Poll: Atheists only: Do you believe no god(s) exists?
Yes, I believe no god(s) exists
No, I do not believe no god(s) exists
[Show Results]
 
For Atheists: Do you believe no god(s) exist?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-02-2017, 10:16 PM
RE: For Atheists: Do you believe no god(s) exist?
(06-02-2017 10:11 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(06-02-2017 09:38 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  And?

It remains a garage dragon. It remains non-existent.
That's not what a garage dragon is, and it has no useful purpose for explaining any point.

Yes, it is. There is no evidence of its existence and it is defined as undetectable.

Quote:In Carl's story he didn't claim that his fire breathing dragon created the universe.

That has no bearing on it - it is utterly beside the point.
And it is not a 'story', it is an explanatory device.

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
06-02-2017, 10:18 PM
RE: For Atheists: Do you believe no god(s) exist?
(06-02-2017 10:11 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(06-02-2017 10:00 PM)Stevil Wrote:  Where did you get that definition from?

The stories that made up the idea of unicorns, Stevil.

This is not complicated.
There is no authoritative source. We really have no idea what a unicorn is.

Normally, what happens is, we discover an animal, we analyse it and categorise it and name it.

We don't normally imagine an animal, define its characteristics and then go out into nature and try to find it.


The fact that we have no documented sightings of unicorns means that we know nothing about them. If they do exist the fiction authors may have gotten their descriptions completely wrong.

Perhaps in ancient history they did exist, perhaps tales of unicorns got handed down by mouth and then later in stories, perhaps in these later stories they became magical. Who knows?
We don't have any evidence for them, but then again we don't have any evidence against them either.

Some authors write that vampires burn up in sunlight, but I know of an author who claims that they go all sparkly rather than burning up.
Noone knows what actually happens to a vampire even though some authors have wrote down what they think might happen.
We cannot claim to know what a vampire is. We can just reference a particular authors depiction of one.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2017, 10:20 PM
RE: For Atheists: Do you believe no god(s) exist?
(06-02-2017 10:16 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(06-02-2017 10:11 PM)Stevil Wrote:  That's not what a garage dragon is, and it has no useful purpose for explaining any point.

Yes, it is. There is no evidence of its existence and it is defined as undetectable.

Quote:In Carl's story he didn't claim that his fire breathing dragon created the universe.

That has no bearing on it - it is utterly beside the point.
And it is not a 'story', it is an explanatory device.
Used as an explaination on how a claim can change. Not used to explain how to deal with invisible undetectable things.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2017, 10:22 PM
RE: For Atheists: Do you believe no god(s) exist?
(06-02-2017 10:20 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(06-02-2017 10:16 PM)Chas Wrote:  Yes, it is. There is no evidence of its existence and it is defined as undetectable.


That has no bearing on it - it is utterly beside the point.
And it is not a 'story', it is an explanatory device.
Used as an explaination on how a claim can change. Not used to explain how to deal with invisible undetectable things.

No - you utterly missed Sagan's point. Facepalm

Go back and read it because you truly did not understand it.

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
06-02-2017, 10:23 PM
RE: For Atheists: Do you believe no god(s) exist?
(06-02-2017 10:11 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  Yes

Is that really all that you can come up with? That you could technically take another entity and call it the same thing? Do you think that this somehow retroactively makes all the tales of magical one-horned horses with virgin-detecting powers true?

Honestly, this is just getting sad.
What are you on about?

I am challenging your assertion that a unicorn is magical. You seem to know that it is.
I'm not saying it is or isn't. I have no idea what a unicorn is.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2017, 10:23 PM
RE: For Atheists: Do you believe no god(s) exist?
(06-02-2017 10:22 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(06-02-2017 10:20 PM)Stevil Wrote:  Used as an explaination on how a claim can change. Not used to explain how to deal with invisible undetectable things.

No - you utterly missed Sagan's point. Facepalm

Go back and read it because you truly did not understand it.
I've read it, and you missed it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2017, 10:25 PM
RE: For Atheists: Do you believe no god(s) exist?
(06-02-2017 10:18 PM)Stevil Wrote:  We really have no idea what a unicorn is.

Yes. We do. It is a white-coated equine with a long horn coming out of its forehead that has magical healing powers and dwells in European forests, where it engages in strangely obsessive activities with virgin human females.

You can continue to stick your fingers in your ears and say "nuh-uh nobody ever came up with an actual definition of 'unicorn'", but it will only continue to make you look even more stupid and stubborn than you already do.

(06-02-2017 10:18 PM)Stevil Wrote:  Normally, what happens is, we discover an animal, we analyse it and categorise it and name it.

We don't normally imagine an animal, define its characteristics and then go out into nature and try to find it.

And this changes the fact that we can conclude that they do not exist... how, exactly?

(06-02-2017 10:18 PM)Stevil Wrote:  If they do exist the fiction authors may have gotten their descriptions completely wrong.

In which case they still do not exist, and are merely fictionalized accounts of an actual animal. Likewise with your later, and equally stupid, vampire example. If you really want to be absurdly anal-retentive about it, we can go through each individual author's claimed version of said fictional entity and conclude that they do not exist individually.

The end result is the same. We know that unicorns do not exist.

Do you think that you're making some kind of point here, or is this just you trying to pretend that you have an argument in order to avoid admitting that you were wrong?

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2017, 10:30 PM (This post was last modified: 06-02-2017 10:38 PM by Chas.)
RE: For Atheists: Do you believe no god(s) exist?
(06-02-2017 10:23 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(06-02-2017 10:22 PM)Chas Wrote:  No - you utterly missed Sagan's point. Facepalm

Go back and read it because you truly did not understand it.
I've read it, and you missed it.

Let's find out if anyone here agrees with you. My money says no one does. Except maybe Tomasia, but he's also a moron.

Read it again because you mistake a rhetorical device for the actual point.

Here you go since you can't be bothered to actually read it:




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
06-02-2017, 10:40 PM
RE: For Atheists: Do you believe no god(s) exist?
(06-02-2017 10:30 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(06-02-2017 10:23 PM)Stevil Wrote:  I've read it, and you missed it.

Let's find out if anyone here agrees with you. My money says no one does. Except maybe Tomasia, but he's also a moron.

Read it again because you mistake a rhetorical device for the actual point.
I'm not making any mistakes. Carl is clearly showing how a claim is put forth, seemingly verifiable and how it goes through a process of change so that what you thought could be verified then changes. e.g. the dragon becomes invisible, its fire becomes heatless. This point is clear as day. And it has great value because this is what often the religious folk do. The further you go down the rabbit hole of looking for evidence the further the claim changes to give excuses as to why you aren't finding the evidence that you think ought to be there.

The idea of an invisible non interacting thing existing or not is pointless. It has no value. Noone believes in an invisible non interacting thing. Even deists believe their god interacted once to create the universe, just because it no longer interacts that isn't proof that it never did.

Anyway, we could argue this till we explode.
I can see why religion branches off into different directions and holy wars ensue. when you can't ask the author to clarify you are going to have arguments with people interpreting things.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2017, 10:43 PM (This post was last modified: 06-02-2017 10:48 PM by Chas.)
RE: For Atheists: Do you believe no god(s) exist?
(06-02-2017 10:40 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(06-02-2017 10:30 PM)Chas Wrote:  Let's find out if anyone here agrees with you. My money says no one does. Except maybe Tomasia, but he's also a moron.

Read it again because you mistake a rhetorical device for the actual point.
I'm not making any mistakes. Carl is clearly showing how a claim is put forth, seemingly verifiable and how it goes through a process of change so that what you thought could be verified then changes. e.g. the dragon becomes invisible, its fire becomes heatless. This point is clear as day. And it has great value because this is what often the religious folk do. The further you go down the rabbit hole of looking for evidence the further the claim changes to give excuses as to why you aren't finding the evidence that you think ought to be there.

The idea of an invisible non interacting thing existing or not is pointless. It has no value. Noone believes in an invisible non interacting thing. Even deists believe their god interacted once to create the universe, just because it no longer interacts that isn't proof that it never did.

Anyway, we could argue this till we explode.
I can see why religion branches off into different directions and holy wars ensue. when you can't ask the author to clarify you are going to have arguments with people interpreting things.

You didn't watch it, did you. No

You couldn't have because the point is explicitly stated and it is not what you say it is.

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
Post Reply
Forum Jump: