Ontology of belief
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-05-2014, 08:29 AM
RE: Ontology of belief
(03-05-2014 07:43 AM)John Wrote:  This... feels... so... pointless... Dodgy

[Image: outofcontrol-2.gif]

No matter what you do, it just keeps going and going and getting bigger on its way.

Yup. The moron thinks the fucking world should revolve around his idiocy.

It's Special Pleadings all the way down!


Magic Talking Snakes STFU -- revenantx77


You can't have your special pleading and eat it too. -- WillHop
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-05-2014, 09:19 AM
RE: Ontology of belief
(03-05-2014 06:54 AM)TrainWreck Wrote:  Okay, Mr. Smarty Pants, with the multi-color post technique.

1. It does not make sense to use the term "atheist,' as the designation for lack of belief, because belief in god requires authority to prescribe the belief. So therefore, "atheism," is the opposition to the authority prescribing the belief. To be without belief in the supernatural is covered by humanism, which is the proper ontological antithesis to theism, because it is not logical to designate an ontology based on opposing another ontology. When opposing/negotiating authority that is politics - atheism is the political opposition to theist public policy. And that is what atheist organizations do - they oppose public policy.

2. Abstract and concrete are classifications that denote whether a term describes an object with a physical referent or one with no physical referents. They are most commonly used in philosophy and semantics. Abstract objects are sometimes called abstracta (sing. abstractum) and concrete objects are sometimes called concreta (sing. concretum). An abstract object is an object which does not exist at any particular time or place, but rather exists as a type of thing, i.e. an idea, or abstraction. - Wikipedia

3. The abstract exists because human beings generate the ideas and convert the ideas into tangible instruments, and there are people who study and advance the ideas represented in the tangible instruments - they are the guardians. Man generates the abstract by the thought process. Theists believe that god puts the thoughts into people's minds, souls, and so forth.

4. The abstract needs guardians, because otherwise the ideas would would get lost, or obscured by other, more entertaining ideas. You are guarding the abstract concept of "atheism," from my attempt to correct it.

Do carry on, but no one here agrees with #1.

I don't disagree that humanism stands in opposition to theism, but it is not the only -ism to do so.

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
03-05-2014, 10:32 AM
RE: Ontology of belief
(03-05-2014 09:19 AM)Chas Wrote:  [quote='TrainWreck' pid='560539' dateline='1399121677']
I don't disagree that humanism stands in opposition to theism, but it is not the only -ism to do so.
Humanism is not the political doctrine - atheism is the political doctrine. They are both opposed to theism.

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-05-2014, 10:37 AM
RE: Ontology of belief
(03-05-2014 10:32 AM)TrainWreck Wrote:  
(03-05-2014 09:19 AM)Chas Wrote:  [quote='TrainWreck' pid='560539' dateline='1399121677']
I don't disagree that humanism stands in opposition to theism, but it is not the only -ism to do so.
Humanism is not the political doctrine - atheism is the political doctrine. They are both opposed to theism.

You are wrong and I am right. Drinking Beverage

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
03-05-2014, 10:46 AM
RE: Ontology of belief
(03-05-2014 10:32 AM)TrainWreck Wrote:  Humanism is not the political doctrine - atheism is the political doctrine. They are both opposed to theism.

This is cool. You tell atheists what they are despite the fact that absolutely none of them agree with you.

Christianity is also a political doctrine and it is an extreme form of fascism. Not just ordinary vanilla fascism but extreme fascism. It is opposed to ... errmmm ... Utilitarianism.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Mathilda's post
03-05-2014, 10:59 AM
RE: Ontology of belief
(03-05-2014 10:46 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  
(03-05-2014 10:32 AM)TrainWreck Wrote:  Humanism is not the political doctrine - atheism is the political doctrine. They are both opposed to theism.

This is cool. You tell atheists what they are despite the fact that absolutely none of them agree with you.

Christianity is also a political doctrine and it is an extreme form of fascism. Not just ordinary vanilla fascism but extreme fascism. It is opposed to ... errmmm ... Utilitarianism.
Christianity is only a political doctrine in a secular republic, where any organization is welcome to participate in the negotiation of public policy.

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-05-2014, 11:34 AM
RE: Ontology of belief
(03-05-2014 10:59 AM)TrainWreck Wrote:  
(03-05-2014 10:46 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  This is cool. You tell atheists what they are despite the fact that absolutely none of them agree with you.

Christianity is also a political doctrine and it is an extreme form of fascism. Not just ordinary vanilla fascism but extreme fascism. It is opposed to ... errmmm ... Utilitarianism.
Christianity is only a political doctrine in a secular republic, where any organization is welcome to participate in the negotiation of public policy.

Right, so what was Christianity during the divine monarchies and theocracies of the European Dark Ages? A fucking chess club? Facepalm

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like EvolutionKills's post
03-05-2014, 11:46 AM
RE: Ontology of belief
(01-05-2014 05:22 PM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  Now, for those who are wearing big boy pants and not diapers, let us continue our discussion.

Everyone here believes that their five senses are working properly in that they are providing our brain with accurate sensory information regarding the physical world which we all inhabit.

Can we all agree with this statement?

No.

All perceptions from all our senses are passed through the amygdala and everyone has a different makeup from everyone else. One cannot say that we all perceive things in the same way because it is impossible to know how every neuron representing part of a signal received by a sensory receptor is dealt with by every amygdala and rerouted by the amygdala to another part of the brain. In extreme cases, some people, when other people smell an odor, see a color.

So, you may be told something about a man being the son of god and that may trigger something in your brain about how to behave if you want to live forever as a bit of invisible mist. In mine, it triggers thoughts of incomprehension about how stupid people are.

So, define "we" because wherever your beliefs come from and those of the people included in "we", they come from somewhere different from the beliefs that "I" have, not being part of your "we" group. I suggest, if you know who the people are who make up the "we" that you are referring to, you ask them.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-05-2014, 11:48 AM
RE: Ontology of belief
(03-05-2014 11:34 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(03-05-2014 10:59 AM)TrainWreck Wrote:  Christianity is only a political doctrine in a secular republic, where any organization is welcome to participate in the negotiation of public policy.

Right, so what was Christianity during the divine monarchies and theocracies of the European Dark Ages? A fucking chess club? Facepalm
Those were not secular republics - were they?

Any atheist organization of that time would have been political opposition to the authoritarian decree of Christianity.

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-05-2014, 12:00 PM
RE: Ontology of belief
By the way, you'll all be thrilled to hear that I have bought a copy of Ralph Ellis' book, Jesus, King of Edessa,which I should have from Ebay in the next week to two months, depending on who brings it to the non-place I live in, thanks to the fecking UN sanctioned embargo on this place.

Anyway, that said, I will have a read of it and then will, hopefully, be able to explain to Jeremy where "we" get "our" beliefs from. I am hoping that it has something to do with Camalot.Yes

I am sure I will be able to talk sense to Jeremy.Thumbsup
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: