Psychology looks at atheism and theism. Also, atheism is tenuous/non-existent/rare ..

I am quite literally stunned. I have read the content of this forum for some time and felt no need to comment (Well, once, but a computer problem resulted in such a lengthy absence I abandoned the account). The unreasoning stances of creationism are quite effectively pointed out by many others but on this, I must speak up.The idea that there are no such thing as Atheists for the reason Kendemeyer (sp?) gives is rank arrogance of the worst kind. Listen closely, K., and I will try to make it clear. I don't care what you believe. You can wail out your childish entreaties to your mythical god all you want. You are hurting only yourself, so go ahead.What I will not tolerate without challenge, you self important ass, is the claim that you know my mind. You do not know my mind and never can. The very idea that all people must think as you do, K., is astounding in its sheer bravado. I simply have to agree with you deep down because you are so manifestly right? No. I do not and you are not.The fact is this: I am an atheist. I exist. That's all it takes, as others have pointed out. Your argument from disbelief that we must be wrong because you simply don't believe our assertion is a load of bull. You don't know what I or any of the other Atheists on this board think or believe. Claiming that you do only makes you out to be a fool.I am an Atheist. I exist. Screw you.

Dealing with you, I can see why they would be coarse.Your attempts at social science do not interest me and I am not responding to them.I am addressing your later point. You flatly told several Atheists that their word was insufficient as to their state of mind because you simply don't believe them. You even had the high handed arrogance to insist that these individuals provide you with evidence as to their state of mind, since you knew better. That is what I am taking issue with.You do not know what is in my mind. So, when I claim to be an Atheist, you have no grounds to claim otherwise, except for the tired idiocy of jumping up and down and saying that I must believe in your god because you do, or because anyone else does, or even because everyone else does.Damn right I will be coarse with anyone who is big enough a fool to tell me they know what I am thinking better then I do. I will be coarse with anyone who is so conceited that they believe everyone must, deep down, agree with them.I think you need to not concern yourself with my mood. I think you need to stop trying to advise me of anything I need to do. In fact, I think you need to go off somewhere quiet and seriously rethink your entire worldview.Note that by the above I am not refferring to Christians or adherents of any particular religion. I am also not refferring to kendemeyer's particular views on religion. I am refferring to the arrant nonsense he is spouting about knowing what others are REALLY thinking.

A special pleading? Not at all. I do not question that you firmly believe in your particular brand of mythology. I certainly question the validity of that belief but not it's existence. To do so would put me in the foolish and unsupportable position of claiming to know another's mind.I don't care if you or anyone questions what I think, but I will not tolerate for a moment you or any other insufferable egotist telling me what I think.I am an Atheist. There is no argument you can make against that assertion. It is a declaration of my own state of mind. Skepticism can address if Atheism is a valid position, but the fact that I hold that position is beyond your or anyone else's refutation.

Ken said: "In my initial post I descibed why professed atheist would be selective regarding the information they are willing to grapple with...Once again, you give further validity to my initial post."And once again, you blustering buffoon, you are trying to tell me my mind. I am not interested in your initial post because there are truths there I don't want to face? Horse hockey. (I'm feeling alliterative.) I was at no point interested in your initial post and I never read it. Not one word. So, how could I be avoiding uncomfortable "truths" I didn't read? I didn't get interested until I came across the superlative stupidity of your claim that Atheists don't exist because you don't believe in them.Let's try an example if you can get your faulty faculties to accept it. I say you are only a christian because you are afraid to face the world without the help of the old man in the sky and for no other reason. If you claim otherwise, I can say, "I do so know what you're thinking!"But I can't do that, and you can't maintain your claim.As to your claim that I am helping your argument, in a way I hope I am. The poor, weak little thing needs help from somewhere. You sure as hell aren't giving it any.

I will try again, from the beggining. The argument for the existence of Atheists was made as follows:I am an Atheist.
I exist.
Therefore Atheists exist.Your refutation was, "You never proved your first premise. You have to show your testimony is unimpeachable. I see no reason why your testimony should be given carte blanche acceptance. I do not consider your testimony to be the gospel truth. Nothing personal. I just do not."This is what I am taking issue with. I am the one and only authority on what I think. When I speak to the contents of my mind, my testimony is absolutely unimpeachable, unless you mean to call me a liar to my face. Is that what you mean to do? I doesn't matter if you don't accept it. The fact remains despite your doubt. How do I know? It's my mind.I am aware that you didn't direct this silly tirade at me personally,, but when you paint with that broad a brush, you color a lot of people. In this case I am one of them.But, personal matters aside, I am stating that your refutation of the original argument is invalid factually because the claim that an individual cannot speak authoritativly in regard to their own thoughts is simply incorrect. How do you respond?

Deleted due to double post.This message has been edited by mikehager, 09-02-2004 10:24 PM

You think headed baboon! I am addressing a simple syllogism. Stop avoiding the question.Do you or do you not agree that an individual is the only reliable source regarding their own state of mind?Yes or no.

You are going to ignore a simple question and hiding? Fine. Coward. You cannot answer my question without either seeming to be the arrogant sod you are (i.e. No, people are not the best authority as to their own mind and by extension, you are) or invalidate your entire position by admitting that Atheists are quite capable of knowing their own mind.The bottom line is that your argument is incorrect and you don't want to discuss it for fear of admitting that you are wrong.

Still you avoid the question. How surprising.You're absolutely correct. The Monty Python knight is reminiscent of you and I commend you on your perception in realizing it. Your crippled argument hops around on one leg, gamely ignoring the fact that it is soundly defeated. Now that you have achieved this self knowledge, lets see what you can do with it.I repeat, your response to the simple syllogism is invalid on it's face. It is factually incorrect and in making it, you demonstrate an incredible arrogance and short sightedness.Are you congenitally incapable of addressing a criticism, or just congenitally stupid?