A Nation Of Immigrants
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Trey replied on Fri Dec 21, 2007 @ 6:17pm |
 Coolness: 102810 | It is hard to accommodate Absolutists. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Screwhead replied on Fri Dec 21, 2007 @ 11:29pm |
 Coolness: 685635 | Absolutely.
 |
| I'm feeling internet withdrawl right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» nothingnopenope replied on Sat Dec 22, 2007 @ 2:45pm |
 Coolness: 201270 | Yeah, absolutists, like people who think their religious law is the absolute true authority and that it should be a part of every society.
I couldn't agree more. |
| I'm feeling gangsta right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» basdini replied on Sun Dec 23, 2007 @ 12:10am |
 Coolness: 145245 | likewise people who believe in absolute atheism not just for themselves but for everyone... |
| I'm feeling surly right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» nothingnopenope replied on Sun Dec 23, 2007 @ 12:28am |
| Coolness: 201270 | I'm glad I'm not one of those people |
| I'm feeling gangsta right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» basdini replied on Sun Dec 23, 2007 @ 5:24am |
| Coolness: 145245 | no, your not brave enough to be one of those people, you just cheer them from the sidelines, |
| I'm feeling surly right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Trey replied on Sun Dec 23, 2007 @ 8:57am |
| Coolness: 102810 | ....except that an Atheism paradigm world view changes along with knowledge and awareness of our environment, societies, cultures, and every new scientific discovery.
We rely on our cognition, we don't stick to archaic fallacies and faith. Everything is a theory, and the evidence for the theory of a God, or Supernatural, including souls and spirits, is pretty much nil, as in having no existence. Usually when someone can't counterpoints the reasoning of a side, they attack the person itself. Thus saying an Atheism is a zealot, cut from the same cloth of a religious person is a lackadaisical argumentation. if we find out with empirical evidence that we human beings are actually engineered war machines to take over the Orion arm of the Milky Way, and our designers are a super galactic civilization from Andromeda, then so be it. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Screwhead replied on Sun Dec 23, 2007 @ 11:52am |
| Coolness: 685635 | I like that one best. |
| I'm feeling like motorhead right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» cvxn replied on Sun Dec 23, 2007 @ 3:09pm |
 Coolness: 178690 | ***we human beings are actually engineered war machines***
LOL doubt it. humans not powerful enough ;) We're probably just dispensable tiny soldiers. |
| I'm feeling wheeeeeeeeeeee right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» nothingnopenope replied on Sun Dec 23, 2007 @ 5:13pm |
| Coolness: 201270 | no, your not brave enough to be one of those people, you just cheer them from the sidelines,
No I'm not a big fan of abolishing all religion because most people do not have the mental grounding to handle the planet without thoughts of an imaginary thing in the sky watching over them. It's a mental thing. |
| I'm feeling gangsta right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» basdini replied on Mon Dec 24, 2007 @ 12:14am |
| Coolness: 145245 | Originally Posted By SCOTTYP
NO, YOUR NOT BRAVE ENOUGH TO BE ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE, YOU JUST CHEER THEM FROM THE SIDELINES, MOST PEOPLE DO NOT HAVE THE MENTAL GROUNDING TO HANDLE THE PLANET WITHOUT THOUGHTS OF AN IMAGINARY THING IN THE SKY WATCHING OVER THEM. IT'S A MENTAL THING. yes, you re more intelligent than most people, how silly of me to doubt that. you need to protect these people from themselves. trey "We rely on our cognition, we don't stick to archaic fallacies and faith. Everything is a theory, and the evidence for the theory of a God, or Supernatural, including souls and spirits, is pretty much nil, as in having no existence." so where is your proof that god doesn't exist, oh right like all non-believers you don't have one... you say that because there is no evidence that god exists we can conclude that he does not exist, as i have stated on many occasions not having evidence for a statement like 'god exists' is not a proof, it's no where near a proof, so, who's the one commiting a falacie now. If you have a proof for the non existence of god we are all ears. If not, it would seem that all you've got is rhetoric and sophistry. Atheists as hard as they try can't get around this and would just like everyone to forget that they can't prove what they hold so dear, that is that god does not exist. People who believe in god do not need to prove his existence, because they have faith, so they are not even trying to do so (they know better than to attempt the impossible) atheist on the other need to prove that god does not exist or else they will have to admit that they hold a belief which is not founded on evidence,that is, that god does not exist. so, shall we go around in circles again? |
| I'm feeling surly right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» nothingnopenope replied on Mon Dec 24, 2007 @ 1:15am |
| Coolness: 201270 | well theists can't scientifically prove that god exists, so the basis of their faith is basically hearsay.
Most atheists aren't born atheists, it's a personal choice and is more of an evolution of human awareness than a step back. It is basically admitting that you are the one in control of your life and not a collection of rules based on a (possibly ancient) written or oral history. Not everyone is ready to take such a big step. "Faith" is a cop out. I could say that I have faith that the moon is made of out cheese, and discount any scientific evidence to the contrary, because I have "faith" in my belief. Faith is another way to describe 'absolute stubbornness'. yes, you re more intelligent than most people
Nope, I would never make such a grandiose statement. |
| I'm feeling gangsta right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» moondancer replied on Mon Dec 24, 2007 @ 8:45am |
 Coolness: 92310 | Originally Posted By SCOTTYP MOST ATHEISTS AREN'T BORN ATHEISTS, IT'S A PERSONAL CHOICE AND IS MORE OF AN EVOLUTION OF HUMAN AWARENESS THAN A STEP BACK.
That's a hella bold statement. You should never claim yourself to be more evolved. The only way to know what evolved is is to become it and so you can never ever know. There are tons of people who turned relgious that weren't, even atheists and vice versa, there are many religious people turned atheist. Assuming you understand everyone else and that you are indeed more evolved is a step back from evolution. [ www.beliefnet.com ] [ www.youtube.com ] It's funny that people would have to make any personal choices regarding what they don't believe. Evolution is not useless opposition. Nobody is shocked or awed by your disbelief, it's completely ordinary. I don't understand what you people keep defending if you aren't trying to convert people to atheism. It's like you're arguing with no one about nothingness. We already know what atheism is it doesn't need anymore explaining. It's ridiculous that this discussion is still going. You people really think that what you're saying is something new. I'd be more entertained in kindergarden. As someone who is neither religious nor athiest I can say that my polarity has not changed whatsoever after reading this thread. I can state very firmly that I have learned LITERALLY NOTHING. |
| I'm feeling bored right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» basdini replied on Mon Dec 24, 2007 @ 12:54pm |
| Coolness: 145245 | first of all i just want to say that sophia's post was hillarious (i'm not just big upping my intellectual ally, i really thought it was funny)
Scott "Faith" is a cop out. I could say that I have faith that the moon is made of out cheese, and discount any scientific evidence to the contrary, because I have "faith" in my belief. Faith is another way to describe 'absolute stubbornness' saying "the moon is made of cheese" is not the same type of statement as "god exists", because we can send something to the moon to find out, it's an empirical matter, the same clearly does not apply to the statement "god exists". I feel like sometimes we go around in circles on this because you misunderstand the nature of the term faith...You seem to think that you can apply it to any statement, i get the the impression that you think that when someone says that they "have faith that such and such is true", you believe that all they are really saying is "no evidence can be presented to me to stop me from believing such and such", this just isn't the case...If you believe that then i think you are just missusing language, (more to the point, it's not like you have proven that god does not exist, and people who believe in god are just being stubborn, you haven't proven anything, so how are they being stubborn?) The point of faith is that in the absence of any real proof to substaniate a statement like "god exists" we must rely on faith, in other words, it's nothing outside in the world which gives me faith, but rather something within in me that reasures, in the same way that i don't need my girlfriend to prove that she loves me, i know she does, i can feel it inside of me. I want to touch on one last thing in this post, other statements which quite obviously can't be proven in any meaningful way either empiricaly or deductively. These include (but are not limited to) all moral statements (such and such is right, such and such is wrong). These statements in my mind are equally based on faith, because they are unprovable, "abortion is wrong" or "euthinasia is right" are both articles of faith. Some of you may want to object by saying some thing along the lines "well if we allow for "X" (or do not allow for "X"), then this will happen", this isn't a proof in any way, further more, this is a consequentialist line of reasoning, all you end up saying by going this route is "i perfer the world this way", which is a value judgement, and also, quite arbitrary. At the end of the day we may be forced to admit that are most deeply cherished beliefs regarding what is right and wrong, just and unjust, and decent or wicked are just as groudless and based upon "faith" as religious beliefs... lastly to be clear i never ever, EVER...want to be seen as anything close to this dude [ www.realtruth.org ] no matter how much i argue about this type of thing... |
| I'm feeling surly right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» nothingnopenope replied on Mon Dec 24, 2007 @ 1:24pm |
| Coolness: 201270 | I'm not trying to convert people to atheism, because you can't convert someone to atheism. It's not a religion. There is no ritual you go through to become "atheist". There is no manual or book, you have to rely on yourself and your own beliefs. You can still be spiritual and be atheist, it's simply a rejection of outdated religions and concepts that set a moral standard based on ancient stories.
Believing in something that cannot be logically proven is believing in fantasy, as far as I am concerned. And the religious will constantly come up with excuses every time science proves them wrong. There are plenty of people who think the world is about 5000 years old, despite mountains of evidence that disproves this. They substantiate their claims with their holy texts, and faith. They have faith that science is wrong. Anyway I'm not saying that I am correct, just stating my opinion, and defending my right to do that (which is getting harder and harder, atheists on sites such as youtube are constantly censored and under attack by every fundamentalist religious group out there). You can rest assured that if the 'rapture' comes, I will surely be one of the first to die, so you can at least take solace in that. |
| I'm feeling gangsta right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» moondancer replied on Mon Dec 24, 2007 @ 2:25pm |
| Coolness: 92310 | Defending your non-religion doesn't bother me. I just don't see where the need to defend this came in here in the first place. Nobody cares. I just don't see the majority of replies here as defense but offense. Nobody said anythign was wrong wtih atheism did they? Be atheist, be happy. What does it matter what anyone else thinks? Whether or not you call it a relgion if you consider yourself more evolved in your opinions than others than you also believe that other people agreeing with you is what's best for them or correct. That's the problem with a lot of relgious people and that's the problem with a lot of atheists. You share all the same problems to a T. You don't consider it preaching just because you think you're right. It doesn't matter if you're right or wrong it's still preaching. I don't care what it is or isn't. It's a very easy concept to understand, don't worry about that. Continuously stateing what it is and isn't as if you're trying to make us understand. We get it.
I don't understand why people keep makign arguments about who's better than who. When did that become a concern? No one cares. This doesn't solidify either side of the story, it only outlines your mutual human weaknesses. Why should I feel sorry for a group of people who claim they don't even exist? I also disagree that you can be spiritual and atheist. That would go against the entire theory of atheism and not believing what can't logically be proven. Once again atheism and agnosticism are not the same thing. If you want to become an agnostic just do so. Why does anyone bother to call themselves anything? Why must our opinions be binded and grouped to that of an outside authority? If atheism is not a relgion than why on earth does it matter so much to you? Why must you call yourself by that name? Why can't you simple just nto beleive in god and be happy? Atheim is at the very least a stance and once you start believing that it is an evolved view from which all of human kind can benefit you are following exactly the same logic as a fundamentalist christian. Same output with a few different words. |
| I'm feeling bored right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» basdini replied on Mon Dec 24, 2007 @ 3:07pm |
| Coolness: 145245 | Scott
'Believing in something that cannot be logically proven is believing in fantasy, as far as I am concerned.' as i have already shown you believe in lots of things that are not logically provable, you believe that the death penalty is wrong, you can't prove that to me... as someone who has spent a good part of their life studying logic i can say honestly most people don't understand what it is very well (i'm not saying you don't), most people think that common sense and logic are the same, they're not. I can tell you that there is two types of logic, little 'l' logic (for everyday use)and big 'L' logic (truth functional calculus), although they are related they are differentiated by the latter much more technical and much more rigorous. In the study of formal logic there exists a paradox called the "paradox of validity" which basically states that you can't prove anything without assuming something, if you're not willing to assume something (even just one thing, one statement) without it being substantiated, then you can't prove anything, the system will collapse in on itself without this first step...in other words... a leap of faith... Your assertion that 'god does not exist' is no more reasonable than the statement "god exists"...even if it appears so to you...it rests on faith, because you can't prove, it doesn't bother me that my position is founded on the seed of faith, however your position cannot survive it, at least not without accepting a manifest incoherance... from more info on the paradox of validity please see 'Paradoxes A-Z' by Michael Clark [ bookshop.blackwell.co.uk ] |
| I'm feeling surly right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» moondancer replied on Mon Dec 24, 2007 @ 3:20pm |
| Coolness: 92310 | Exactly, liklihood and logic are not the same at all. It is more likely that there is no god or that based on how many different gods there are - that any one of them would be the right one. However it can't be logically disproved. Assumption based on likelihood or lack of evidence against is illogical because logic is unbendable and absolute. If logic can't determine something absolute it isn't logic. Logic can't be a theory or an opinion or an assumption based on likelihood. |
| I'm feeling bored right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» nothingnopenope replied on Mon Dec 24, 2007 @ 3:49pm |
| Coolness: 201270 | I can tell this discussion died when word semantics became a part of it, forget it, I'm going to get bored to death. My opinions are my opinions, you can agree or disagree with them.
You can talk about faith, logic, and paradoxes all you want; the reality is that people are tuning their moral compasses to ancient stories, and I don't believe that is a good thing for humanity. I'm not as interested in proving whether god exists or not, my stance is a rejection of religion as a way to control people, especially the three major Abrahamic religions. If there were a god, I doubt he would be stupid enough to write such horrible, conflicting, and morally questionably guidebooks such as the bible or koran. If the only evidence of god's existance is these texts, then he (or she, or it) must be a real psychopath. |
| I'm feeling gangsta right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Screwhead replied on Mon Dec 24, 2007 @ 4:53pm |
| Coolness: 685635 |  |
| I'm feeling like motorhead right now.. | |
A Nation Of Immigrants
[ Top Of Page ] |
Post A Reply |
You must be logged in to post a reply.
[ Top Of Page ] |
