Why I am neither a Theist nor an Atheist
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
11-09-2011, 07:17 PM
RE: Why I am neither a Theist nor an Atheist
So anyways Zombie Lincoln is fairly disturbing. I'll be thinking about that one while I try and sleep tonight.

Also I don't remember which one of you guys said it because this thread is fucking long. But someone said that just because you don't know how it could be done doesn't mean it couldn't be done, I think it was Tae. It's true. It's not a good place to stand upon. However the counter argument of, because I know it can't be done currently I can assume with good conscience that it hasn't happened as of now, is also true and a good place to stand. I believe that is how someone who calls themselves strictly agnostic can choose which side of the fence to sit on in certain debates. Such as the god issue. That's how I figure shit out, first I go, well I can't actually prove that there is no god no matter how you describe it, but I can prove that claims made within the bible are false and that it was written by man, and man is fallible and that it has questionable morals etc... and form a way of leaning from there. But also have to concur that there are certain things that I will never see a lick of proof for one way or the other, and those things I will not take a side on unless they fall into one of my other categories such as morality or sexiness etc.

You guys argue a lot. Settle down or I'm going to call your mothers.

"I think of myself as an intelligent, sensitive human being with the soul of a clown which always forces me to blow it at the most important moments." -Jim Morrison
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-09-2011, 08:55 PM
RE: Why I am neither a Theist nor an Atheist
Ghost,

Yes I do find it amusing that when someone calls you out on your double standard you throw a tantrum. By the way, notice who resorted to insults instead of actual arguments Cool

Here's the summary of why you use a special kind of logic for god:

Me: Do you believe the president is a reanimation?
You: No because everything we know indicates it's not possible.

--Notice how you don't feel the need to provide excuses, special exceptions, apologies, loopholes, nothing like "well it could be a reanimation process unknown to us", etc. Just plain and simple disbelief in something for which not only there's no evidence to back it up but it also contradicts what we already know.--

Me: Fair enough, do you believe in a god with conscious attributes?
You: I can't say whether I believe in it or not.
Me: But everything we know about consciousness indicates that it requires a physical brain, didn't you just dismiss the reanimation claim because everything we know indicates that it's not possible?
You: Oh but a god can have consciousness in a manner unknown to us.

/facepalm!

How is it not special pleading when you're perfectly comfortable saying "I don't believe it" for one claim yet resort to "it could be in a way unknown to us" for the other? (an excuse that can be used for anything btw)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-09-2011, 10:30 PM
RE: Why I am neither a Theist nor an Atheist
You did not call me out on my double standard. There is no double standard. You invented this double standard because you are incapable of understanding a simple concept, and you called your invention true. I just didn't play your game.

The fact that you insult me is bad. The fact that you claim that you do not is worse, because when you do that, you insult my intelligence by suggesting I am incapable of understanding what it is to be insulted. So be a fucking man and admit to what you've done. It's clear, it's on the record and only a fucking coward would deny it.

Quote:nothing like "well it could be a reanimation process unknown to us", etc.

You are a dirty fucking liar. I went on and on about prima facie evidence and you ignored it in its entirety. If science tells us that humans cannot live without lungs and you tell me that you know a human that is living without their lungs, the established truth tells me that it is not so. Prima facie evidence: Humans are aerobes and their metabolic processes cannot function without oxygen and can cease altogether if oxygen supply is interrupted for mere minutes; therefore, a human cannot survive if the lungs, responsible for oxygen intake, gas exchange and carbon dioxide expulsion, one of two major organs in the oxygen delivery system, the cardiopulmonary or cardiorespiratory system, is not present in the body. The assertion that you know a human that is living without their lungs cannot be true by virtue of our established understanding of human biology. BUT (and this is the part you are utterly ignoring), if you rebut the established truth, that changes everything. So let’s look at this reanimation thing. If you tell me you had lunch with a zombie, the evidence says, clearly, bullshit. If you rebut that pre-established truth (and don’t you fucking dare claim that I have never used the word rebut prior to now) with, oh, I don’t know, the claim that a reanimation process that is unknown to us was used, we then investigate that new claim and see what we can determine. I no longer believe it is false because the veracity of the new claim, that which rebuts the established truth, is undemonstrated (provided that the new claim is not immediately debunked by other prima facie evidence, for example, if you tell me you used scotch tape and glitter). So I reserve my opinion until such time as it is demonstrated. If you tell me a wizard did it, then it is no longer a scientific question. It is indemonstrable. I no longer believe it is untrue, I now reserve my opinion; a reservation that will last in perpetuity because the indemonstrable, by definition, can never be demonstrated.

I would respond to the rest of your paragraph but it's written in gibberish.

As far as consciousness goes, it was an argument that you brought up out of nowhere that had nothing to do with anything that we were talking about. So don't pretend like it's my issue. If you really want to get into it, two things. 1 - I was exceptionally clear that I have no interest in attributing any qualities or traits to God because I have no reason to. Consciousness and meat brains are traits. This is your argument, not mine. 2 - The idea that an omnipotent being that has the power to create the universe could not have free agency without a meat brain is so astronomically ridiculous, I felt it went without saying. A brain is a requirement of natural law. A supernatural entity, by definition, is not subject to natural law. That means that by definition, we cannot assume that a supernatural being is limited by the laws of the universe, quite the opposite, we must, by definition, assume that it is not. So there is no reason to believe that a supernatural being, should it exist, requires a meat brain, a walking stick, low cholesterol, or anything else. If you really want to discuss this further we can start another thread because this is a thread about Agnosticism, not the qualities of God, should he exist.

I have been clear. If something is demonstrated to be either true or false, I believe it to be true or false. When something is undemonstrated, I reserve my opinion. When something is indemonstrable, I reserve my opinion. That is the only criteria I am using. I do not juggle it to suit the argument. I will not sit here and be called a liar by a liar. If you wish at any point to discuss what is actually being said, I have no issue discussing the matter with you. But up until now, all you have demonstrated is a determination to prove that I use "mental gymnastics" a term that you have never defined and continue to accuse me of regardless of what I say, an utter inability to process what I am actually saying, a lack of compunction for lying about what I said and liberal use of mockery. If you cannot understand why I think that is not worth engaging with, I have no remedy for you.

668, THE NEIGHBOUR OF THE BEAST… BITCHES!!!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-09-2011, 01:44 AM
RE: Why I am neither a Theist nor an Atheist
Do you believe in a god that interferes with events?

Yes= Theist
No= Atheist
I don't know=Atheist
I haven't made up my mind yet=Atheist
I'm blah blah blah= Atheist

Belief is binary. Prove to me that knowledge is a requirement of belief.

“Forget Jesus, the stars died so you could be born.” - Lawrence M. Krauss
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like DeepThought's post
12-09-2011, 10:58 AM
RE: Why I am neither a Theist nor an Atheist
Alright, let's see who's summarizing the conversation and who's trying to weasel out his own statements.

G: "Atheist...if it implies any positive statements whatsoever, like, "I don't believe in God," then I most certainly am not."
T: "... do you avoid ALL questions of belief or just when it comes to gods? So for example what would you say if I asked you if you believe Obama actually died 10 years ago and what we have as president is the reanimated body controlled by Hitler (who also didn't die)?"
G: "I don’t believe it."
G: "Based on what we know of cellular biology, metabolic pathways, brain damage, organic compounds and decay, we know that it is scientifically impossible to reanimate a corpse."
G: "there is no evidence for it, BUT THERE IS EVIDENCE AGAINST IT. We have ALREADY PROVEN that a corpse cannot be reanimated by ANY KNOWN METHOD. Unless you can rebut that FACT, there is no reason to believe you"

G: "For me, the God question is simple. Is there some entity or agent that can create and or control our universe?"
T: "are you going to water down the definition of a god to mean "anything that caused the big bang and/or the laws of the universe"?"
G: "God or the Gods or the Spirits or whatever else, should he/she/it/they exist, MUST have 1 - Created the universe and 2 - have control over the natural forces of the universe"
T: "When it comes to the consciousness of a god that can that can create and/or control our universe, the fact that everything we know about consciousness pointing to it being the product of material brains (plus the fact that there is zilch evidence for the existence of a god, let alone how it created and/or controls the universe) says nothing to you about the claim."
G: "If you want to say that the only entities in the universe and even beyond the universe that can possibly have free agency are those that have material brains as we understand them, more power to you. I have no evidence so I reserve my opinion."
T: "you talk about a god with conscious qualities (intelligence, intent, ability to control things, etc.) and when called out on how it can't be done without a brain (as far as we know it), your response is to special plead ("it doesn't have to be consciousness as we know it")."

G: /tantrum!
T: /lol
G: /insult
T: /rofl


Now about the whole "you introduced the word 'consciousness' not me" cry. I specifically asked you if you were going to water down the definition of god to anything that caused the big bang and/or the laws of the universe. Your answer was that should it exist it must have created the universe and have control over it. Unless you want to retract and water down the definition, the god you're describing has some form of intelligence, intent, and the ability to control things. I summarize those thing with the word 'consciousness'. If it bother's you that much we can replace it with 'intelligence'.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-09-2011, 11:27 AM
RE: Why I am neither a Theist nor an Atheist
I can keep my mouth shut no longer.

Tae, are you purposely trying to destroy any means of reasonable, mature communication by acting like a dick, then complaining when you are called a dick?? Holy shit, seriously, this drives me nuts. Fine, make your arguments, but do you need to make them the way you are?

This is so common on the internet. Someone comes along, speaks condescendingly, rudely, and straight up like an ass, but at the same time, very carefully crafts their posts so as not to outright call someone names/dirctly say their opponent is stupid/or whatever, then when someone speaks plainly, they get up in arms because the other person "insulted" them. You constantly read into other posts what you want to read, and refuse to actually think about what the person is saying. If they don't use the words that perfectly describe (in a way that you would use) what they mean, you act like they are contradicting/watering down/weaseling out of things.

Try slowing down, and imagine you are speaking to people face to face. It may just create a conversation. And a conversation between people who have different views can actually be productive, because it means you are not just looking for where the other person is wrong. It means you are listening to what they have to say, in the hopes that they may bring to your attention something you have previously overlooked.

....BTW, What I have said here is my opinion, and has NOTHING to do with me being the administrator here. Call me out on my bullshit, tell me I'm an asshole, agree with me because you do, but don't think I am saying anything as a threat. You WILL NOT be punished/banned/whatever, just because I don't agree with your means of communication. I say so because you are new here, and I want you and everyone else to know that we have no rules that say you need to agree with staff, lest ye suffer the consequences.



nuff said.

So many cats, so few good recipes.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Stark Raving's post
12-09-2011, 12:34 PM
RE: Why I am neither a Theist nor an Atheist
(12-09-2011 01:44 AM)DeepThought Wrote:  Do you believe in a god that interferes with events?

Yes= Theist
No= Atheist
I don't know=Atheist
I haven't made up my mind yet=Atheist
I'm blah blah blah= Atheist

Belief is binary. Prove to me that knowledge is a requirement of belief.

So a deist (belief in a non-interfering, "Grand Architect of the Universe", creator god) is an atheist too? Huh

The God excuse: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument. "God did it." Anything we can't describe must have come from God. - George Carlin

Whenever I'm asked "What if you're wrong?", I always show the asker this video: http://youtu.be/iClejS8vWjo Screw Pascal's wager.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-09-2011, 04:17 PM (This post was last modified: 12-09-2011 05:42 PM by DeepThought.)
RE: Why I am neither a Theist nor an Atheist
(12-09-2011 12:34 PM)Efrx86 Wrote:  So a deist (belief in a non-interfering, "Grand Architect of the Universe", creator god) is an atheist too? Huh

A few quick edits and:
Do you believe in a god that doesn't interfere with events?

Yes= Deist
No= Adeist
I don't know=Adeist
I haven't made up my mind yet=Adeist
I'm blah blah blah= Adeist

Belief is binary. Prove to me that knowledge is a requirement of belief.

Really, you could have done that yourself!

“Forget Jesus, the stars died so you could be born.” - Lawrence M. Krauss
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-09-2011, 05:24 PM
RE: Why I am neither a Theist nor an Atheist
Stark,

I'm going to pick my fights and not pick one with an admin.

/peace
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-09-2011, 05:53 PM
RE: Why I am neither a Theist nor an Atheist
(12-09-2011 05:24 PM)taeftw1 Wrote:  Stark,

I'm going to pick my fights and not pick one with an admin.

/peace

Better yet, don't pick a fight at all. Pick a discussion instead.

The fact that I am the admin for this forum shouldn't have anything to do with it. I'm not bashing you either. It's common on many forums that if you disagree with an admin you are basically asking to get booted from the forum. So I can understand your aprehension. Trust me though, it's not like that here. You can really say anything to me that you can to anyone else (which is damn near anything, since I am a strong believer in freedom of speech), so let me have it. I can take it, I promise. Hell, if I am wrong or out of line I WANT you to let me have it. That's how we all learn and grow as people.

So many cats, so few good recipes.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: