Validity of belief (no matter what it is)
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
04-09-2013, 10:20 AM
RE: Validity of belief (no matter what it is)
Looks like agnosticfaith may have been a 'hit and run' theist.

One fallacious and flawed post and gone.

Do you think he even bothered to read any of the replies?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-09-2013, 10:51 AM
RE: Validity of belief (no matter what it is)
(04-09-2013 10:20 AM)Simon Moon Wrote:  Looks like agnosticfaith may have been a 'hit and run' theist.

One fallacious and flawed post and gone.

Do you think he even bothered to read any of the replies?

Well; it's only been a day and a half.

It'd take a bit longer than that before I'd conclude someone wasn't coming back.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-09-2013, 01:06 PM
RE: Validity of belief (no matter what it is)
(04-09-2013 01:35 AM)absols Wrote:  u cant mean being logical

to believe smthg that thing must look at least being existing objectively, so a kind of subjective speculation about what the fact represent is justfiable somehow logically

but u jump to keep meaning the word belief for god, when god is meant as a source of creations then he cant b existing in his creations, so the word belief cant apply for that

u always want to reject logics while insisting to present urself as being beyond it knowing what arguments are
about

it is clear that u mean believing some words in religions, which is hundred percent about urself will, so believing urself which cant b
u actually mean believing that god will take u to heaven so hundrepercent about urself alone

believing is a very living word that keep pointing objective truth

when a fact is clearly absolute one, even if the conscious realizing it know being nothing to it cant but believe it existing really there present

believing is considering else presence being real

what mean else mean oneself as else too

again which prove that u cant believe what u r meaning making u





I'm almost tempted to believe that this was turned into English from another language by Google Translate or somesuch, but that doesn't explain the textspeak abbreviation like u r for you are. It's almost indecipherable. I THINK part of what's being advanced here is the old, debunked, "There must be a Creator because there's a Creation, so let's call that Creator God" argument. Maybe? If I squint real hard?

"If I ignore the alternatives, the only option is God; I ignore them; therefore God." -- The Syllogism of Fail
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-09-2013, 01:17 PM
RE: Validity of belief (no matter what it is)
You cannot have logically "equally valid" beliefs in theism and atheism. One of these is a more correct belief.

The problem lies with the subset of atheists who reject the agnostic label utterly. If we reject every possibility as probable or even possible without its falsification we limit our thinking and go nowhere pretty fast.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-09-2013, 01:25 PM
RE: Validity of belief (no matter what it is)
(04-09-2013 01:17 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  You cannot have logically "equally valid" beliefs in theism and atheism. One of these is a more correct belief.

The problem lies with the subset of atheists who reject the agnostic label utterly. If we reject every possibility as probable or even possible without its falsification we limit our thinking and go nowhere pretty fast.

Your post went nowhere fast. I do not understand what you are trying to say at all.

The first statement implies that there is an objective truth by which to assert the validity of one claim over the other. Please present that.

The second statement is gibberish. Please rephrase it.

“Science is simply common sense at its best, that is, rigidly accurate in observation, and merciless to fallacy in logic.”
—Thomas Henry Huxley
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-09-2013, 01:38 PM
RE: Validity of belief (no matter what it is)
(04-09-2013 01:25 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(04-09-2013 01:17 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  You cannot have logically "equally valid" beliefs in theism and atheism. One of these is a more correct belief.

The problem lies with the subset of atheists who reject the agnostic label utterly. If we reject every possibility as probable or even possible without its falsification we limit our thinking and go nowhere pretty fast.

Your post went nowhere fast. I do not understand what you are trying to say at all.

The first statement implies that there is an objective truth by which to assert the validity of one claim over the other. Please present that.

The second statement is gibberish. Please rephrase it.

Yes, his statements are not cogent.

Use of the word 'logic' is perhaps not appropriate to the context. To be logically valid a belief must only follow from its premises.

The various flavours of atheism and theism proceed from different premises. As far as they may be said to be invalid, that term must refer to the truth of their respective premises (which are not objectively demonstrable) - and so is unrelated to the logical validity of those beliefs.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-09-2013, 02:41 PM (This post was last modified: 04-09-2013 02:47 PM by absols.)
RE: Validity of belief (no matter what it is)
the problem is what u dont seem to know how a word is true, any word

when existence is true then any word is absolute objective free real clarity

while to u belief, is pointing smthg that might exist or not but subjectively u adopt as u want it to b

this is nonsense, it cant b

it shows how all words are deformed by conscious misconceptions, so a lot of opposite to the true means are sold out and mayb it is a way for fake life to b stronger

a belief is an absolute objective reality of abstract recognition of else existence

logically, one cant recognize being present but itself, as any perspective would b always related to his own presence fact

but bc existence is true, objective always exist as being else positive end constant fact without means

so belief as a word, mean the abstraction of objective facts knowledge being true, so kind of recognition of smthg else existence being present too

that is how beliefs should b always neutral, while the word is used to mean an affection for smthg to b

to believe one must b else to else then too
while the word is used to confuse the belief with the believer, that is how it could mean god, but it is an impossible way, if the believer is not independant to what he believe then he doesnt exist to believe anything

the word belief literally is b lief, which show what i said

leave and b so there is else present

now theism n atheism are never an objective free fact so they cant b believed

theism is pointing a source of objective so outside of it so never it nor inn
and atheism is pointing individuals freedom and not things so also dont admit the existence of absolute objectivity, while clearly shout being opposed to the word belief so mean its own presence fact over anything n everything
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-09-2013, 03:37 PM
RE: Validity of belief (no matter what it is)
(04-09-2013 02:41 PM)absols Wrote:  the problem is what u dont seem to know how a word is true, any word

when existence is true then any word is absolute objective free real clarity

while to u belief, is pointing smthg that might exist or not but subjectively u adopt as u want it to b

this is nonsense, it cant b

it shows how all words are deformed by conscious misconceptions, so a lot of opposite to the true means are sold out and mayb it is a way for fake life to b stronger

a belief is an absolute objective reality of abstract recognition of else existence

logically, one cant recognize being present but itself, as any perspective would b always related to his own presence fact

but bc existence is true, objective always exist as being else positive end constant fact without means

so belief as a word, mean the abstraction of objective facts knowledge being true, so kind of recognition of smthg else existence being present too

that is how beliefs should b always neutral, while the word is used to mean an affection for smthg to b

to believe one must b else to else then too
while the word is used to confuse the belief with the believer, that is how it could mean god, but it is an impossible way, if the believer is not independant to what he believe then he doesnt exist to believe anything

the word belief literally is b lief, which show what i said

leave and b so there is else present

now theism n atheism are never an objective free fact so they cant b believed

theism is pointing a source of objective so outside of it so never it nor inn
and atheism is pointing individuals freedom and not things so also dont admit the existence of absolute objectivity, while clearly shout being opposed to the word belief so mean its own presence fact over anything n everything


Best. Nonsense. Ever. Thumbsup

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
04-09-2013, 04:00 PM
RE: Validity of belief (no matter what it is)
(04-09-2013 02:41 PM)absols Wrote:  the problem is what u dont seem to know how a word is true, any word

[SNIP]

theism is pointing a source of objective so outside of it so never it nor inn
and atheism is pointing individuals freedom and not things so also dont admit the existence of absolute objectivity, while clearly shout being opposed to the word belief so mean its own presence fact over anything n everything

I know others have already told you this, but I figured I'd join in in hopes that it will get through, but....

Your posts do not communicate anything, and therefore are a waste of your time and ours.

I get the feeling that you believe you have something important to communicate, but you are failing miserably.

Whether it is because English is your 2nd language, or you have some other issue making your thoughts into understandable language, you are not doing anyone any good here.

That's the last I'll mention it, but until your posts are understandable, they are of no use.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-09-2013, 04:23 PM
RE: Validity of belief (no matter what it is)
(04-09-2013 03:37 PM)Chas Wrote:  Best. Nonsense. Ever. Thumbsup

Not. Even. Close.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: