Why I'm a Theist
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 2 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-08-2015, 07:07 AM
Why I'm a Theist
(06-08-2015 06:59 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(06-08-2015 06:42 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Highly improbable individual events happen all the time. Once the first event has occurred, each succeeding event in a chain is far more probable. "Accident" and "random" are intentional, biased, ignorant theist propagandistic buzz words, used by people who either are just ignorant of probability theory, or perversely intentionally pushing their agenda.

lol, it's funny watching how you folks take issue with the term "accident", but not when you hear of accidental pregnancies or car crashes, etc., where it implies that an event that transpired was without apparent or deliberate cause, was unintentional, etc... The argument here reeks of very bad apologetics, your contradictions and incoherency arise to the surface rather quick. It puts you in a poor light.

It's revealing to me, how it's not just a hard pill to swallow for theists, but also for many atheists, who don't recognize that by refusing to swallow it, they make their case even less convincing.

It isn't the word we object to, it's your ignorance and bias in the way you attempt to apply it. Drinking Beverage

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
06-08-2015, 07:11 AM
RE: Why I'm a Theist
(06-08-2015 06:59 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(06-08-2015 06:42 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Highly improbable individual events happen all the time. Once the first event has occurred, each succeeding event in a chain is far more probable. "Accident" and "random" are intentional, biased, ignorant theist propagandistic buzz words, used by people who either are just ignorant of probability theory, or perversely intentionally pushing their agenda.

lol, it's funny watching how you folks take issue with the term "accident", but not when you hear of accidental pregnancies or car crashes, etc., where it implies that an event that transpired was without apparent or deliberate cause, was unintentional, etc... The argument here reeks of very bad apologetics, your contradictions and incoherency arise to the surface rather quick. It puts you in a poor light.

It's revealing to me, how it's not just a hard pill to swallow for theists, but also for many atheists, who don't recognize that by refusing to swallow it, they make their case even less convincing.

Where intentionality exists, the word "accident" merits use for unintentional occurrences. It does not apply in the absence of intentionality.

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
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
06-08-2015, 07:16 AM
Why I'm a Theist
[Image: cd30b3bf61c9c192a08349c69f3e4f09.jpg]

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
06-08-2015, 07:16 AM
RE: Why I'm a Theist
(06-08-2015 07:07 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Your analogy is false. No one here said car crashes were an "accident".
Given certain circumstances they are highly probable.

Yea, so now you want to argue that car accidents, aren't accidents?

Quote:The colloquial use is far different than the scientific use. Nice try. Fail again. You forgot one teensy weensy thing, dear. You forgot to provide any support for your claim how exactly it "reeks". We get that you think it's "revealing". It's your bias showing it's ugly head, preacher man. Thumbsup


It's your bias that's showing.

Since you distinguish between the colloquial and scientific sense. Would you concede than in the colloquial sense car accidents, are accidents? And that I'm accurate in the colloquial sense as well? Or do you think I'm inaccurate in both the colloquial and scientific sense?

Can you also provide an example of something that would be an accident in a scientific sense, since even car crashes don't even qualify?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-08-2015, 07:18 AM
Why I'm a Theist
(06-08-2015 07:16 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(06-08-2015 07:07 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Your analogy is false. No one here said car crashes were an "accident".
Given certain circumstances they are highly probable.

Yea, so now you want to argue that car accidents, aren't accidents?




Quote:The colloquial use is far different than the scientific use. Nice try. Fail again. You forgot one teensy weensy thing, dear. You forgot to provide any support for your claim how exactly it "reeks". We get that you think it's "revealing". It's your bias showing it's ugly head, preacher man. Thumbsup


It's your bias that's showing.

Since you distinguish between the colloquial and scientific sense. Would you concede than in the colloquial sense car accidents, are accidents? And that I'm accurate in the colloquial sense as well?

Holy fuck you're dense.

Car "accidents" is a common usage of the term that is not the same as one would use in a scientific sense. Just like the word theory.

If you were actually here to think and not preach, you might get that you dishonest prick. Drinking Beverage

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
06-08-2015, 07:21 AM
RE: Why I'm a Theist
(06-08-2015 07:11 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(06-08-2015 06:59 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  lol, it's funny watching how you folks take issue with the term "accident", but not when you hear of accidental pregnancies or car crashes, etc., where it implies that an event that transpired was without apparent or deliberate cause, was unintentional, etc... The argument here reeks of very bad apologetics, your contradictions and incoherency arise to the surface rather quick. It puts you in a poor light.

It's revealing to me, how it's not just a hard pill to swallow for theists, but also for many atheists, who don't recognize that by refusing to swallow it, they make their case even less convincing.

Where intentionality exists, the word "accident" merits use for unintentional occurrences. It does not apply in the absence of intentionality.

Does the absence of intentionally merit use of words and terms like, "unintentional", "without apparent or deliberate cause"?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-08-2015, 07:24 AM
Why I'm a Theist
(06-08-2015 07:21 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(06-08-2015 07:11 AM)Chas Wrote:  Where intentionality exists, the word "accident" merits use for unintentional occurrences. It does not apply in the absence of intentionality.

Does the absence of intentionally merit use of words and terms like, "unintentional", "without apparent or deliberate cause"?

No, because the way you're using them still implies something that could have intentions or an apparent or deliberate cause.

Universe = non-deliberate consequence of events. Intentions or unintentional do not apply.

Is any of this leaking into your brain?

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
06-08-2015, 07:24 AM
RE: Why I'm a Theist
(06-08-2015 07:18 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Holy fuck you're dense.

Car "accidents" is a common usage of the term that is not the same as one would use in a scientific sense. Just like the word theory.

If you were actually here to think and not preach, you might get that you dishonest prick. Drinking Beverage

You didn't answer the question. In the colloquial sense my use of the word accident is accurate. You recognize that right? If I was using the word accident in the way that it's commonly used, than my usage is accurate.

Do you have the honesty to admit this ?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-08-2015, 07:26 AM
Why I'm a Theist
(06-08-2015 07:24 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(06-08-2015 07:18 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Holy fuck you're dense.

Car "accidents" is a common usage of the term that is not the same as one would use in a scientific sense. Just like the word theory.

If you were actually here to think and not preach, you might get that you dishonest prick. Drinking Beverage

You didn't answer the question. In the colloquial sense my use of the word accident is accurate. You recognize that right? If I was using the word accident in the way that it's commonly used, than my usage is accurate.

Do you have the honesty to admit this ?

I don't care how you think you're using it, because the way you've framed it around your bias means you've no interest in an honest discussion.

You want to preach and reject answers given to you, but you claim you're here to converse and debate. That is a lie. Period. Your actions/words demonstrate your dishonesty. Drinking Beverage

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
06-08-2015, 07:28 AM
RE: Why I'm a Theist
(06-08-2015 07:21 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(06-08-2015 07:11 AM)Chas Wrote:  Where intentionality exists, the word "accident" merits use for unintentional occurrences. It does not apply in the absence of intentionality.

Does the absence of intentionally merit use of words and terms like, "unintentional", "without apparent or deliberate cause"?

The use of the word "unintentional" where there is no intentionality possible would be redundant.

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
[+] 3 users Like Chas's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: