The hypocracy of atheism
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
18-08-2014, 03:34 AM
RE: The hypocracy of atheism
(17-08-2014 10:13 AM)Baruch Wrote:  
Quote:'phil.a' I personally have no fixed definition of "god", but that's fine because I'm not creating an identity for myself relative to that concept, I choose not to label myself.

Whereas I'd claim that anyone who is an explicit atheist, is creating a self-identity relative to the "god" concept, and that necessarily requires some conception of what the "god" concept actually means.

Thats just a cop out Phil.a by not defining the concept of God and leaving is fuzzy so you basically dodge any definitions or critique - saying "well, thats not quite what I mean by God"

A "cop out" or a "sane position"? :-)

Quote:As for 'explicit' atheists definitions of God and self identity:
There are many versions of God(s) theists provide and I will make a distinction between:
1. Strongly denying & knowing the non existence of some gods (at least to a high probability if one cannot get absolute certainty for somethings non existence) This version is usually due to contradictions in the God concept.
2. Suspending belief about other versions of God - usually due to lack of evidence.
3. Not being able to know about other versions of God - an agnosticism.

In this sense I would not be some 'dogmatic' atheist but a mixture of strong atheism to agnosticism depending on the God concept precisely because their are different God concepts.

Eg I would be a strong explicit atheist [using your terminology] for God concepts like Jesus, Zeus and Tlahuizcalpantecuhtli.
(I'm sure you never prayed to Tlahuizcalpantecuhtli let alone say His glorious name - if you pronounce it correctly the first time there must be a God !!! Tlahuizcalpantecuhtli lives ! )

However for some of the Neo-Platonistic apophatic theological versions of God may leave me as an agnostic in the strong sense.
(by strong agnosticism meaning it is not possible to know whether an apophatic 'negative theology' type of God exists in which is God defined by 'what it is not' - found in some of the neo-platonistic & kabbalistic versions defining God.)

Ok well this is similar to my own position, seems reasonable to me. I think there are many subtle different definitions of "god" and depending on the definition, the position I'd personally take would be anything between theism and strong atheism.

Phil
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-08-2014, 03:40 AM
RE: The hypocracy of atheism
(17-08-2014 10:18 AM)Chas Wrote:  There is no confusion in what I mean by my lack of belief in God/gods.

I do not believe any of the claims of existence for gods I have ever read or heard.

Fair enough, it's good to be skeptical. I certainly advocate against belief that's not based on some sort of direct personal experience (e.g. empirical evidence)

Note: someone claiming they have empirical evidence for something is not in fact empirical evidence for me, it's little more than hearsay.

Phil
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-08-2014, 06:43 AM
RE: The hypocracy of atheism
Personal experience is not empirical evidence.

Empirical evidence does not vary from person to person.

[Image: fdyq20.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like LostLocke's post
18-08-2014, 06:54 AM
RE: The hypocracy of atheism
(16-08-2014 04:20 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  Atheism is a single stance on a single question: do I believe the god claims of others? There is no content to atheism outside of the answer to that question, so it can't be dogmatic because it lacks any dogma.

Example: I don't believe any god claim and I think you are a dumb cunt. The fact I think you are a dumb cunt is not a part of atheism, because it has no content or dogma addressing dumb cuntery.

This is as far as I got in the thread. It seems like you ended it quite well. +1 for that.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-08-2014, 07:05 AM
RE: The hypocracy of atheism
(18-08-2014 06:43 AM)LostLocke Wrote:  Personal experience is not empirical evidence.

OK, however, consider the reverse - I think it's true that empirical evidence is a personal experience.

It's a "personal" experience of sense data coming into the awareness of a "person". There has to be a person there to be aware of the empirical evidence, you can't take the personal observer out of the system.

Quote:Empirical evidence does not vary from person to person.

That does not disprove the fact that it's at root, a personal experience. All it proves is that all human beings have the exact same subjective personal experience.

It's not possible to remove the "personal" from the observation in an absolute sense, even though it may nevertheless be meaningful to consider empirical data as objective in a relative sense, simply because all humans can agree on it without argument and that is good enough in practice to work with reality as actually experienced.

Phil
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-08-2014, 03:01 PM
RE: The hypocracy of atheism
God exists because God exists. It's as simple as that. Oh wait, that's circular reasoning? You mean, like, logic is valid because logic is valid? That kind of circular reasoning?

Truth seeker.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-08-2014, 03:24 PM
RE: The hypocracy of atheism
(18-08-2014 03:01 PM)diddo97 Wrote:  God exists because God exists. It's as simple as that. Oh wait, that's circular reasoning?


Yay! Now if you'll just stop there people might think that there is hope for you (again).

(18-08-2014 03:01 PM)diddo97 Wrote:  You mean, like, logic is valid because logic is valid? That kind of circular reasoning?

Logic is a tool that uses artificial constructs that approximate reality (true and false, or N% true/false if you use fuzzy logic).

Is a hammer a valid tool? For hitting nails and smashing skulls then yes, not so much for making souffles.

Logic is also a crap tool if you want to create artificial intelligence for example ... Fancy that!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-08-2014, 03:26 PM
RE: The hypocracy of atheism
(18-08-2014 03:24 PM)Mathilda Wrote:  
(18-08-2014 03:01 PM)diddo97 Wrote:  God exists because God exists. It's as simple as that. Oh wait, that's circular reasoning?


Yay! Now if you'll just stop there people might think that there is hope for you (again).

(18-08-2014 03:01 PM)diddo97 Wrote:  You mean, like, logic is valid because logic is valid? That kind of circular reasoning?

Logic is a tool that uses artificial constructs that approximate reality (true and false, or N% true/false if you use fuzzy logic).

Is a hammer a valid tool? For hitting nails and smashing skulls then yes, not so much for making souffles.

Logic is also a crap tool if you want to create artificial intelligence for example ... Fancy that!

Logic isn't absolute? Congratulations! You have admitted that you believe in God!!

Truth seeker.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-08-2014, 03:32 PM
RE: The hypocracy of atheism
(18-08-2014 03:26 PM)diddo97 Wrote:  
(18-08-2014 03:24 PM)Mathilda Wrote:  Yay! Now if you'll just stop there people might think that there is hope for you (again).


Logic is a tool that uses artificial constructs that approximate reality (true and false, or N% true/false if you use fuzzy logic).

Is a hammer a valid tool? For hitting nails and smashing skulls then yes, not so much for making souffles.

Logic is also a crap tool if you want to create artificial intelligence for example ... Fancy that!

Logic isn't absolute? Congratulations! You have admitted that you believe in God!!

That is the most non sequitur of all the non sequiturs to ever not follow.

The people closely associated with the namesake of female canines are suffering from a nondescript form of lunacy.
"Anti-environmentalism is like standing in front of a forest and going 'quick kill them they're coming right for us!'" - Jake Farr-Wharton, The Imaginary Friend Show.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Free Thought's post
18-08-2014, 03:34 PM
RE: The hypocracy of atheism
(18-08-2014 03:26 PM)diddo97 Wrote:  Logic isn't absolute? Congratulations! You have admitted that you believe in God!!

No I haven't.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Mathilda's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: