Um, where is....
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
27-12-2014, 07:13 PM
RE: Um, where is....
(25-12-2014 08:26 AM)Baba Bozo Wrote:  .... the Real Life Debate With Atheists section?

He asked before adding us to his Ignore List. Laughat

---
Flesh and blood of a dead star, slain in the apocalypse of supernova, resurrected by four billion years of continuous autocatalytic reaction and crowned with the emergent property of sentience in the dream that the universe might one day understand itself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Paleophyte's post
27-12-2014, 07:53 PM
RE: Um, where is....
(25-12-2014 08:26 AM)Baba Bozo Wrote:  Doesn't atheism explicitly or implicitly propose reason as an alternative to religion? Isn't reason the foundation upon which "lack of belief"is built?

Have you considered that religious people may be reasonable as well, if only somewhat?

What is your understanding of the burden of proof and do you think it belongs to Theism or Atheism?

(25-12-2014 08:26 AM)Baba Bozo Wrote:  But what fun is debunking theists? They can retreat in to the "we believe on faith" hidey hole at any time, so what's the point?

And what is the point really of challenging other people's beliefs when the truth is, we really can't do much of anything about them? Isn't challenging other people's beliefs sort of inherently illogical, an illusion we perpetrate upon ourselves?

If we challenge our own beliefs instead, we at least have a chance of learning something that we can actually implement.

Do you consider the challenging of someone's beliefs a refining moment for the target of the challenge alone? Does the challenger not also test his own view for weakness?

(25-12-2014 08:26 AM)Baba Bozo Wrote:  In order to know that "nobody knows" I'd have to both know everybody, AND I'd have to know what The Answer is not. So even though I'm claiming "nobody knows" I'm at the same time claiming that "I know" thus defeating my own position without any help from anybody.

What is your definition of "know" and are you using the word the same way in both cases?

Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of a spiritless situation. The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness.

-Karl Marx
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-12-2014, 08:06 PM
RE: Um, where is....
(27-12-2014 07:53 PM)Dark Phoenix Wrote:  Have you considered that religious people may be reasonable as well, if only somewhat?

Oh sure, of course. There are billions of religious people, many of them are indeed very reasonable.

Quote:What is your understanding of the burden of proof and do you think it belongs to Theism or Atheism?

The burden belongs to anyone making a claim. Anything other than "I don't know" is a claim.

Quote:Do you consider the challenging of someone's beliefs a refining moment for the target of the challenge alone?

Challenging someone else's beliefs is mostly an illogical big waste of time driven by ego and emotion etc. But I do it all the time anyway myself. Having a knack for a largely pointless activity helps develop one's sense of humor. What can I say?

Quote:Does the challenger not also test his own view for weakness?

Not very often, but ideally, yes.

Quote:What is your definition of "know" and are you using the word the same way in both cases?

Good question, thanks, I like it.

Knowing is a process where we try to create a conceptual object in our minds that accurately represents some aspect of the real world.

It works well enough most of the time, evidence being humans are still here on the planet.

Knowing can present substantial obstacles in the inquiries we are discussing here, and I apologize, I'm just too tired to go much farther in to such a large subject at the moment. Rome wasn't built in a day etc.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-12-2014, 08:11 PM
RE: Um, where is....
(25-12-2014 11:45 AM)Baba Bozo Wrote:  What is the lack of belief built upon? Where does it come from? What is it's source?

Why are you convinced that Atheism has a "source" or a foundational justification? Isn't it the default of birth?

Here is a silly and probably flawed analogy to help ask my question. Let us imagine that someone asserts the sky is not blue, but is instead green. Finding the sky as blue as ever when we glance upward, we ask for evidence or other justifications for the belief that is green. Let's imagine that a few are given, but they turn out to be inconclusive or inadequate to justify the belief in a green sky. We refuse to accept the claim.

Imagine the person who asserts a green sky then demanding that the rest of us justify our belief in a blue sky. Upon what is it founded? Where does it come from?

It seems to me that the response is the same in the analogy and on the subject of Atheism, we need no justification for what is based on observation. We did not even know of the assertion until it was made known to us, thus we did not come by it naturally. It is not innate to us. Why should we be called upon to prove a negative, or to provide evidence for a null hypothesis?

(25-12-2014 08:26 AM)Baba Bozo Wrote:  First you have to prove that "critically examining" is a reliable method for coming to conclusions on the topic of gods.

Do you consider it reliable on all other topics? If so, why not gods as well?

(25-12-2014 08:26 AM)Baba Bozo Wrote:  My posts will stop offering the same challenge when somebody meets that challenge by proving that your chosen authority, human reason, is qualified for the job at hand.

Have you considered that it might not be possible to meet this challenge, even for you? How can we justify our reason when we employ it throughout the justification?

(25-12-2014 08:26 AM)Baba Bozo Wrote:  Imagine this was a theist forum. You challenge the authority of the Bible, and your challenge is ignored, ignored, ignored and all anybody does is keep quoting you Bible verses. That's what's happening here in regards to reason.

Is it your view that the authority and reliability of the bible is equal to that of reason itself? Do you consider them parallel?

Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of a spiritless situation. The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness.

-Karl Marx
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Dark Phoenix's post
27-12-2014, 08:38 PM
RE: Um, where is....
(27-12-2014 08:06 PM)Baba Bozo Wrote:  Oh sure, of course. There are billions of religious people, many of them are indeed very reasonable.

How then can reason be an alternative to religion, if they can and do coincide?

(25-12-2014 08:26 AM)Baba Bozo Wrote:  The burden belongs to anyone making a claim. Anything other than "I don't know" is a claim.

Is it your view that we are saddled with a burden on the rejection of a claim as well?

I will give you another silly example for the sake of the question. Supposing I were to tell you about the invisible golden wish granting fairies that live in my gall bladder.

Is it your view that "I don't know" is as far as you can accurately speculate on the supposed fairies?

(25-12-2014 08:26 AM)Baba Bozo Wrote:  Not very often, but ideally, yes.

Given that with the "ideal" attitude the challenger is testing his own view as much as his opponent's, could it be true that it is not necessarily a waste of time?

(25-12-2014 08:26 AM)Baba Bozo Wrote:  Good question, thanks, I like it.

Thank you.

(25-12-2014 08:26 AM)Baba Bozo Wrote:  Knowing is a process where we try to create a conceptual object in our minds that accurately represents some aspect of the real world.

Is it not possible to construct a conceptual object for the views of others? If you find yourself incapable of knowledge when it comes to the supernatural, what might be wrong with considering everyone else limited in the same way?

Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of a spiritless situation. The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness.

-Karl Marx
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-12-2014, 12:07 AM
RE: Um, where is....
(27-12-2014 06:00 PM)Baba Bozo Wrote:  I'm putting as much work in to my reply as you are putting in to your question.

Given your amount of words in reply in regards to the amount of words in my question I would deem you're quantitatively putting more effort into the replies so ar. For which I do thank you.

(27-12-2014 06:00 PM)Baba Bozo Wrote:  You want to know about my positions.

Yes, this is my wish.

(27-12-2014 06:00 PM)Baba Bozo Wrote:  Ok, thanks for your interest.

You're most welcome.

(27-12-2014 06:00 PM)Baba Bozo Wrote:  I've already typed about 6 billion words all over the forum, so perhaps do a bit of research, conduct your investigation, and see what you can learn from the data that is already readily available.

Blink

What? Yes, indeed, you've posted a great many things spread all over the forum. That you request myself to go searching through all your written work to seek out something which you may not even have posted/addressed? This seems an od reply/request.

I thought my initial question to you in this thread would be enough to receive a simple reply.

(27-12-2014 06:00 PM)Baba Bozo Wrote:  If you should choose to do this, and you try to summarize my position in your own words, this will demonstrate you actually are interested.

I'm sorry. I thought my question about your actual position was evidence enough of my interest.

You also seem to assume I actually have the time to do this?

(27-12-2014 06:00 PM)Baba Bozo Wrote:  If you choose not to, that's ok, no problem. That will demonstrate your interest is limited, and so my replies will be limited to.

Again, that I initially showed interest in asking about your position is my amount of curiosity about yourself.

(27-12-2014 06:00 PM)Baba Bozo Wrote:  This is my last post on this matter. You do the homework or you don't. Either way is ok with me.

I'm sorry, but I simply do not have the time to work through
(27-12-2014 06:00 PM)Baba Bozo Wrote:  I've already typed about 6 billion words all over the forum,

Thank you for your time. Your replies do furnish a few things.


Much cheers to all.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Peebothuhul's post
28-12-2014, 01:44 AM
RE: Um, where is....
Bozo, just my 2 cents but I think you're throwing rocks at a window that doesn't exist. That or you're trolling.

Reasoning reason is circular. But reason is a sufficient means to question the possibility of God. It's what we have. If reason isn't justifiable than you might as well accept all hypothetical realities.

"I don't know" might be the only possible finish line you see, but those of us that accept this reality conclude that God isn't real.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-12-2014, 04:40 AM
RE: Um, where is....
(27-12-2014 08:11 PM)Dark Phoenix Wrote:  Why are you convinced that Atheism has a "source" or a foundational justification? Isn't it the default of birth?

At some point the person hears about the god proposal. And then they reject that proposal based on their human reasoning.

Their rejection of one faith (religion) is based upon a competing faith in the infinite power of human reason to answer all questions. One person says god is all powerful, the next person says human reason is all powerful.

The baby thing has nothing to do with anything really.

Quote:Let's imagine that a few are given, but they turn out to be inconclusive or inadequate to justify the belief in a green sky. We refuse to accept the claim.

Yes, you refuse to accept the claim, based on your faith that human reason can determine the color of the sky.

But you never challenge what the limits of human reason's ability might be, because your faith in reason is stronger, and less examined, than the faith a fundamentalist baptist has in Jesus.

Quote:It seems to me that the response is the same in the analogy and on the subject of Atheism, we need no justification for what is based on observation.

You have to prove that the ability to observe is sufficient that you could see a god if there was one. Until you prove that, the fact that you can't observe a god says nothing at all about it's existence or non-existence.

Quote:Why should we be called upon to prove a negative,

I'm not asking you to prove a negative. I'm asking you to prove the position assertion that human reason is qualified to deliver meaningful conclusions on the subject of gods.

The problem we are having is that the faith that atheists typically have in human reason's ability to address the god question is so strong, and so unexamined, such a matter of pure faith, that they don't even realize their viewpoint too, just like theists, also rests upon a positive assertion.

Quote:Do you consider it reliable on all other topics? If so, why not gods as well?

The god proposal is unique, as it makes a claim about the fundamental nature of everything. And we don't even know what the word "everything" refers to. Thus, atheism is a claim to know what doesn't exist, in an arena we can't define.

Quote:Have you considered that it might not be possible to meet this challenge, even for you? How can we justify our reason when we employ it throughout the justification?

This is a common point of confusion. The answer is simple, for those who sincerely actually want an answer, yourself included I hope.

Could you or I have come up with Einstein's space/time discoveries on our own? Probably not, right? That is, we easily recognize and admit there is a limit to our personal human reasoning ability. And we found this limit to our reasoning ability, using reason.

We all do this all the time. Could I have made it through med school? No way, don't have the brain for it. Could I be an astronaut? No way, not enough smarts. Could I get elected President? Nope, not savvy enough? All these limits of my reason, discovered with reason.

When you see how simple this is, you will be amazed that we've had to clog 28,000 threads on the forum discussing it.

Quote:Is it your view that the authority and reliability of the bible is equal to that of reason itself? Do you consider them parallel?

In my view, neither has proven their ability to deliver meaningful conclusions on the the very largest questions, such as the god proposal.

Holy books and human reason are both useful for very many other things, but that doesn't automatically qualify them as useful on EVERYTHING.

My atheist friends are making the very same mistake the theists make. It will be easier for you to see this mistake in theists, so we'll start there.

The theist reads his holy book, and has some wonderful experience. He may have found some good advice on how to live that has changed his life for the better, and he is really happy about the whole thing.

Then he makes an unwarranted leap from the fact that holy books are good for some things, to the completely unproven assertion that holy books are therefore credible authorities on EVERYTHING.

The atheist does the very same thing. They start with the absolutely true fact that human reason is useful for very many things, and then they make an unwarranted leap to the completely unproven assertion that human reason is therefore a credible authority on EVERYTHING.

If they are an adamant atheist, the next step is usually that they attach their personal ego identity to this sloppy conclusion, and once that happens they typically become immune to any counter argument. This same process unfolds in very many theists as well.

Thanks for intelligent questions. I hope my replies were at least somewhat helpful.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-12-2014, 04:57 AM
RE: Um, where is....
Apologies, I'm trying, but I find I can not keep up with every comment from every user. It's nothing personal, just reaching the limits of available time and energy etc. I am geezer guy, begging your forgiveness. :-)

(27-12-2014 08:38 PM)Dark Phoenix Wrote:  I will give you another silly example for the sake of the question. Supposing I were to tell you about the invisible golden wish granting fairies that live in my gall bladder.

We have proven over many thousands of cases that human reason is qualified to develop a great deal of accurate information about gall bladders. Thus, I am comfortable dismissing the invisible golden wish granting fairies theory.

Though, you might note, I have sorta almost proven the existence of the Invisible Pink Unicorn in another thread. Seriously. The history of science reveals many cases where we were sure we knew something, and we turned out to be completely wrong. Anyway, back on point...

We have no such pile of documented proof of ability on the god question. Thus, lacking proof of such an ability, I decline to believe in such an ability.

Many of you consider yourself hard headed realists, but on this question you are not. You believe in the ability of human reason to settle the god question, without any proof of such an incredible ability. That's called faith.

This is very useful information for the atheist who in engaged in a sincere inquiry, and not just an ego pumping argument loop.

The existence of atheist faith tells us a lot about the human condition, the source of both theism and atheism. Once we realize that we too base many of our perspectives on faith, we no longer have to be puzzled about the mystery of theism, because we can observe the very same processes unfolding in our own mind.

To the true investigator, the real person of reason, this discovery is welcomed as a research bonanza.

To the committed atheist ideologist, this is an existential threat which must be exterminated by any means necessary.

The very same thing exists in theism. Some theists are true explorers, while others content themselves with chanting memorized phrases in an insistent voice.

The real dividing line is not between theism and atheism, but between the real explorers and the dogma chanters in both camps.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-12-2014, 05:05 AM
RE: Um, where is....
Peebothuhul, I have been extremely generous with words all over the forum, way too much so. The information you seek is there if you really want it.

If you should choose to do some homework, and if you should come back with some specific questions or challenges, I'll make a good faith effort to address your comments, where I feel I might be able to add something of value.

Please understand that this forum is flooded with a million tiny posts whose only real purpose is to get somebody to type something so that whatever is typed can be rejected.

I'm NOT accusing you of this, I'm just saying your fellow posters are exhausting my ability to address every post by every user. Show me evidence that you're actually really interested, and my replies will likely become more responsive.

Ok, apologies, but we are no longer discussing whether we are discussing. :-)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: