Burden of proof, with a twist.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
30-07-2016, 08:14 PM
RE: Burden of proof, with a twist.
(29-07-2016 11:06 AM)thonord Wrote:  I have a problem with "The burden of proof".

While recognizing that, as long as an atheist only asserts that the christian believers have not presented a credible claim, the burden of proof remains with the claimer.

I believe this to be counter productive.

The smart atheist should assume the burden of proof!

It is more believable to use science to support a claim than the bible.

While this will never win an argument with a christian, the logic may ignite doubt in other members of the flock.

Isn't that the purpose?

The bible makes some absurd claims, you can point out the absurdity to a believer in the biblical god, but you're likely to run into a wall of cognitive dissonance.

I pointed out the ridiculous city building lists of Asshur and Nimrod in Genesis 10:10-12 to a theist that plagued this forum after he made the ridiculous claim that there is no archeological evidence that contradicts the bible. After showing this glaring and blatant contradiction, the chucklefuck used a stock apologist argument that is used by creationists to dismiss geological evidence that contradicts their ridiculous creationist world view.
Using the term "uniformitarian assumptions" to dismiss the evidence. This is not a term used with archeology in creationist circles, it's used to dodge geological evidence. So the clown's brain went into lockup and started chattering like a fucking squirrel that didn't even understand the arguments he was attempting to use.

This is the disconnect you run into with intellectual con artists that don't have a rebuttal to the evidence, they simply dismiss it using fallacious creationist terminology.

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-07-2016, 10:33 AM
RE: Burden of proof, with a twist.
Quote:While this will never win an argument with a christian, the logic may ignite doubt in other members of the flock.

Isn't that the purpose?

Hi guys. I'm new here, so help me out...this confuses me. Are we all assembled here to attempt to change the world, to force others to believe what we believe? I was unaware that we had such a purpose...or indeed, ANY purpose other than to meet and have discussions with like-minded folks, without the weight of the trappings of religion.

I am creeped out by very religious folks...they seem slightly- sometimes more than slightly- insane to me.

But we want to have our beliefs respected, so shouldn't we reciprocate..? If other people want to believe a giant pink dragon lives on the dark side of the moon and grants their wishes...well, more power to them, I guess. I'll try my best to cover my mouth before I laugh, but that's the best I can do.

Am I missing something? I know I clicked "yes" when it says have you read the rules but...err...Blush
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-07-2016, 11:02 AM
RE: Burden of proof, with a twist.
(31-07-2016 10:33 AM)The Dark One Wrote:  
Quote:While this will never win an argument with a christian, the logic may ignite doubt in other members of the flock.

Isn't that the purpose?

Hi guys. I'm new here, so help me out...this confuses me. Are we all assembled here to attempt to change the world, to force others to believe what we believe? I was unaware that we had such a purpose...or indeed, ANY purpose other than to meet and have discussions with like-minded folks, without the weight of the trappings of religion.

The forum is meant to be a safe place for non-theists but you'll probably find that other than not believing god claims it may be a bit of a stretch to think of most members as "like minded".

Also, igniting doubt in somebody is a far cry from forcing them to change their beliefs. I'm very much in favor of getting people to reconsider why they believe the things they do since I think a world with less religion would be a better place.

Quote:I am creeped out by very religious folks...they seem slightly- sometimes more than slightly- insane to me.

Agreed

Quote:But we want to have our beliefs respected, so shouldn't we reciprocate..? If other people want to believe a giant pink dragon lives on the dark side of the moon and grants their wishes...well, more power to them, I guess. I'll try my best to cover my mouth before I laugh, but that's the best I can do.

There is a time and place for every discussion and often it is best to try to ignore it but I don't agree that we should respect the beliefs. I might agree that we should respect the right to have the belief but even that depends on what they are doing with it.

Quote:Am I missing something? I know I clicked "yes" when it says have you read the rules but...err...Blush

There's no rule that says you have to try to disabuse theists or even support others who do. You can even argue that we should not ever try to get people to reconsider why they believe what they do. You can also ignore those threads and just use the forum to vent or talk about other topics.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like unfogged's post
31-07-2016, 11:21 AM
RE: Burden of proof, with a twist.
(31-07-2016 10:33 AM)The Dark One Wrote:  I'm new here, so help me out...this confuses me. Are we all assembled here to attempt to change the world,to force others to believe what we believe? I was unaware that we had such a purpose...or indeed, ANY purpose other than to meet and have discussions with like-minded folks, without the weight of the trappings of religion.

There is no we, or rather I care not about reasons of others for being here. I'm here cause it is fun; changing the world isn't something that I'm interested in.

(31-07-2016 10:33 AM)The Dark One Wrote:  But we want to have our beliefs respected, so shouldn't we reciprocate..?

I don't want my "belief" (lack of it to be honest) respected, I only want to have the same rights. As for reciprocating - I don't think that religious beliefs warrants respect as being gullible isn't trait that one can admire.

(31-07-2016 10:33 AM)The Dark One Wrote:  If other people want to believe a giant pink dragon lives on the dark side of the moon and grants their wishes...well, more power to them, I guess. I'll try my best to cover my mouth before I laugh, but that's the best I can do.

If people want believe in some idiocy it is certainly their right, but I see no reason for not ridiculing it when they try to preach such nonsense.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Szuchow's post
31-07-2016, 11:55 AM
RE: Burden of proof, with a twist.
I don't have any problem with any of that...the way Thonord I think it was, said

"While this will never win an argument with a christian, the logic may ignite doubt in other members of the flock.
Isn't that the purpose?"

just seemed vaguely cult-like. I was curious. I don't give a rat's ass what anyone believes, I don't even care enough to bother ridiculing them. Provided they don't attempt to force their beliefs on me.

I would argue that

"I don't want my "belief" (lack of it to be honest) respected, I only want to have the same rights."

IS respect, but that's not particularly important.

I'm hearing a lot of "angry atheists", and I get that- many of you were raised in repressive atmospheres with religion used as a tool for control, which became it's primary purpose after the bumps in the night were explained, more or less.

I wasn't...my family attended a bizarre methodist church, the minister based sermons on "Peanuts" cartoon strips, and the unofficial church motto was "As close as you can get to atheist, while still believing in God!". Seriously, it was. This was the early 70's, and any of you who lived through that know about the weirdness that prevailed.

But I've seen enough to understand why so many are angry and unforgiving. I'm ok with that, I hate the legal brainwashing that is religion, I just don't hate the people. Usually. Most are victims, in my eyes.

Ah- and by "like minded" I only meant in the sense that we all believe God to be a myth. I'm 50 years old and have led a full life, I'm not stupid enough to think we're all stepford wives here.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-07-2016, 12:53 PM (This post was last modified: 31-07-2016 02:11 PM by Szuchow.)
RE: Burden of proof, with a twist.
(31-07-2016 11:55 AM)The Dark One Wrote:  I would argue that

"I don't want my "belief" (lack of it to be honest) respected, I only want to have the same rights."

IS respect, but that's not particularly important.

Not really. I don't care if people think that atheism is stupid, sinful, or wrong. I simply demand to have the same rights guaranteed by state which is (should be) non religious entity.

It's not my "belief" that should be respected, only my rights which don't disappear cause I do not believe. Though it's more about favoring particular religion than discriminating specifically against atheists, i.e. abortion or euthanasia issues.

(31-07-2016 11:55 AM)The Dark One Wrote:  I'm hearing a lot of "angry atheists", and I get that- many of you were raised in repressive atmospheres with religion used as a tool for control, which became it's primary purpose after the bumps in the night were explained, more or less.

Quite the assumption you have here. How do you know in what way many people were raised? As for "angry atheists" spare me. Not agreeing witch church and sheep forcing their nonsensical beliefs onto society does not mean that someone is angry.

(31-07-2016 11:55 AM)The Dark One Wrote:  But I've seen enough to understand why so many are angry and unforgiving. I'm ok with that, I hate the legal brainwashing that is religion, I just don't hate the people. Usually. Most are victims, in my eyes.

Is this assumption that many atheists(?) are being angry and unforgiving is something else than your imagination? Cause it looks like standard religious tripe to me.

Opposing religion and being angry about it aren't synonyms.

About people - I simply don't care about most of them, they have their lives I have mine. No need for hate.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-07-2016, 01:35 PM
RE: Burden of proof, with a twist.
DarkOne -

Respectfully, I think you're turning a bit of a blind eye to the damage done by religion, and to the legitimate reasons many of our members feel it is their duty to attack the beliefs of theists... at least, certain brands of theist. (I doubt we would ever have cause to argue with members of the church in which you were raised, for instance.) Trying to suggest we want others to become atheists, and that this makes us a cult-like organization, is neither fair nor accurate. But many of us see daily cause to be alarmed by the actions of people who accept the tents of religion in this modern, nuclear-armed world.

We have a teenaged member, for instance, who was just thrown out of his parents' home because they discovered his atheism. I, too, was told to leave my family home as a teenager, when I realized I was no longer a Christian and asked to stop attending church. There are endless reasons to attack the system that teaches our fellow human beings to turn off their minds and accept a philosophy/theology that is anti-gay, anti-science, anti-reason, and a host of other dangerous things that do great harm to people who are not in the "in-group". It impacts our politics and society in ways that could (and do) fill this board.

The most religious members of the US congress tend to stand against the findings of science, from evolutionary biology to climate change, tend to attack secular government in their various attempts to install their version of religious "morality" into our laws, and stand to do great harm to our entire planet with their perspective on conflicts with regions heavily influenced by other religions (like Israel and the Middle East). Anything we can do to undermine the brainwashing system that lends support to such men and women might go a long way toward keeping the human race alive long enough to turn into a society more like that depicted in Star Trek than the one depicted in Mad Max.

We are myriad in our motives and philosophies, but personally I consider it something of a duty to help our fellow human beings move out of Bronze- and Dark-Age thinking and into the Age of the Enlightenment.

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like RocketSurgeon76's post
31-07-2016, 02:03 PM
RE: Burden of proof, with a twist.
(31-07-2016 11:55 AM)The Dark One Wrote:  I don't have any problem with any of that...the way Thonord I think it was, said

I had to go look up Thonord; he/she joined in 2014 but has made a total of 7 posts as of today. I wouldn't consider that representative of the forum; in just this latest thread you'll see a lot of disagreement with Thonord's views.

Quote:I'm hearing a lot of "angry atheists", and I get that- many of you were raised in repressive atmospheres with religion used as a tool for control, which became it's primary purpose after the bumps in the night were explained, more or less.

For the record, I was raised in a mostly secular environment and don't remember ever believing or it ever being an issue for discussion at home. I'm angry at the way religion is used to deny rights and retard the application of science to deal with problems and foster division between various groups. There is no real personal stake in it but I see plenty of justification to see religion as something to be opposed at every opportunity.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like unfogged's post
31-07-2016, 02:12 PM
RE: Burden of proof, with a twist.
Girly is GOD. I AM BOB. .... bitches. ..... wait, did i just say that out loud? ....

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-07-2016, 02:20 PM
RE: Burden of proof, with a twist.
(31-07-2016 02:12 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Girly is GOD. I AM BOB. .... bitches. ..... wait, did i just say that out loud? ....

Beware. It is the "sacred" "duty" of every SubGenius™ to kill "Bob"® upon meeting him.

Don't worry. He'll recorporate. MWOWM won't let him stay dead, however much "Bob" protests.

Don't let those gnomes and their illusions get you down. They're just gnomes and illusions.

--Jake the Dog, Adventure Time

Alouette, je te plumerai.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: