Words that need to be redefined
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
22-02-2013, 06:26 AM (This post was last modified: 22-02-2013 06:42 AM by Vosur.)
RE: Words that need to be redefined
(21-02-2013 11:21 PM)Lion IRC Wrote:  You are not qualified to instruct every single living human on the planet that the evidence they find persuasive and suggestive of theism/afterlife/souls isnt evidence.
Evidence that you dont happen to find persuasive is and can be persuasive evidence to others.
Whether or not the 'evidence' you are talking about is persuasive is completely irrelevant since it has no bearing on the validity of said 'evidence'.

(21-02-2013 11:21 PM)Lion IRC Wrote:  You are either;

a) 100% certain that God does not exist anywhere in this or any other space/time dimension.
or
b) you hold a BELIEF that God does not exist. In which case, you are no different to those you mock for the belief they hold.

And I find your belief that God doesnt exist requires much more faith than any exercised by the average garden variety monotheist.
What you are proposing is a false dichotomy because there are actually more than two choices. Your dichotomy neither accounts for agnostics, nor does it account for agnostic atheists and apatheists.

c.) You lack a belief in the existence of god(s).

d.) You are indifferent to the existence of god(s).

e.) You are unsure about the question of whether or not god(s) exist(s).

There are more examples, but these should suffice for now.

Also, your assertion that Chas or anyone else here believes that god doesn't exist is merely your unfounded and uneducated opinion. You firstly have no way of knowing what anyone here does or doesn't believe and you secondly seem to have forgotten that we have repeatedly said which definition of "atheist" (someone who lacks a belief in god(s)) and "atheism" (the absence of a belief in god(s)) we are using.

I am thus left with no choice but to assume that you are being intentionally dishonest.

[Image: IcJnQOT.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-02-2013, 06:48 AM
RE: Words that need to be redefined
(21-02-2013 11:21 PM)Lion IRC Wrote:  
(21-02-2013 08:47 PM)Chas Wrote:  No.
There is no evidence for the existence of any gods, therefore I am not religious.


You are not qualified to instruct every single living human on the planet that the evidence they find persuasive and suggestive of theism/afterlife/souls isnt evidence.
Evidence that you dont happen to find persuasive is and can be persuasive evidence to others.

(21-02-2013 08:47 PM)Chas Wrote:  I don't define my feelings by my non-beliefs.

You are either;

a) 100% certain that God does not exist anywhere in this or any other space/time dimension.
or
b) you hold a BELIEF that God does not exist. In which case, you are no different to those you mock for the belief they hold.

And I find your belief that God doesnt exist requires much more faith than any exercised by the average garden variety monotheist.


You do not understand what constitutes evidence. There is no evidence for gods.

And, yes, I am qualified to state what constitutes evidence.

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
24-02-2013, 03:51 AM
RE: Words that need to be redefined
I've always been annoyed by the word "Heart". At least the way most theists gleefully refer to it. When I hear people like WLC talk up their "witness of the holy spirit" in their "heart" I get rather miffed. Sure, a thinking person would just say it probably refers to our emotional center, or something like that, but It's always struck me as a rather vague and imprecise term that harkens back to when people thought the actual heart was the seat of consciousness and not the brain.

Check out my gaming/entertainment site @ trendkilleronline.com
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-02-2013, 07:20 PM (This post was last modified: 24-02-2013 07:34 PM by Lion IRC.)
RE: Words that need to be redefined
(22-02-2013 06:26 AM)Vosur Wrote:  Also, your assertion that Chas or anyone else here believes that god doesn't exist is merely your unfounded and uneducated opinion. You firstly have no way of knowing what anyone here does or doesn't believe and you secondly seem to have forgotten that we have repeatedly said which definition of "atheist" (someone who lacks a belief in god(s)) and "atheism" (the absence of a belief in god(s)) we are using.

I love it when atheists try to retreat to the neutral corner, throw up a white flag and plead, as a defense, that they are really just agnostics who ''lack a belief''.

Well, in that case, I lack a belief in the no-God hypothesis and my lack of belief in atheism should be the default position for everyone.

As I said, the ''no-religion'' option is only applicable to the undecided/uncommitted agnostic looking at a spinning coin up in the air.

God? - yes.
God? - no.

[Image: coin_spins.gif]

Which side will the coin land on? Head or tails?

''...oh I lack a belief that it will land on either side.''


BTW - Funny you seem pretty certain about what Chas believes. Are you his official spokesperson?
How did you come to know what he believes if there's ''no way of knowing what anyone here does or doesn't believe.''
Nice job refuting yourself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-02-2013, 07:32 PM
RE: Words that need to be redefined
(24-02-2013 07:20 PM)Lion IRC Wrote:  I love it when atheist try to retreat to the neutral corner, throw up a white flag and plead, as a defense, that they are really just agnostics who ''lack a belief''.
You could avoid making yourself look like an uneducated fool if you were to take a look into a dictionary once in a while.

atheist
Syllabification: (a·the·ist)
Pronunciation: /ˈāTHēˌist/
noun
a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods

It is also widely known that atheism and agnosticism are not mutually exclusive. In fact, many of us are agnostic atheists.

(24-02-2013 07:20 PM)Lion IRC Wrote:  Well, in that case, I lack a belief in the no-God hypothesis and my lack of belief in atheism should be the default position for everyone.
Please stop wasting my time by repeating the same inane drivel that has been refuted time and time again. Firstly, you cannot belief or disbelief in atheism because it is defined as the lack of a belief in supernatural deities. Secondly, atheism has absolutely nothing to do with any kind of "no-God hypothesis". And last but not least, atheism is the default position because we are born lacking a belief in gods.

[Image: IcJnQOT.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-02-2013, 07:37 PM
RE: Words that need to be redefined
(24-02-2013 07:20 PM)Lion IRC Wrote:  BTW - Funny you seem pretty certain about what Chas believes. Are you his official spokesperson?
How did you come to know what he believes if there's ''no way of knowing what anyone here does or doesn't believe.''
Nice job refuting yourself.
Please learn how to read properly, Lion_IRC. You could save both of us a lot of time.

What I actually said is that you have no way of knowing what anyone here believes or doesn't believe:

(22-02-2013 06:26 AM)Vosur Wrote:  You firstly have no way of knowing what anyone here does or doesn't believe [...]

There is no refutation, only your lack of reading comprehension. Or is perhaps your intellectual dishonesty the cause of your quote mining?

[Image: IcJnQOT.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-02-2013, 07:37 PM
RE: Words that need to be redefined
"I love it when atheists try to retreat to the neutral corner, throw up a white flag and plead, as a defense, that they are really just agnostics who ''lack a belief''."

I bet so. Maybe you'll find one here some day.

The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right names. - Chinese Proverb
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-02-2013, 08:08 PM
RE: Words that need to be redefined
(24-02-2013 07:20 PM)Lion IRC Wrote:  
(22-02-2013 06:26 AM)Vosur Wrote:  Also, your assertion that Chas or anyone else here believes that god doesn't exist is merely your unfounded and uneducated opinion. You firstly have no way of knowing what anyone here does or doesn't believe and you secondly seem to have forgotten that we have repeatedly said which definition of "atheist" (someone who lacks a belief in god(s)) and "atheism" (the absence of a belief in god(s)) we are using.

I love it when atheists try to retreat to the neutral corner, throw up a white flag and plead, as a defense, that they are really just agnostics who ''lack a belief''.

Well, in that case, I lack a belief in the no-God hypothesis and my lack of belief in atheism should be the default position for everyone.

As I said, the ''no-religion'' option is only applicable to the undecided/uncommitted agnostic looking at a spinning coin up in the air.

God? - yes.
God? - no.

[Image: coin_spins.gif]

Which side will the coin land on? Head or tails?

''...oh I lack a belief that it will land on either side.''


BTW - Funny you seem pretty certain about what Chas believes. Are you his official spokesperson?
How did you come to know what he believes if there's ''no way of knowing what anyone here does or doesn't believe.''
Nice job refuting yourself.


He has a very clear idea of what I believe because I have clearly stated it on more than one occasion.

I lack a belief in any gods because there is no evidence that any gods exist.

How is that not clear? How is that a retreat from anything? Just because you see and think in absolutes doesn't mean everyone does.

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
Post Reply
Forum Jump: