As an atheist now, what is your lifestyle at present?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
28-05-2012, 07:49 PM
RE: As an atheist now, what is your lifestyle at present?
Quote: I define God in the Christian faith in His fundamental relation to the universe as the uncreated creator of the created universe.

Well, there is problem number one.

I define god in the christian faith in his fundamental relation to the universe as the created creator of the uncreated universe.

[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
[+] 3 users Like Dom's post
29-05-2012, 10:07 AM
RE: As an atheist now, what is your lifestyle at present?
Did not read back 12 pages:
So my lifestyle
I am much more happy and much less scared and much less hopeless.
I used to be scared that every wrong I do or even only think will come back at me 3 times / 3 times worse. I used to believe in fate and that everything is layed out for people anyway so no mater how bad I fight, I will lose because it is fate.
I am not doing nice things just to avoid universal punishment, anymore.
I do good thing because I want to do them.
When I knowingly do something bad or risky, I know that it is my fault and not fate.
I see hope and I feel that working on things will eventually get me somewhere.
All my mental problems start vanishing.
So I am doing better and better since I left mine....

"Freedom is the freedom to say that 2+2=4" - George Orwell (in 1984)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-05-2012, 04:16 PM
RE: As an atheist now, what is your lifestyle at present?
(28-05-2012 05:35 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(28-05-2012 02:50 PM)Pachomius Wrote:  First you explain what is special pleading and then you show how my concept of God is a case of special pleading, and then you prove that God does not deserve a special pleading, and all that because your inquiry in science tells you so.


For the rest of posters here, let us all concentrate on BB and myself, focusing on special pleading which he now brings up; so I will not reply to you for the time being.



Pachomius


I'm not into that stuff.

[Image: k5691705.jpg]






Dear BB, you bring in the statement that your inquiry in science, history, and literature leads you to conclude that there is no God.

Then you bring in the diagram of how science leads you to conclude there is no God.

Next you bring in special pleading as the ground by which your inquiry in science leads you to conclude that there is no God.

You are the one bringing in statement after statement, but when requested to explain you always balk.

You see, you and I must know that anyone bringing in a statement or a term must be ready to explain it, and his listener will try to agree with him on his explanation; in this manner there is a joining of minds between the speaker or presenter of statements and terms and the listener, and from that point they can decide in our present concern the ultimate question whether there is God.

Why is it or should be this way, namely, that the presenter of a statement or a term like special pleading must explain on request from the listener or reader?

Because otherwise we cannot concur on what we are talking about, and then each party is talking past the head of the other: and that is not the way to get to come to conclusion for example on the issue Is there God?

If you don't want to explain, then don't present statements and terms.

You will say that I have to do my homework if I need explanation from you, that is all right if we are talking about something that is not contentious, like for example that there is a nose in your face as also in my face, and our concern is to measure the size of each other's nose.

But when the issue is the existence of God which is a contentious question, then the presenter must explain every statement and terms he introduces, in order that his listener will seek to agree with him on his explanation, then on a concurring ground formed by statements and terms both now agreed on, they can proceed to work together to come to the solution of the contentious issue, Is there God?

If I will proceed on my own understanding of your statements and your terms or more correctly the statements and the terms you bring up, then it can and does happen all the time that you will insist I don't understand your statements and the terms you bring up, or that I do not know what I should know about science and about special pleading which everyone is supposed to know.

And then we will go astray at this point, no longer to talk about Is there God, but about what is science and what is a special pleading.

Do you now see the logic why you should explain your statements and your terms or what you bring up in statements and in terms to save us the trouble of going astray into discussing now who have the correct idea of your statements and your terms?

So, go ahead and explain what is a special pleading, now that you have already produced a diagram on how science is done.

If you don't want to accede to my request to explain what is special pleading then don't bring it in; if you bring it in, then explain it and I will see whether I have the same idea as yours, and from that point we will work on Is there God or There is no God, from science and specifically from the concept of special pleading.


I hope you get my concern, it is simply in order to avoid going astray into the discussion of what is science, what is special pleading.

You will say that I don't produce any statement, but I have produced a statement, namely:

In the Christian faith the concept of God in HIs fundamental relation to the universe is that:

"God is the uncreated creator of the created universe."



Pachomius
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-05-2012, 05:00 PM
RE: As an atheist now, what is your lifestyle at present?
(26-05-2012 05:12 PM)Pachomius Wrote:  
(25-05-2012 04:47 PM)Chas Wrote:  Observation: The continued existence of evil.
Observation: The continued existence of suffering.
Observation: The continued existence of amputees.
Observation: The existence of 400,000 species of beetles. Is your God inordinately fond of beetles?
Observation: Look at the universe around you, how it is, how it works; does it look guided by a beneficent being?



[ I am having a hard time with the format design of this forum, I am more accustomed with vBulletin, but here goes just the same, so readers just exercise your reading skill to get to my message below. ]


Well, I guess Backy Ball is no longer interested in his own
proposition that his inquiry in science brings him to conclude there is no God.


I will now take up with Chas.

Chas, first please for a neat exchange of thoughts, please
just choose one observation, and work it out step by step with the scientific
diagram of BB so as to come to the conclusion there is no God, the uncreated
creator of the totality of the created universe.


Pachomius
No, the burden of proof is on the one making the existence claim. You must show me the evidence.

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
29-05-2012, 06:15 PM (This post was last modified: 29-05-2012 06:29 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: As an atheist now, what is your lifestyle at present?
(29-05-2012 04:16 PM)Pachomius Wrote:  I hope you get my concern, it is simply in order to avoid going astray into the discussion of what is science, ...

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.





(29-05-2012 04:16 PM)Pachomius Wrote:  In the Christian faith the concept of God in HIs fundamental relation to the universe is that:

"God is the uncreated creator of the created universe."

Dom's interpretation is better, in that it has the advantage of at least having some semblance of evidence behind it.

"I define god in the christian faith in his fundamental relation to the universe as the created creator of the uncreated universe."

There is only one really serious philosophical question, and that is suicide. -Camus
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like GirlyMan's post
29-05-2012, 07:35 PM (This post was last modified: 29-05-2012 07:42 PM by Dom.)
RE: As an atheist now, what is your lifestyle at present?
Pachy, since you won't do your own homework, this is what special pleading is:

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

I think I get it now - what this thread is all about.

Pachy is interested in only one line of argument, and if he gets his way it will end up where he "proves" that god is the uncreated creator of the created universe.

There are likely some 10 steps or so to get to that end.

Am I right Pachy, are you going to try to prove that?


Maybe Pachy is from the same site that -was it Hughsie- one of us went to after a post was made here. Eventually the poster was banned for spamming and the post was lost. This sounds like the same thing to me, that's why Pachy has to stay exactly on track with his queries or it won't work for him.

[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
[+] 2 users Like Dom's post
29-05-2012, 07:58 PM
RE: As an atheist now, what is your lifestyle at present?
(29-05-2012 07:35 PM)Dom Wrote:  Pachy, since you won't do your own homework, this is what special pleading is:

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

I think I get it now - what this thread is all about.

Pachy is interested in only one line of argument, and if he gets his way it will end up where he "proves" that god is the uncreated creator of the created universe.

There are likely some 10 steps or so to get to that end.

Am I right Pachy, are you going to try to prove that?


Maybe Pachy is from the same site that -was it Hughsie- one of us went to after a post was made here. Eventually the poster was banned for spamming and the post was lost. This sounds like the same thing to me, that's why Pachy has to stay exactly on track with his queries or it won't work for him.

The pachyderm is just trolling now. Doesn't mean the rest of us can't use it to get to know each other better. Wink

There is only one really serious philosophical question, and that is suicide. -Camus
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-05-2012, 06:21 PM
RE: As an atheist now, what is your lifestyle at present?
You now some atheist here bring in the terms existence and evidence, but again we have to first concur on what we mean by existence and by evidence.

Next you some atheist here bring in an authority, the dictionary -- or some expert in the internet or source accessible in the web, or even a published source not accessible online: that is not constructive because then the discussion will be on whether the authority is really genuine and non-partisan accepted by everyone.

That is al the time I see the penchant with atheists, they do not or dare not to work on concurrence first on concepts and principles, but will talk all the time banking on their slogans and cliches by which they already are absolutely 'certain' owing to their psychology of emotional certainty (as shown by their if I may use the words, strutting arrogance in words and in postures).

I am still waiting for BB to explain what is special pleading from his own thinking and writing, and I will see how I can agree with him, in order that on the basis of special pleading we can both proceed to discuss how special pleading leads to the conclusion for him as for myself on the question whether there is God.

So, anyone atheist here, if you know what is special pleading and you can write as to explain what it means, please do so.

Otherwise you are ultimately the way I see it into banking on nothingness as the origin of everything but never presenting a concept of nothingness that can be accepted by mankind to be nothingness -- because it is always something that you atheists socalled deep thinkers and evidence seekers slip in and trust that no one questions it; but you are only talking to your own kind of thinkers who slip in something when they use the word nothing, but other humans do not understand nothing as something but as just plain common everyday nothing which no human can talk about except in reference and by opposition to something.

Then if you think that you are clever with evasions by resorting to the cliche that you will not debate theists because they are just after earning points by luring you self-acclaimed famous scientists to debate with you, to add to their cv: if you think about it, it is not really what you think to be clever stratagem except that it is abuse of intelligence -- the fact is you instinctively see even though you do not recognize it explicitly in your heart that you fear to first come to concurrence on concepts and principles, which concurrence on concepts and principles theists will always first invite you to come to -- otherwise it is no debate but just each one talking past the head of the other.



Please, anyone, without citing any expert source anywhere, just from your own stock knowledge and thinking, and writing explain what you understand to be special pleading.

Now if you insist on resorting to an expert, then bring that expert into this discussion and then he will explain what he knows to be special pleading, and I will see how I can agree with him, and thus I can with this expert together go into how special pleading leads to the answer to the question whether there is God or there is no God.


Anyway, if you want to insist on relying on dictionaries and encyclopedias whatever or some human expert (but you cannot him in here): just assimilate the ideas in all these books or expert persons, and expound on them as your appropriated ideas now effectively part of your cognitive arsenal.

However, don't mention your sources because that will require us to argue endlessly on what they really intend to convey with their words, when they are not around to personally explicate their words -- or bring them expert persons here in person and you guys retire in silence.




Pachomius
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-05-2012, 06:44 PM (This post was last modified: 30-05-2012 07:02 PM by Atothetheist.)
RE: As an atheist now, what is your lifestyle at present?
(30-05-2012 06:21 PM)Pachomius Wrote:  You now some atheist here bring in the terms existence and evidence, but again we have to first concur on what we mean by existence and by evidence.

Next you some atheist here bring in an authority, the dictionary -- or some expert in the internet or source accessible in the web, or even a published source not accessible online: that is not constructive because then the discussion will be on whether the authority is really genuine and non-partisan accepted by everyone.

That is al the time I see the penchant with atheists, they do not or dare not to work on concurrence first on concepts and principles, but will talk all the time banking on their slogans and cliches by which they already are absolutely 'certain' owing to their psychology of emotional certainty (as shown by their if I may use the words, strutting arrogance in words and in postures).

I am still waiting for BB to explain what is special pleading from his own thinking and writing, and I will see how I can agree with him, in order that on the basis of special pleading we can both proceed to discuss how special pleading leads to the conclusion for him as for myself on the question whether there is God.

So, anyone atheist here, if you know what is special pleading and you can write as to explain what it means, please do so.

Otherwise you are ultimately the way I see it into banking on nothingness as the origin of everything but never presenting a concept of nothingness that can be accepted by mankind to be nothingness -- because it is always something that you atheists socalled deep thinkers and evidence seekers slip in and trust that no one questions it; but you are only talking to your own kind of thinkers who slip in something when they use the word nothing, but other humans do not understand nothing as something but as just plain common everyday nothing which no human can talk about except in reference and by opposition to something.

Then if you think that you are clever with evasions by resorting to the cliche that you will not debate theists because they are just after earning points by luring you self-acclaimed famous scientists to debate with you, to add to their cv: if you think about it, it is not really what you think to be clever stratagem except that it is abuse of intelligence -- the fact is you instinctively see even though you do not recognize it explicitly in your heart that you fear to first come to concurrence on concepts and principles, which concurrence on concepts and principles theists will always first invite you to come to -- otherwise it is no debate but just each one talking past the head of the other.



Please, anyone, without citing any expert source anywhere, just from your own stock knowledge and thinking, and writing explain what you understand to be special pleading.

Now if you insist on resorting to an expert, then bring that expert into this discussion and then he will explain what he knows to be special pleading, and I will see how I can agree with him, and thus I can with this expert together go into how special pleading leads to the answer to the question whether there is God or there is no God.


Anyway, if you want to insist on relying on dictionaries and encyclopedias whatever or some human expert (but you cannot him in here): just assimilate the ideas in all these books or expert persons, and expound on them as your appropriated ideas now effectively part of your cognitive arsenal.

However, don't mention your sources because that will require us to argue endlessly on what they really intend to convey with their words, when they are not around to personally explicate their words -- or bring them expert persons here in person and you guys retire in silence.




Pachomius
So... Let me get this straight, you totally disregarded all of the links other poster graciously gave you, and still you demand US to describe it to you because you are too damn stupid ( or stubborn) to read for yourself. No wonder you're a theist.

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Atothetheist's post
30-05-2012, 06:59 PM
RE: As an atheist now, what is your lifestyle at present?
You're*

We must fight ignorance with proper grammar.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like TheBeardedDude's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: