. What evidence do you have? I would love to hear this. I'm expecting the obvious Evolution, Big Bang, possibly even Quantum Fluctuations and perhaps some Krauss as well? Sleepy

Atheists have nothing of the sort. You just like to think you do.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-01-2014, 01:17 AM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(31-12-2013 01:03 PM)WeAreTheCosmos Wrote:  
(31-12-2013 12:33 PM)Brownshirt Wrote:  How wonderfully simplistic. If there's no evidence for the light bulb being on or off why should I make a statement either way? If you believe there's evidence for a reason for existence present it. Given what we do know about the universe tell me why I should make a decision either way.

Quote:You really have a hard time with comprehension and critical thinking. I clearly stated that being agnostic is reasonable when it comes to whether or not god exists. So we agree there.

Meh, I understand you perspective and disagree, that has nothing to do with comprehension. However your perspective seems symptomatic of being an atheist. The funny thing is you think you hold some copyright on logic and rationality. The typical atheist is as dogmatic as any theist. How would I "digress" from an atheist to agnostic?



The part you seem to have trouble grasping is that when someone makes a claim, you either believe it or you dont. You needn't dismiss it completely, but you do either believe it or not.

Quote:If I said "I have a $20 bill in my pocket"
You either believe it or not.
If you do not believe it, you needn't dismiss it. Perhaps you are waiting for proof. When proof is presented you may change your mind. "I dont believe and I dont disbelieve" doesn't work, because as soon as you decide its anything other than a true claim, you do not believe it. Even if you are indecisive, you technically have not accepted it as true, and thus do not believe it.

The point is, if I said "God exists." You either believe that claim or you don't. If you do not believe it, you may be waiting for proof. You may change your mind, but you either believe the claim or do not. Agnosticism is NOT in between, its simply admitting that you dont know for sure.

You can believe the claim and be agnostic. You can disbelieve the claim and be agnostic.

This is hardly a great example for your case, nor does it require critical thinking. Firstly you're using an example which is verifiable (this is a typical tactic) as you're looking to equate if $20 is in your pocket to whether a creator exists. Tell me why?

If you show me that $20 is in your pocket, belief doesn't play a factor does it?

I attribute an equal likelihood that a creator exists to existence to purely being the byproduct of a spontaneous random process without catalyst.

Perhaps you should define the difference between believe and know. And at what point do the two merge? Why do you assume that we can observe reality as it is?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-01-2014, 01:18 AM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(31-12-2013 03:19 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(31-12-2013 03:16 PM)Brownshirt Wrote:  Your position is so typical of an atheist.

That is because it is the rational one.

Yeah yeah you hold the one truth. Now where have I heard that before? Oh yeah....
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-01-2014, 01:27 AM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(31-12-2013 02:22 PM)joshChase Wrote:  1. Why do you have an active lack of belief?
I don't have an active lack of believe, in the same way I am not actively not collecting stamps - it doesn't require any effort, therefore is inactive.

Why not got to forum for Aphilatists?

Quote:2. What is the purpose of atheism?
It doesn't serve a purpose other than for convenience in labeling.

Yeah words do that.

Quote:3. Why believe evidence is (or will be) available to confirm or negate a god?
Borrowing from Matt Dillahunty, a god (under common usage) would know exactly what evidence it would take to convince me. I don't need to negate god anymore than I need to prove unicorns don't exist. Do you spend time concerned about how to disprove Findledomathings? Of course not, for I just made it up (I thinkWink. The active part of atheism is response to the effects of belief on others, not the inaction of disbelief.

Why would a god need to convince you? Why did you say atheism serves no purpose and then say "is response to the effects of belief on others"? Can a purpose not be to respond? The interesting thing is a key part of atheism is the disbelief, or the effects on others would not be viewed as adverse otherwise.

Personally I find atheist use soft targets to "win" their battle. Whatever makes you feel good, just don't get all pissy when you're called to justify it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: