Why Conspiracies are stupid.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
16-11-2016, 12:17 PM
RE: Why Conspiracies are stupid.
(16-11-2016 11:46 AM)Celestial_Wonder Wrote:  My definition of religion - a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith.
I'm sure the viewing that statement through your plexiglas navel makes it seem reasonable. Hobo
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Gawdzilla's post
16-11-2016, 12:24 PM
RE: Why Conspiracies are stupid.
(16-11-2016 12:07 PM)Celestial_Wonder Wrote:  
(16-11-2016 11:54 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  "Do you mean to say that I am using religion as a label to insult others or that it insults me?"
I'm asking why you keep applying the label to science and scientific theories and atheists.

"Because I'm not exactly seeking to insult others comparing it to religion in the sense how some Atheists treat it, because I don't view religion as something that is inherently bad but something that is occurs naturally."
Once again, what "some Atheists" are you referring to?

Mainly to describe the behavior of the majority of 'Dawkinists' if we were going to start adding more definitions towards individual atheists at least. I think Dawkinist is allowable?

Quote:"My definition of religion - a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith."
Right, so you've constructed a new definition of religion to fit your straw men.

What is "faith" to you? Is it of any benefit to discussion when you've your own definitions of words that no other person would accept, thereby causing discussions to be filled with confusion because what you are trying to say is muddled by the incorrectly defined terms you use?

The definition is from merriam-websters online dictionary.

Full Definition of religion
1
a : the state of a religious <a nun in her 20th year of religion>
b (1) : the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2) : commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
2
: a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
3
archaic : scrupulous conformity : conscientiousness
4
: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith


and here's one of the definitions for faith by Merriam-Webster this is the definition I'm using in these examples.

Faith - something that is believed especially with strong conviction; especially : a system of religious beliefs <the Protestant faith>

"Mainly to describe the behavior of the majority of 'Dawkinists' if we were going to start adding more definitions towards individual atheists at least. I think Dawkinist is allowable?"
I don't know what a "Dawkinist" is. Making up terms to describe people in a way that they wouldn't describe themselves is a rather baseless tactic for debate. Atheists lack a belief in a god, that's it. End. Fin. No more than that. So what "some atheists" do or believe is in no way a reflection of atheism or of science or even of Dawkins.

So you apply the definition of faith and religion differently depending on the group then? Ergo, between science, scientific theories, and atheists, you use one concept of religion and faith but for actual religions you use a different definition of faith and religion?

How about I put it this way, the definition of faith you provide says "especially: a system of religious beliefs" but your preferred definition of religion is "a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith." Meaning that your definition of religion for atheists/science is dependent upon your definition of faith but your definition of faith is dependent upon your definition of religion. It's circular.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
16-11-2016, 12:26 PM
RE: Why Conspiracies are stupid.
I'm sorry I haven't been paying attention to this thread.

Anyone care to give me a synopsis of what's going on?

Oh, and I will be watching it from now on.


But as if to knock me down, reality came around
And without so much as a mere touch, cut me into little pieces

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-11-2016, 12:27 PM (This post was last modified: 16-11-2016 12:35 PM by Celestial_Wonder.)
RE: Why Conspiracies are stupid.
(16-11-2016 12:12 PM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  
(16-11-2016 11:46 AM)Celestial_Wonder Wrote:  My definition of religion - a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith.

I reject that definition in preference to the accepted definitions already in use.

The definitions in use are accepted by believers and non-believers alike.
The definitions are accurate.
There is no viable reason for redefining the word.
The proposed definition is both inaccurate and confusing.

That is one of the definitions already in use fatbaldhobbit. It is accurate, and it isn't confusing because its a definition. Its like a grape, there are many varieties of grapes and there isn't just any one kind. We're free to harvest these grapes as we see fit.

(16-11-2016 12:24 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(16-11-2016 12:07 PM)Celestial_Wonder Wrote:  Mainly to describe the behavior of the majority of 'Dawkinists' if we were going to start adding more definitions towards individual atheists at least. I think Dawkinist is allowable?


The definition is from merriam-websters online dictionary.

Full Definition of religion
1
a : the state of a religious <a nun in her 20th year of religion>
b (1) : the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2) : commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
2
: a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
3
archaic : scrupulous conformity : conscientiousness
4
: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith


and here's one of the definitions for faith by Merriam-Webster this is the definition I'm using in these examples.

Faith - something that is believed especially with strong conviction; especially : a system of religious beliefs <the Protestant faith>

"Mainly to describe the behavior of the majority of 'Dawkinists' if we were going to start adding more definitions towards individual atheists at least. I think Dawkinist is allowable?"
I don't know what a "Dawkinist" is. Making up terms to describe people in a way that they wouldn't describe themselves is a rather baseless tactic for debate. Atheists lack a belief in a god, that's it. End. Fin. No more than that. So what "some atheists" do or believe is in no way a reflection of atheism or of science or even of Dawkins.

So you apply the definition of faith and religion differently depending on the group then? Ergo, between science, scientific theories, and atheists, you use one concept of religion and faith but for actual religions you use a different definition of faith and religion?

How about I put it this way, the definition of faith you provide says "especially: a system of religious beliefs" but your preferred definition of religion is "a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith." Meaning that your definition of religion for atheists/science is dependent upon your definition of faith but your definition of faith is dependent upon your definition of religion. It's circular.

*sigh*

If I haven't been clear enough already. I use it to define the BEHAVIOR of certain individuals who also happen to be atheists.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-11-2016, 12:27 PM
RE: Why Conspiracies are stupid.
(16-11-2016 12:26 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  I'm sorry I haven't been paying attention to this thread.

Anyone care to give me a synopsis of what's going on?

Selective use of definitions, creation of circular arguments, straw men, and equating atheism with the mysterious "faith" and "religion" of "some atheists."

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-11-2016, 12:28 PM
RE: Why Conspiracies are stupid.
(16-11-2016 12:27 PM)Celestial_Wonder Wrote:  
(16-11-2016 12:12 PM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  I reject that definition in preference to the accepted definitions already in use.

The definitions in use are accepted by believers and non-believers alike.
The definitions are accurate.
There is no viable reason for redefining the word.
The proposed definition is both inaccurate and confusing.

That is one of the definitions already in use fatbaldhobbit. It is accurate, and it isn't confusing because its a definition. Its like a grape, there are many varieties of grapes and there isn't just any one kind. We're free to harvest these grapes as we see fit.

It is one definition of religion that you selectively use, that still doesn't equate science or scientific theory with religion. (that's because the way that this definition of religion uses the word "faith" is clearly not the same definition as the one for "faith" you try to use.)

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-11-2016, 12:29 PM
RE: Why Conspiracies are stupid.
(16-11-2016 12:27 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(16-11-2016 12:26 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  I'm sorry I haven't been paying attention to this thread.

Anyone care to give me a synopsis of what's going on?

Selective use of definitions, creation of circular arguments, straw men, and equating atheism with the mysterious "faith" and "religion" of "some atheists."

Oh my. Gasp looks like a real charmer.

Well...I'll keep an eye on things. Smile


But as if to knock me down, reality came around
And without so much as a mere touch, cut me into little pieces

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Momsurroundedbyboys's post
16-11-2016, 12:37 PM
RE: Why Conspiracies are stupid.
(16-11-2016 12:29 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  
(16-11-2016 12:27 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Selective use of definitions, creation of circular arguments, straw men, and equating atheism with the mysterious "faith" and "religion" of "some atheists."

Oh my. Gasp looks like a real charmer.

Well...I'll keep an eye on things. Smile

"Don't make me come in there!!!" Gasp
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Gawdzilla's post
16-11-2016, 12:41 PM
RE: Why Conspiracies are stupid.
(16-11-2016 12:26 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  I'm sorry I haven't been paying attention to this thread.

Anyone care to give me a synopsis of what's going on?

Oh, and I will be watching it from now on.

What's going on smells suspiciously like a dirty sock to me. I recommend a dirty sock check.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-11-2016, 12:42 PM
RE: Why Conspiracies are stupid.
(16-11-2016 12:28 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(16-11-2016 12:27 PM)Celestial_Wonder Wrote:  That is one of the definitions already in use fatbaldhobbit. It is accurate, and it isn't confusing because its a definition. Its like a grape, there are many varieties of grapes and there isn't just any one kind. We're free to harvest these grapes as we see fit.

It is one definition of religion that you selectively use, that still doesn't equate science or scientific theory with religion. (that's because the way that this definition of religion uses the word "faith" is clearly not the same definition as the one for "faith" you try to use.)

Well it certainly didn't specify which definition it could use. Also again, using it to describe the behavior of atheists. I've said it many times already that 'Dawkinists' treat science like their new religion. And I've explained why and how and you just keep running circles around me so much so that Full Circle would be jealous.

The definitions are what they are, if you take such offense to it then change the english language.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: