A Request for Sources
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
17-12-2012, 10:37 PM
RE: A Request for Sources
(17-12-2012 06:35 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(17-12-2012 05:35 PM)Janus Wrote:  There you go again... your "knowledge"... You know fuck all, KC! You're just aping what it says in that great book of fairy tales, and parroting what the 'priesthood' has been whining for 1700 years. As do another couple billion. You're delusional if you think you know. But what else is new.
"As to my knowledge" is a figure of speech which means "in my limited amount of understanding on the subject".

Semantic antics, eh?

Anyway, yes. I don't "know" anything. Zero. There is no knowledge because to "know" something requires absolution. There are no absolutes. So, I have a great leaning towards certain things... but I don't "know".

I've never claimed knowledge either... I've actually been very vocal about not being gnostic.

Janus is completely irrational here, but so is your answer. You're certain that "knowing" requires absolution? How do you *know* this? Do you see the contradiction? Of course you know things, and I know things, and everyone knows something.

My girlfriend is mad at me. Perhaps I shouldn't have tried cooking a stick in her non-stick pan.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-12-2012, 12:15 AM
RE: A Request for Sources
(17-12-2012 03:08 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  What are you wanting from us? Scientific citations? You know why you don't believe, and why no one should, or you don't know why. If you know why it shouldn't be believed then you don't need anything. If you don't know why you don't believe then you should first ask yourself. Not trying to be a dick. Want do you want?
As stated in my original post I have many sources for my own, and because of that, I know many of you do as well. I was simply asking for some of your favorite sources that prove or reinforce what you think/know/believe. That's all. Yes a very broad topic indeed, and one that might amount to nothing. But my mother at least has some regrets about the house-life when I was growing up and because of how strongly they believed, I felt it best to never discuss or reveal my atheism to my family until way after I left. I don't think you are being a dick, it's a honest question. I was just asking for more links, books, quotes, thoughts, etc that boost the idea of there being no deity.
I appreciate the link to the library thread we have here, I saw it after I posted this of course and thought to myself "Well you got ahead of yourself." Since this is a forum and I only visit frequently about once a month or so, I took my occasional check-in to post an update about myself and for any advice on the head.
Starcrash, hits the nail on the head for the most part. My story is not unique and my fundamentalist family is not either, with exception towards my mother's regret. I already told her that our conversation might not do much because this is how she has lived her life for so long. But she is insisting, so I will move forward with this once at least.
I was surprised by the doom and gloom a few of you portrayed to the matter, as realistic as it might have been. What's the point of being on a forum, specifically about atheism, if you never discuss personal matters. If you only mean to speak arbitrarily about subjects to people who already agree with most of what you say... isn't that kind of like beating a dead horse? Just my thoughts. Appreciate the responses from all.

And yet another interesting topic I am not interested in.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-12-2012, 09:37 AM
RE: A Request for Sources
(17-12-2012 10:37 PM)Starcrash Wrote:  
(17-12-2012 06:35 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  "As to my knowledge" is a figure of speech which means "in my limited amount of understanding on the subject".

Semantic antics, eh?

Anyway, yes. I don't "know" anything. Zero. There is no knowledge because to "know" something requires absolution. There are no absolutes. So, I have a great leaning towards certain things... but I don't "know".

I've never claimed knowledge either... I've actually been very vocal about not being gnostic.

Janus is completely irrational here, but so is your answer. You're certain that "knowing" requires absolution? How do you *know* this? Do you see the contradiction? Of course you know things, and I know things, and everyone knows something.
No. There is no "knowing". Nothing is ever 100%. There is always the chance of an exception. But, based on evidence, chances, and rationale, we can formulate a pretty good idea as to what will happen, which is then perceived as knowledge.

Your example is a paradox. It will just go in a circle. So, yes... I don't "know" that I am correct with there being nothing that is 100%; however, I'm basing it on the math that a die never falls on the same number 100% of the time.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-12-2012, 06:41 PM
RE: A Request for Sources
(18-12-2012 09:37 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(17-12-2012 10:37 PM)Starcrash Wrote:  Janus is completely irrational here, but so is your answer. You're certain that "knowing" requires absolution? How do you *know* this? Do you see the contradiction? Of course you know things, and I know things, and everyone knows something.
No. There is no "knowing". Nothing is ever 100%. There is always the chance of an exception. But, based on evidence, chances, and rationale, we can formulate a pretty good idea as to what will happen, which is then perceived as knowledge.

Your example is a paradox. It will just go in a circle. So, yes... I don't "know" that I am correct with there being nothing that is 100%; however, I'm basing it on the math that a die never falls on the same number 100% of the time.

You're still being hypocritical by stating your opinions here without the language of uncertainty ("seems to be", "may be", "it would appear that") while arguing that everything is uncertain. You can lead a horse to water...

I know my example was a paradox... and my example was your post. I pointed out a paradox in your rationale where you both use certainty and dismiss it as non-existant (and did it again in this post).

I agree that a die doesn't fall on the same number 100% of the time, and your point is? I can "know" that a 6-sided die will land on one of its 6 sides, because that does happen 100% of the time. There are a lot of things that happen 100% of the time. Pointing out an example of something that's uncertain is not evidence that nothing is certain.

My girlfriend is mad at me. Perhaps I shouldn't have tried cooking a stick in her non-stick pan.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-12-2012, 07:20 PM
RE: A Request for Sources
Knowledge. What is true knowledge? pfft..That's a philosophical question that's been pondered by great minds for thousands of years, but in my KC is right. Descartes was right when he first *tried* to be skeptical and said Cogito Ergo Sum, but after that it was all shit. That (in my opinion) is the only real knowlede. David Hume himself would be proud of KC....up until he said "fuck the math" that is. Odds are, no gods, no creator, and no omniscient deities that rule the infinite everything that are receiving messages telepathically from a insignificant species on a spec of rock floating around. No good reason to have a religion.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-12-2012, 09:44 PM
RE: A Request for Sources
(18-12-2012 07:20 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  Knowledge. What is true knowledge? pfft..That's a philosophical question that's been pondered by great minds for thousands of years, but in my KC is right. Descartes was right when he first *tried* to be skeptical and said Cogito Ergo Sum, but after that it was all shit. That (in my opinion) is the only real knowlede. David Hume himself would be proud of KC....up until he said "fuck the math" that is. Odds are, no gods, no creator, and no omniscient deities that rule the infinite everything that are receiving messages telepathically from a insignificant species on a spec of rock floating around. No good reason to have a religion.
Why is everyone here equivocating "knowledge" with "absolute certainty"? When I first spoke of knowledge, I just meant knowing something with enough certainty to treat "as if it was assumed true". That's generally what we mean when we say "I know that".

Descartes was not a radical skeptic (one who believes that nothing can be known with absolute certainty). He came up with "I think, therefore I am" in order to prove that there was at least something that radical skeptics could not argue with, because an argument against it would be self-refuting (much like vocalizing one's opinion against free speech). He was, if anything, an opponent of radical skepticism.

While it's true that Hume argued very much against certainty -- and what a great citation, because I respect Hume more than you can know -- even Hume wasn't a radical skeptic. Hume merely wanted us to weigh evidence from both sides before addressing its truth. While his presumption that there is two sides to every truth claim implies that nothing is certain, he didn't make arguments against coming to a conclusion on a truth claim... again, rather the opposite.

My girlfriend is mad at me. Perhaps I shouldn't have tried cooking a stick in her non-stick pan.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-12-2012, 09:49 PM
RE: A Request for Sources
(17-12-2012 10:32 PM)Starcrash Wrote:  I think Sam Harris is extremely eloquent, and his book Letter to a Christian Nation put the case best. It's written specifically to fundamentalist Christians (as I assume your mother is), and the audio book is a mere 1.5 hours... that's my suggestion.

However, I agree with what these guys have said. It is possible to convert from religion to atheism... I did it myself. But it rarely happens. Your mother's friends are probably all Christian. Her lifestyle and rituals are built around Christianity. Her worldview is based on a foundation of Christian beliefs. It would be difficult for her to change, even if she found that she couldn't refute your claims. The reason that most conversions happen in college or in the military or some such location is because the transition isn't so world-upending and insanely difficult, and that's why your mother isn't going to change.

Plus, it's highly unlikely that she'd even listen to a short 1.5 hour audio book that offended her (and of course it would offend her). Do you read Christian books or listen to hour-long podcasts/movies put together by Christians? If you do, you're in the minority along with me. So I imagine you can understand how and why that just wouldn't happen.




"It is possible to convert from religion to atheism... I did it myself. But it rarely happens."

Steady there big fella. Look at Ireland.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-12-2012, 10:14 PM
RE: A Request for Sources
(18-12-2012 09:49 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  "It is possible to convert from religion to atheism... I did it myself. But it rarely happens."

Steady there big fella. Look at Ireland.
I don't know what you're talking about, but I'd like to know. What happened to Ireland?

If there's anything to be wrong about, I'd love to be wrong about this.

My girlfriend is mad at me. Perhaps I shouldn't have tried cooking a stick in her non-stick pan.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-12-2012, 10:52 PM
RE: A Request for Sources
If true knowledge isn't absolute certainty then I don't know what it is. Also, from my post I made it pretty damn clear that Descartes was not an absolute skeptic. As a matter of fact, I don't know how I could've made it in clearer, so I don't know what your problem with my example was.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-12-2012, 06:28 AM
RE: A Request for Sources
Well, one of the things that helps me is I make the case for we are animals just like any other. When the theist tries to make the case for the soul, I get them to define the nature of the soul and what it allows us to do that other animals can't. If they make the case for us being intelligent and having technology and other things, I counter it. I ask them if they drive a car. The usually say yes. I then ask if they can build one if given all of the raw materials needed or even all the parts already made. Only once has someone said yes to being able to put it together, but not from just the raw materials. I then have sources that show that chimps can drive and speak to us using sign language. I can also show sources for african grey parrots not only using language, but also doing things with it that previously scientists thought that only humans were capable of. I make a pretty damn good case for humans only being animals and only a few humans out of the huge population are anything special. If you are interested in my sources let me know and I will post them. I don't have time right now.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Birdguy1979's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: