3 questions for atheists
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 8 Votes - 1.5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-01-2014, 06:06 PM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(07-01-2014 05:55 PM)Brownshirt Wrote:  
(07-01-2014 05:53 PM)Taqiyya Mockingbird Wrote:  Yes, you described yourself perfectly.

[Image: NO_U_cycle.gif]

[Image: a122afc87ab52b925cd6446f84999b2c5d93645a...8c0dc5.jpg]

Is your role here the "no, you are guy"? Or is that my role according to you?

I'm the guy who likes to shred idiotic trolls. You....you are...just another chew toy.

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
07-01-2014, 06:21 PM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(07-01-2014 06:03 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(07-01-2014 05:31 PM)Brownshirt Wrote:  Where is this bible that tells you what the universe would look exactly like without a deity? I needs me one of those.

[Image: h7995B6A3]

You don't claim knowledge but claim to know what a universe would look exactly like without a god. Gotta love the self-awareness within 2 sentences.

There is no bible, there is science. When we investigate reality, we continue to explain things with entirely naturalistic mechanisms. Not once has any mechanism required addition of the supernatural. The universe looks natural, and investigation continues to support that.

Have you looked at life, at our biosphere? All life is related, every living thing is cousin to every other, there is a common ancestor of daisies and dinosaurs, petunias and primates,
staphylococcus and cocker spaniels. Have you looked at parasites, diseases, predators? It is all explained by evolution.

We continue to investigate the universe because there are many, many things we don't know, things for which we don't yet have answers.

Of course naturalistic mechanisms explain what we observe. How this all stacks up into some grand picture of solely naturalistic origin (and by this I presume you mean non-deity) of existence is still not justified.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-01-2014, 06:27 PM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(07-01-2014 06:21 PM)Brownshirt Wrote:  
(07-01-2014 06:03 PM)Chas Wrote:  There is no bible, there is science. When we investigate reality, we continue to explain things with entirely naturalistic mechanisms. Not once has any mechanism required addition of the supernatural. The universe looks natural, and investigation continues to support that.

Have you looked at life, at our biosphere? All life is related, every living thing is cousin to every other, there is a common ancestor of daisies and dinosaurs, petunias and primates,
staphylococcus and cocker spaniels. Have you looked at parasites, diseases, predators? It is all explained by evolution.

We continue to investigate the universe because there are many, many things we don't know, things for which we don't yet have answers.

Of course naturalistic mechanisms explain what we observe. How this all stacks up into some grand picture of solely naturalistic origin (and by this I presume you mean non-deity) of existence is still not justified.

I didn't mention the origin of the universe.
But since you bring it up, the agnostic answer, the only honest answer, is "I don't know".

Our knowledge of the universe gives us some rational hypotheses.

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
07-01-2014, 06:27 PM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(07-01-2014 06:03 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(07-01-2014 05:31 PM)Brownshirt Wrote:  Where is this bible that tells you what the universe would look exactly like without a deity? I needs me one of those.

[Image: h7995B6A3]

You don't claim knowledge but claim to know what a universe would look exactly like without a god. Gotta love the self-awareness within 2 sentences.

There is no bible, there is science. When we investigate reality, we continue to explain things with entirely naturalistic mechanisms. Not once has any mechanism required addition of the supernatural. The universe looks natural, and investigation continues to support that.

Have you looked at life, at our biosphere? All life is related, every living thing is cousin to every other, there is a common ancestor of daisies and dinosaurs, petunias and primates,
staphylococcus and cocker spaniels. Have you looked at parasites, diseases, predators? It is all explained by evolution.

We continue to investigate the universe because there are many, many things we don't know, things for which we don't yet have answers.

Chas, this guy is a total dick. Don't waste your time unless you want to play with a new toy.

[Image: dobie.png]Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-01-2014, 07:22 PM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(07-01-2014 06:21 PM)Brownshirt Wrote:  Of course naturalistic mechanisms explain what we observe. How this all stacks up into some grand picture of solely naturalistic origin (and by this I presume you mean non-deity) of existence is still not justified.

[Image: the-Wicker-Man-6.jpg]

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
07-01-2014, 07:23 PM (This post was last modified: 07-01-2014 07:58 PM by WeAreTheCosmos.)
RE: 3 questions for atheists
Claim:
"God exists"

Response:
"I accept that claim" - Theist
"I do not accept that claim" - Atheist (non-acceptance of the claim)
"I do not accept that claim. There is no god" - Atheist (non-acceptance of initial claim, followed by an assertion which is necessarily atheist, but not inherently atheist)

Non-acceptance of a claim doesn't indicate the belief in the opposite. Non-acceptance of a claim doesn't indicate BELIEF of anything.

Of course, if you still don't understand what nearly EVERYBODY here has been telling you, perhaps you need to let go of your pride, or consider the possibility that you are mentally deficient in some ways.

I gave you perfectly palatable examples earlier in the thread. I know you did not accept all of my examples as valid, but the reasons you gave were either unrelated or simply invalid refutations. A few were so far removed from the points I made, that I simply assumed you were trolling. But, if you don't understand yet, I'm afraid you may be incapable.


Now as far as making the term "agnostic" useless, I don't see that at all.

The usage of "agnostic" has been popularized as you mentioned, to be a person who claims "Nothing can be known about the existence or non-existence of dieties" (paraphrased)

However, the popularization of the word does NOT invalidate the use of the word as translated from its origin in "gnosis".
Gnosis - knowledge of spiritual mysteries
Gnostic - of or relating to knowledge, esp. esoteric mystical knowledge.

Through perfectly acceptable use of language, a person who is "WITHOUT knowledge of spiritual mysteries", can be said to be agnostic. The literal implications do NOT require that we deny the ability to know, only that we currently do not make claims from gnosis.

In fact, it could be argued that the popularized view of agnosticism (that we CANNOT know), is in itself making a claim of knowledge about spiritual matters, and is actually not truly an agnostic stance.


gnostic theist - believes and knows there is a god
agnostic (literal) theist - believes in god, but doesn't claim TO HAVE knowledge about the existence of god
agnostic (popularized) - believes we cannot know whether or not god exists
agnostic (literal) atheist - doesn't believe in god, but doesn't claim TO HAVE knowledge about the existence of god
gnostic atheist - doesn't believe in god, knows there is no god
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-01-2014, 07:48 PM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(07-01-2014 01:43 PM)Brownshirt Wrote:  


Okay, so I watched the video. In short, it is a gross overgeneralization of what it means to be an atheist. I get it. You are against militant atheism. You are against the fanatical atheists. What you don't get is that most atheists are not that.

That's why I said a while ago that your arguments belong in a youtube comment section. People tend to get fanatical about anything when they are camouflaged by the anonymity of the net. That's why comment sections are so heated no matter what the subject matter may be.

Towards the end of the video, he says that "agnosticism is the only way to search for the scientific truth". This is wrong. Skepticism is the only way to search for the scientific truth.

Agnosticism is the only intellectually honest response to "do you know whether or not there is a god?". Sure. That is why most of us will claim agnostic atheism or atheistic agnosticism.

If you are asked "do you hold a positive belief in a god?", and cannot answer yes, then by definition of the word you are an atheist.

Your video creates a big strawman about atheists by only talking about atheists like Dawkins (he's the first one mentioned, surprise, surprise). It only talks about those who are actively outspoken against religion, but you have to realize that the majority of people out there who identify with atheism don't publicly decry religion, don't ridicule those with beliefs, and generally don't even get on the internet and try to push their view.

As I said before, this is the only place I come to to even talk about atheism. It's the only forum I belong to and I don't really use the internet for much anything else but entertainment and education.

I don't fit your categorization of what an atheist is (you still won't acknowledge that it's because what you categorize an atheist as is an overgeneralization and is inherently, definitionally, and categorically wrong).

You need to back the fuck up, take a really good look at the world and start to take it in for what it is, not for whatever view of it makes you feel better about yourself.

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
07-01-2014, 07:49 PM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(07-01-2014 07:23 PM)WeAreTheCosmos Wrote:  ....except maybe the belief that insufficient evidence has been given.

That isn't a belief, my friend. It is an observation.

Carry on. Thumbsup

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
07-01-2014, 07:58 PM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(07-01-2014 07:49 PM)Taqiyya Mockingbird Wrote:  
(07-01-2014 07:23 PM)WeAreTheCosmos Wrote:  ....except maybe the belief that insufficient evidence has been given.

That isn't a belief, my friend. It is an observation.

Carry on. Thumbsup

fixt
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-01-2014, 08:23 PM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(07-01-2014 01:43 PM)Brownshirt Wrote:  


Did this fucking idiot BS make this video? What a buffoon....both of them...

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
Post Reply
Forum Jump: