Atheists are not superior...
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
11-07-2015, 07:06 PM
RE: Atheists are not superior...
(11-07-2015 06:31 PM)xeberdee Wrote:  Nothing in the universe is really where or how it appears to be atm, more so the further away it gets. That's kinda like belief.

No. If it's true, it's testable. It's not at all like belief.
No one is hostile. We save that for the posters that have some substance.
You're just a joke.

Ta ta.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-07-2015, 07:08 PM
RE: Atheists are not superior...
(11-07-2015 06:40 PM)xieulong Wrote:  You really need to take a philosophy class, learn basic logic, then read your OP again and see how incredibly stupid it is.

Are you leaving? If so, great!! Take your stupidity with you when you go.Thumbsup

Bowing oh great and impolite xieulong - Do you have anything meaningful to add - or are you just here to rant a tiny bit like the others.

Logic errors (in a polite manner) can be added to your post any time you like...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-07-2015, 07:16 PM
RE: Atheists are not superior...
(11-07-2015 07:06 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(11-07-2015 06:31 PM)xeberdee Wrote:  Nothing in the universe is really where or how it appears to be atm, more so the further away it gets. That's kinda like belief.

No. If it's true, it's testable. It's not at all like belief.
No one is hostile. We save that for the posters that have some substance.
You're just a joke.

Ta ta.

Besides your relentless and impolite style - I don't mind responding.

How will you test? you are here for such a short time - the universe is quite old. Take a distant galaxy - the universe is expanding - it may take a while to get those results back. Are you sure that you can tell me that it's true - or do you believe it is?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-07-2015, 07:20 PM
RE: Atheists are not superior...
(11-07-2015 05:32 PM)xeberdee Wrote:  
(11-07-2015 05:10 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  Wiki is your source? Rolleyes Here let me help you, show you how its done...for example, lets discuss how the christian triune concept was established....

A paper I wrote on this....notice I don't use wiki, or "I think blah blah blah"...


The development of the Christian doctrine of the Trinity-----

Don't worry about wiki. It's a simple postulation with a reliable reference.

As far as the trinity is concerned, I am surprised that you didn't go further back to Pythagoras or the Zoroaster. The development of number and geometry mixes with the concepts of good and evil, male and female etc. Christianity stole everything it has from the Greeks and everything before it.

That is it's true origin.

very true, the string of hero god constructs is long and completely traceable. My favorite being romulus as it is an exact copy of the jesus myth, but anyway, that is all a different conversation, you were trying to posit atheism has religious tenets, and that we shouldnt pick on those who make baseless, factless, childish assertions. Neither of those have a grain of reality to them.

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-07-2015, 07:24 PM
RE: Atheists are not superior...
(11-07-2015 06:57 PM)xeberdee Wrote:  
(11-07-2015 06:23 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Confident enough to bother to test it. But you better leave that shit at the door when you go test it. Faith is a dirty word. "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." - Hebrews 11:1 (KJV) That shit's gonna invalidate your results.

People read too much 'holy shit' into what I say - I'm an Atheist. Faith is just a word to me for confidence - relax, no need to quote or compare with scripture I already said that's bullshit.

As a scientist I have a theory that something is probable - based on evidence and previous testing - but I can't prove it unless I am confident (have the faith) and believe that I will get a worthwhile result - otherwise I won't bother testing.

So confidence is important - you understood me - it's nothing more. I have theist friends that don't let it get in the way - why should we.

I'm not in any way promoting organized religions - just supporting the right to believe and have faith in anything I like. That's not the same.

Spirituality usually gets up other Atheists backs too - but again, they just conflate it with their hate idols.

I disagree.

You see I went from christian, to spiritualist, to agnostic to atheist, the more I learned the less I believed. I have spent my life learning, I have much to learn yet, as we all do. I freely admit my biggest challenge these days is to neutrally review new information without bias, it is a struggle. Especially after 28 years of research. In my humble opinion, the problem isnt even religion per se, the true problem is faith...I dont know the answers, I just know that faith, especially for me, is a failed epistemology.

For many years I was of the "I don't believe, live and let live, why would I care what someone else believes" type of outlook. But I feel that religion slithers its way into politics and shapes the laws of this land which affect everyone, it uses fear to brainwash people, and even more despicably, children into believing absolute BS. It is evil to the core, and the ultimate pyramid scheme..money goes up, nothing of value comes down. it preys on the sick, the gullible, the ignorant, the elderly and the uneducated. Its supporters financially and politically use their organized power to block stem cell research that could lead to the curing of deadly diseases, to block a woman's right to abort, to teach creationism in public schools, etc etc..

This is the reason why as an educated intelligent human being it is my moral responsibility to fight the corrosive creep of religion where ever I find it. To look the other way is to imply by inaction that it is ok, and religion is anything but ok. The moderate religious followers who go to church, seek out fellowship, civil community outreach and support of the homeless and poor are great factors of religion, but we don't need religion to have those in society. There are secular organizations that do the same thing...like foundation beyond belief. Just my opinion of course. But this is why i have been self jarred into more assertive action versus religion.

So no, it isn't ok, and it needs to be taken apart at every opportunity.

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like goodwithoutgod's post
11-07-2015, 07:32 PM
RE: Atheists are not superior...
I'm going to make a bet at the start of this. I'm going to bet that this person doesn't define what god is and presents no real evidence of his claims. I'm going to bet he makes empty assertions and pseudo-philosophical nonsense. But hell, I'm open to being wrong, so let's slog through this. I only glimpsed it on my phone, but thought I'd pull out my laptop to make notes on this as I went through.

(11-07-2015 03:49 PM)xeberdee Wrote:  It seems that most Athiests are trying to define the world in very exact terms. The idea is that Atheism is superior to Theism because it relies on specific evidence with science as it’s backbone.

The fuck are you talking about? Atheism is only the position that theists have not presented sufficient evidence to support their claims. Some atheists are scientifically minded, some are not. Some are rational, some are not. This is as false a statement as if I said all theists believe god is a space alien and that when you die you get to rule your own planet. Some theists believe that, some don't.

Quote: Exactness does not appear in nature though, so in some sense this strive for exactness is unatural. What I'm talking about is the idea that only logic can define pure and perfect objects such as numbers or points and co-ordinates.

No. No no no. Logic is a process, a method of applying axioms. If you follow the rules of logic, then you are being logical. It can define nothing, only evaluate claims. If your claim follows the rules of logic, it is logical. If not, then not. Numbers are not "objects" either. They are a linguistic label that we slap on things. There is no such thing as a "2" out there in the universe. "2" is defined as a set containing a discreet object and another discreet object. That's it. Coordinates are also not "perfect objects." They are simply arbitrary markers we put on places based on a completely arbitrary reference point. This isn't even that mysterious, they teach that in basic physics and calculus.

Quote: We imagine things such as perfectly rounded objects with clean boundaries in empty spaces, whereas nature is much more messy and is made of hard to define particles in various groupings with energy and forces moving in waves. Nature does nothing that is ever stable or can be exactly defined at any given point, as it is under constant change (the uncertainty principle)
A good example of trying to define exactness in the natural world is color. There is no boundary between colors in the light spectrum, just an infinite number of shades of color where blue changes into green and into yellow etc.. The frequency of light also extends beyond our vision and logically too beyond our instruments. We could find infinite terms to describe infinite shades of light, but we see a loosely defined band of 7 stripes or shades of color and we measure a number of invisible frequency bands on either side of our visible spectrum. (eg. infrared, ultraviolet, gamma, xrays and microwaves).

The fuck are you talking about? You're upset because most rainbows have seven bands on them? No one is arguing that this is an accurate representation of the color spectrum, it's just a convenient way of differentiating things. I'm sure some artists will come and explain primary colors and whatnot, and how the others are formed via combinations of those colors (again, not that controversial). The rainbow is portrayed that way because it is a convenient shorthand way of labeling colors in our brains.

No one argues that this is all light is, but it is all that most of us are able to see with our eyes. That's simply an accident of nature, it doesn't mean anything except that it happens to be the way that we have evolved.

Quote:Another example of the loose definition in nature might be under an imaginary super powerful electron microscope where the boundary between the particles that makeup your hand and the air in front of it becomes vague. The closer you look, the more the boundary between you and the air disappears - or the more air there is in you. You are also loosing bits of yourself at an alarming rate into the air, and at the same time you are also dependent on the air to breath. So at what point do you precisely cease being you and become part of the air around you - or vice versa?

This kind of nonsense I've heard before. Yes, matter is made up of mostly empty space. What defines a solid object is not the solid matter of the atoms, but rather the electric fields that exist between the atoms. There is a clear barrier between us and the atoms of the air, and it exists in the fields that bind the matter of our bodies together. Again, this isn't that controversial, this was taught in physics I and in inorganic chemistry I.

Quote:When we put an object boundary around anything, we define it only in loose visual terms from some point of consciousness, in reality everything is part of the same universe of particles and forces - which is the most simple general idea of reality that we can ever create. At the same time the universe is the most complex object we know of, in that it contains all other objects inside it. We have no idea if it is infinite or finite – inward or outward.

The idea that there is something outside of nature or supernatural is not so far fetched even though Atheists claim to be resistant to believe it eg. light continues beyond the range of the eye. We can’t see it, yet we are happy about it because we have evidence of it through machines that can measure it.

DING DING DING! We have a winner! We know other forms of electromagnetic waves exist beyond visible light because we have EVIDENCE of it. We have no such evidence of anything supernatural, but as I am still working my way through this slog I might re-touch on that at the end. My point is that atheists are not resistant to the idea of "there might be a god" it is simply that there is no reason to believe that there is. There has been no evidence presented for it.

Quote: Evidence hasn’t always been available though, and yet some people still believed it possible – were they stupid?

No. They were not. But depending on what we are talking about they were not being rational.

Also upon reflection I'm wondering if this was even true. Were there people who believed in X-rays and Gamma rays before there was a way to detect them? I'd have to see a citation on this. I know people believed in something called "flotsam" which was the material that space was supposedly made of. They were wrong, but they were making the best judgement they could about the universe around them.

Quote:. If you are seeking to define evidence of light outside the visible spectrum using the human eye alone, then you will not find it. How could you ever possibly define something that is outside the range of the tool that you use to identify it with? The intelligent mind would not expect evidence of any kind using the human tool - it would be happy enough with the pure theory and belief that it was there. This is the essence of the human belief system - to imagine beyond our senses. The same applies to the supernatural imagination that lies outside of the measurable spectrum.

Do you know WHY we believe in infrared and X-rays? Because we have tools that can convert those things into visible light that we can detect with our eyes. Yes, this is naturally beyond our ability to observe directly with our senses, but we have found ways to detect them by using tools to convert them into a form we can understand. If you want to argue for the supernatural you have to provide some way of detection that can be confirmed. You can't just say "oh it's beyond our senses" and let it go at that. This is a bold admission that you have no evidence of it because if there is no way of gathering and interpreting the data on the supernatural then that means YOU have no evidence of it either. So congrats, you have admitted your position is baseless. Not many theists will do this.

Quote:So we use our imagination, and science tests imaginary theories and designs instruments to define more and more of the universe.

Gross misunderstanding of what science is, check. But then again you've already proven you don't understand math or logic so I should not be surprised.

Science makes observations and predictions. We observed certain phenomena that we did not understand. We make hypotheses. We test those hypotheses. If they are wrong we throw them out. That's why we know that space is not made of jelly, and atoms are in the form of pudding.

Quote: The things we have not yet discovered are still outside our range of what we have already defined as nature. Even if we have evidence of similar things, we cannot know the supernatural in the material sense, as the very act of discovery reveals it as plain old nature.

DING DING DING!!! Once again you have ADMITTED that your position is baseless. We cannot have an explanation of the supernatural because that would be in the realm of the natural. So congrats on admitting the weakness of your own side.

Quote: Schroedingers cat is neither dead nor alive in its box. This is a supernatural state - it is not natural because nature always defines state. Therefore we have to look inside the box to reveal nature - but the supernatural state exists within us until we do.

I'm not a quantum physicist and I don't care to be. The subject bores the crap out of me but I do know just from this that YOU have less of an understanding of it than I do. This analogy was made as a criticism of the Copenhagen interpretation of the multiverse. This is not supernatural, it is simply the fact that certain quantum events are changed by the presence of observation. This is strange, but it is not supernatural. Unless you are working from a different definition of supernatural that I am not aware of. Your incredulity about the working of quantum physics does not make it unnatural or supernatural. It just means that there are certain things you don't know.

I'm not touching the "the supernatural state exists within you" crap. If you believe in some woo woo nonsense you have to explain it, because that sentence as stands is just irrational word salad.

Quote:OK so what's my point?. My point is that Atheists and Theists are really using the same methods and there is no fundamental difference in how our human minds work.

You think we are using the same methods? Present your evidence for your god and I'll consider it. After, of course, you define what it is you believe in since that still hasn't been done. Did I miss it? *scans post* Nope. I did not. You have not yet defined your god, and as such no evidence can exist for it yet.

Quote: One side is no more superior than the other. We all have a clear idea of the supernatural state and what we might imagine to find beyond nature, and we all use information and belief systems to support it.

Did I miss where you defined in clear terms what the supernatural is? I don't think I did. You just gave some nonsense showing you didn't understand quantum phenomena and labeled that as supernatural to back up your belief in something. I still do not know what it is you are talking about when you talk about the supernatural.

But let's pretend I do. After all, I grew up in the church, I do have some notion of what we are talking about. And no, we do not use the same methods for it. There is NOTHING to support the idea of anything supernatural. Simply believing because you want to. There's nothing inherently wrong with that, but it isn't rational and pretending it is so is dishonest.

Quote: The difference is that to the theist - the cat's state can be certain whilst being supernatural at the same time though belief.


A) You don't understand quantum physics.
B) You admit that you are making an assertion that you can not back up. That's three times in one post, well done.

Quote: To defend theism I would suggest that it is hampered by conservative traditions that inhibit it's development in the modern world. To its advantage and at its center it has spirituality, which is a very personal human device that measures mood and feeling in a similarly imperfect way to the eye that measures the spectrum of light.

As a note to mods, I fixed the grammatical errors in this part. I was having trouble reading it but the content of the post is untouched.

You are defining spirituality as "measuring mood and feeling" if I am reading this correctly. Both of these things are chemical signals in the brain. Spirituality in this format has been measured by neurologists. Very specific areas of the brain are activated by prayer, and when people claim to be talking to god. There are a number of documentaries that talk about this, as well as books. Again, this is not really that contested.

So BY YOUR OWN DEFINITIONS this is a natural phenomena and is not supernatural.

Quote: There may be invisible supernatural dimensions to spirituality, but they are highly subjective and undetectable by the hardware. It is pointless for Atheists to expect to find exterior evidence of spirituality, when it is in itself an internal and personal meter.

It is already established that the definition of spirituality that you have laid out is a perfectly natural phenomena that can be easily explained through neuroscience. So saying we "can't find evidence of spirituality" is false. Demonstrably so.

Quote:I am an Atheist, the reason being that I don’t personally believe in any of the intelligent deity solutions to the cosmos or in the organized religion idea. I see so much shit spread by Atheists who think that they are superior to religious people, simply because they imagine that they don't blindly believe in the supernatural – yet science does it and they do it everyday! You cannot take the high ground, exactly because we all are inclined to believe in something – with or without evidence of it in the natural world. We are all to some extent religious too - in the sense that we have intuition and we use it to support and organize our beliefs.

If you are an atheist then good for you, but you are not a rationalist and you certainly are not educated about science or of the world around you.

And I find it somewhat dishonest that you are defining religion in this way, since it is not the way that it is usually understood. Religion is usually meant to imply some sort of dualistic beliefs and post-life expectations. And not everyone holds to this. If you are using religious as a synonym for irrational belief then no, not everyone has that either. That is ALSO dishonest or at best painting with too broad a brush.

Quote:So please stop giving theistic religious people a hard time for just supporting the idea of belief and for using their intuition – it discredits Atheism and it's really just human nature at work. Sure the Bible is always going to be full of crap – even more so as time goes by. Tradition is a tribal inheritance and there will always be stupid outdated theories passed down to both intellectuals and to ordinary people alike. I always try to point these out and I'm devoted to it.
BUT - religion and theism are not really based on stupidity in themselves. Truth, wonder and mystery are the driving forces of human development, and spirituality (the persuit of internal happiness) does not pose a problem with an Atheistic philosophy. I think we should remember that and resist taking the high ground as Atheists.

Xeb.

Well, I was partially wrong. This person is not a theist arguing for a god, so a definition is not necessary.

But to say that atheism and theism are equally viable is CRAP. There is NO evidence in support of theism, and to claim that there is simply is WRONG. Ascribing some sort of woo to human consciousness is understandable, but completely unnecessary.

I will admit that many atheists tend to treat theists as intellectually inferiors, and that this should stop. But when we are talking about the viability of ideas the theist is on the short end of the stick. Until they can provide some reason to believe their type of woo then they are not being rational. That's it.

And to make it worse most of them will ADMIT that it's not rational. And again, there's nothing wrong with that, you aren't obligated to be rational. But when you argue for the viability of an argument you have to set a metric by which to judge the validity of those claims. And theism just does not meet the standards that are set.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes natachan's post
11-07-2015, 07:37 PM
RE: Atheists are not superior...
(11-07-2015 07:04 PM)unfogged Wrote:  
(11-07-2015 06:31 PM)xeberdee Wrote:  I said nothing about any of the things you mention. Amazing interpretation you got out of it.

The interpretation I got was the old "it takes as much faith to be an atheist as it does to believe" canard.

Quote:So please stop giving theistic religious people a hard time for just supporting the idea of belief and for using their intuition – it discredits Atheism and it's really just human nature at work.

I don't know anybody that gives theists a hard time for believing things or for using their intuition. They get a hard time for believing things without evidence and for not testing their intuitions before turning them into beliefs. You are arguing a strawman version of atheism from what looks like a theistic viewpoint.

That is not what I say. I'm talking about the many people on this forum and other places that just polarize, rant and insult as soon as I mention the word faith or belief. That's the problem.

Theistic in what sense? I believe that my emotions run on a different level than my rational mind. There is quite a bit of evidence to support that, and why would that be theistic? I call it spiritual as in it is of my spirit (current emotion). Emotional responses are often involuntary and irrational. If you choose to bundle it together with all the other 'mumbojumbo' then that's your loss. Humans are more complex than the rational mind.

The bible is all bullshit, traditions are bullshit, god is bullshit - these things hold us back. What's theist about that viewpoint?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-07-2015, 07:40 PM
RE: Atheists are not superior...
(11-07-2015 07:16 PM)xeberdee Wrote:  
(11-07-2015 07:06 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  No. If it's true, it's testable. It's not at all like belief.
No one is hostile. We save that for the posters that have some substance.
You're just a joke.

Ta ta.

Besides your relentless and impolite style - I don't mind responding.

How will you test? you are here for such a short time - the universe is quite old. Take a distant galaxy - the universe is expanding - it may take a while to get those results back. Are you sure that you can tell me that it's true - or do you believe it is?

I suggest you "google" "How do we know the universe is expanding", you idiot.
That way child, you can learn two things. Rolleyes

ta ta

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-07-2015, 07:50 PM
RE: Atheists are not superior...
(11-07-2015 07:37 PM)xeberdee Wrote:  That is not what I say. I'm talking about the many people on this forum and other places that just polarize, rant and insult as soon as I mention the word faith or belief. That's the problem.

This is literally what you're doing as well... do you not get it? You're just as faulty and apart of the "problem" you see. It's going to effect you so clearly as long as you keep up this notion that your driven polarizing force that YOUR view and way is superior.

You are making an generalized statement about arrogant people... while being as arrogant as they would ever be in the process.

"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
11-07-2015, 07:53 PM
RE: Atheists aren't superior.
Double post or spam? Perhaps this thread could be removed.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: