Why do atheists become atheists?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
16-01-2015, 05:30 PM
RE: Why do atheists become atheists?
Countless things in history deemed "supernatural" have been studied and examined through greater tool usages has become understood as natural.

So to hamper on that point isn't making any relevant case. If you want to do that, I will too and ask you another time if you would want to actually explain, how does a person determine if they are qualified enough to know something definitively??

Because I'll take what you've been saying. That the idea like Germs/particles being understood 500 years ago was apples and oranges to this. Despite at times it was thought that those were supernatural entities. If we realize they we wrong because they weren't qualified to make the judgement... why should we be certain WE are qualified to make absolute judgements?

My whole case isn't that we should judge God as possible.. it's that we really need to examine how confident we can be in knowing things for sure. We should always be skeptical.. and be skeptical about what we can even be skeptical about in my view.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes ClydeLee's post
16-01-2015, 05:35 PM
RE: Why do atheists become atheists?
(16-01-2015 02:14 PM)Free Wrote:  
(16-01-2015 02:07 PM)Chas Wrote:  You are arguing against a straw man of your own devising.

Neither you nor I can prove there are no gods. We can conclude beyond a reasonable doubt due to lack of evidence that there are no gods, but not prove it.

Claiming 7.0 (or 1.0) is a faith claim.

7.0 is a claim based upon all known facts, whereas a 1.0 position is a claim based upon religious tenants.

Apples and Oranges, Chas. Apples and Oranges.

Yes, you can prove the claim of "God does not exist" by demonstrating conclusive negative evidence ie; a total and complete lack of positive evidence.

And I have done that.

None of us would have any problem accepting the existence of God if credible and conclusive positive evidence were to be supplied.

Therefore, by the very same standard, none of us should have any problem accepting the non existence of God if credible and conclusive negative evidence were to be supplied.


Drinking Beverage

*tenets

No, 1.0 and 7.0 are both claims of knowledge, both are mistaken.

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
16-01-2015, 05:50 PM
RE: Why do atheists become atheists?
(16-01-2015 05:35 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(16-01-2015 02:14 PM)Free Wrote:  7.0 is a claim based upon all known facts, whereas a 1.0 position is a claim based upon religious tenants.

Apples and Oranges, Chas. Apples and Oranges.

Yes, you can prove the claim of "God does not exist" by demonstrating conclusive negative evidence ie; a total and complete lack of positive evidence.

And I have done that.

None of us would have any problem accepting the existence of God if credible and conclusive positive evidence were to be supplied.

Therefore, by the very same standard, none of us should have any problem accepting the non existence of God if credible and conclusive negative evidence were to be supplied.


Drinking Beverage

*tenets

No, 1.0 and 7.0 are both claims of knowledge, both are mistaken.

Theism 1.0, which says makes the positive claim that says "God exists" can be refuted as being knowledge, since the burden of proof has not been met to provide positive evidence of the existence of any supernatural entity known as "God.

Atheism 7.0, which makes the positive claim that says "God does not exist" cannot be refuted as being knowledge since the burden of proof has been met to provide negative evidence of the existence of any supernatural entity known as "God."

Since Atheism 7.0 has proven its knowledge, and Theism 1.0 has not proven its knowledge, then Atheism 7.0 has proven its position on having knowledge, while Theism 1.0 has failed.

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-01-2015, 05:53 PM
RE: Why do atheists become atheists?
(16-01-2015 05:50 PM)Free Wrote:  
(16-01-2015 05:35 PM)Chas Wrote:  *tenets

No, 1.0 and 7.0 are both claims of knowledge, both are mistaken.

Theism 1.0, which says makes the positive claim that says "God exists" can be refuted as being knowledge, since the burden of proof has not been met to provide positive evidence of the existence of any supernatural entity known as "God.

Atheism 7.0, which makes the positive claim that says "God does not exist" cannot be refuted as being knowledge since the burden of proof has been met to provide negative evidence of the existence of any supernatural entity known as "God."

This is where your argument is wrong. There is no proof of the non-existence of any god. We can logically disprove most gods ever described, but not the existence of any possible god.

Quote:Since Atheism 7.0 has proven its knowledge, and Theism 1.0 has not proven its knowledge, then Atheism 7.0 has proven its position on having knowledge, while Theism 1.0 has failed.

No, not proven.

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
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
16-01-2015, 06:00 PM
RE: Why do atheists become atheists?
(16-01-2015 05:53 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(16-01-2015 05:50 PM)Free Wrote:  Theism 1.0, which says makes the positive claim that says "God exists" can be refuted as being knowledge, since the burden of proof has not been met to provide positive evidence of the existence of any supernatural entity known as "God.

Atheism 7.0, which makes the positive claim that says "God does not exist" cannot be refuted as being knowledge since the burden of proof has been met to provide negative evidence of the existence of any supernatural entity known as "God."

This is where your argument is wrong. There is no proof of the non-existence of any god.

Let me just demonstrate why YOU are wrong with one simple question:

What proof would be required to prove non existence?

Big Grin

I think we both know you cannot answer that ...

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Free's post
16-01-2015, 06:07 PM
RE: Why do atheists become atheists?
(16-01-2015 06:00 PM)Free Wrote:  
(16-01-2015 05:53 PM)Chas Wrote:  This is where your argument is wrong. There is no proof of the non-existence of any god.

Let me just demonstrate why YOU are wrong with one simple question:

What proof would be required to prove non existence?

Big Grin

I think we both know you cannot answer that ...

I don't know.. and I don't know how I would claim to know so I don't claim to know.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like ClydeLee's post
16-01-2015, 07:39 PM (This post was last modified: 16-01-2015 08:53 PM by Free.)
RE: Why do atheists become atheists?
(16-01-2015 06:07 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  
(16-01-2015 06:00 PM)Free Wrote:  Let me just demonstrate why YOU are wrong with one simple question:

What proof would be required to prove non existence?

Big Grin

I think we both know you cannot answer that ...

I don't know.. and I don't know how I would claim to know so I don't claim to know.

The criteria to prove existence requires that the object in question must have some degree of evidence to support its existence. This type of evidence can be direct or indirect.

Now to prove non existence, this is where "counter intuitiveness" needs to be employed.

Instead of finding positive observable evidence, we must attempt to prove a negative.

Many have heard, "You cannot prove a negative." But that is not true. You can prove a negative by using evidence of absence to demonstrate that something is missing or that it does not exist.

The evidence of absence is positive evidence that demonstrates negative evidence. When there is nothing to support existence, that is regarded as negative evidence. Since negative evidence has been demonstrated, it becomes positive evidence to support the positive claim that "God does not exist."

Basically, all that is required to prove the non existence of God is to demonstrate the existence of negative evidence, which we all can do.

Many people tend to fall into the frame of mind that "anything is possible." This is simply not true, and can be easily demonstrated by asking anybody to create a square circle. Saying that something is possible does not make it truly possible.

The criteria required to qualify something as being possible is identical to the criteria required to support any other positive claim, because saying that something is possible is indeed a positive claim.

The evidence of absence positively demonstrates that the negative evidence available to the question of the existence of God provides positive evidence to refute any claims of the existence, or possible existence, of this supernatural entity.

The 6.9 position basically says that we cannot say "God does not exist" because we supposedly cannot prove the non existence of God. But, the 6.9 position also says that since we supposedly cannot prove the non existence of God, then that leaves a possibility- however infinitesimal- that God can exist.

But once the possibility of the existence of God has been eliminated by the evidence of absence, then there is no possibility of God existing, and this is positive proof of non existence.

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-01-2015, 07:52 PM
RE: Why do atheists become atheists?
For the pussy. Duh.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like GirlyMan's post
16-01-2015, 10:12 PM
RE: Why do atheists become atheists?
(16-01-2015 07:39 PM)Free Wrote:  But once the possibility of the existence of God has been eliminated by the evidence of absence, then there is no possibility of God existing, and this is positive proof of non existence.

The absence of evidence is not proof, it is only indicative.

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
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
16-01-2015, 10:13 PM
RE: Why do atheists become atheists?
(16-01-2015 06:00 PM)Free Wrote:  
(16-01-2015 05:53 PM)Chas Wrote:  This is where your argument is wrong. There is no proof of the non-existence of any god.

Let me just demonstrate why YOU are wrong with one simple question:

What proof would be required to prove non existence?

Big Grin

I think we both know you cannot answer that ...

Oh, I could answer that, but you just did.

Since one cannot prove non-existence, one cannot honestly be a 7.0 on the Dawkins scale.

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
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: