Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Atheism Examined
Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 91 of 300 (389264)
03-12-2007 3:25 AM
Reply to: Message 50 by Hyroglyphx
03-11-2007 12:30 AM


Re: Clarifying positions
A few general observations, I'll really need to reply to some of your other claims because your idea of atheism is frankly laughable.
I think an honest analysis of the common atheist would reveal that they view themselves as being among the upper crust of any given society.
I would say the opposite, Christians think they are the upper crust because they have been ”chosen’.
To be an atheist is to explicitly claim that there is no God(s).
Garbage.
Yet more ignorance from the expert in unsupported assertions.
Many atheists have no doubt realized the implications for making such a definitive claim. To claim that there is no God,
Atheists don’t claim this though. This only shows that, on yet another subject, you don’t have a clue what you are talking about.
without reservation, leaves the claimant with the burden of proof to shoulder, not the theist.
I take it that you are about 8 years old? This argument is on a par with the thinking of a child.
For the atheist to purport definitively that there is no God would mean that he has all-knowledge.
But, no atheist is even remotely similar to our definition of atheism!
If, however, he has all-knowledge, he himself would be God;
So, the only requirement to being God is to know everything?
Even Jesus didn’t know everything.
and so he would actually nullify his own argument.
Except that an atheist doesn’t fit the description that you have imagined.
Who wants to hang around elitist mentalities that do not believe in any real set of morals?
This is getting more embarrassing.
We are supposed to think that we are the elitist thinkers in society, yet we cannot work out that we are unable to make absolute statements such as ”there is no God’? Only a moron would make a statement that ”there is definitely no God’.
So let us follow your line of reasoning.
Atheists, according to you, believe that they are the intellectuals of society, and that theists are morons. Yet you think that an atheist is erring when they claim that there is definitely no God. You step in and correct them, thus you must thing you are a genius and the cream of societies intellectuals.
And talking of morals, atheists are far more moral than Christians will ever be. Apart from the fact that there are far more Xians in jail that there are atheists, Xians ONLY do ”good’ deeds because they want a reward at the end of their lives. We atheists only help others out of the kindness of our hearts.
Christians are extremely selfish.
A theist, but particularly Christians, feel that whatever knowledge they have about God was given to them.
Which is a self fulfilling prophecy.
But a theists position about God entails belief.
And an atheist’s position entails a belief that there is no god.
here are many logical inferences that could be made in defense of God,
Yet, if we skip to the era of writing ideas down, the arguments in favour of God are a joke. Thousands of years of extremely intelligent people pouring their thoughts into proving there is a God and their arguments are still ridiculous.
but there is nothing that is going to unambiguously prove the existence of God.
So you will be happy to admit that you are agnostic, I mean you don’t want to make absolute statements and claim there definitely is a God do you?
Aside from which, as I already stated, atheism is making positive affirmations.
No it isn’t. This just shows your ignorance yet again.
Tell me, does theism make any positive statements?
But a theists position about God entails belief.
And an atheist’s position is one of belief as well. That you do not know this really doesn’t surprise me.
When I confronted my own atheism with honesty
I doubt that you ever were an atheist. The unbelievable ignorance that you have displayed on this thread shows that you do not have a clue about an atheist’s beliefs, so I doubt you ever were an atheist.
I think that you are a dyed in the wool fundy who is playing the 'I used to be an atheist card' because you think that this somehow means that Christianity is clearly true. I mean wow, you were an atheist and now you are a Xians, it must be a true.
If you were ever an atheist, then I used to be the Pope
Brian.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by Hyroglyphx, posted 03-11-2007 12:30 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 95 by nator, posted 03-12-2007 8:47 AM Brian has replied
 Message 96 by Dr Jack, posted 03-12-2007 9:11 AM Brian has replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 92 of 300 (389265)
03-12-2007 3:27 AM
Reply to: Message 71 by New Cat's Eye
03-11-2007 10:59 PM


I'm going to disagree on two major points.
A firm sense of right and wrong makes it easier to become an atheist. It certainly made it easier for me to reject Christianity - and it should make it easier for anyone. Nobody with a firm sense of right and wrong could endorse, for instance, the genocide attributed to Joshua. I suspect that religion is more often a way for people to be self-righteous, to pretend to themselves that they are good people when really they are not.
As for whatever personal reasons lead people to religion it is not necessary to "see" this evidence to know that it is hugely unreliable. There are many religions in the world. Many are mutually inconsistent. The "Abrahamic" religions with their claims to absolute truth are especially clear on this. Anyone who calls themselves a Christian ought to reject any such evidence that leads people to Islam or Hinduism or any other religion except perhaps Judaism - and even then only for ethnic Jews.
It could be different. If there really were a "god" that this "evidence" pointed to then we ought to be able to see some sign of it in the patterns. But we don't. Most people follow the religion of their parents, the religion they were brought up in. Religions spread by ordinary human contacts. A god needn't wait centuries for misisonaries to reach remote parts of the world !
So to simply say that this "evidence" is dismissed because it cannot be examined is wrong. It may be examined indirectly and it is clearly wanting.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-11-2007 10:59 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 208 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-19-2007 1:30 PM PaulK has replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 93 of 300 (389270)
03-12-2007 8:32 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by Hyroglyphx
03-10-2007 1:33 PM


Trusting Groups
There is a reason why polls are showing that atheists are among the most distrusted people. Who wants to hang around elitist mentalities that do not believe in any real set of morals? There is an arrogance among many atheists because they believe they have climbed the tree of reason. A theist, but particularly Christians, feel that whatever knowledge they have about God was given to them. That in no way instills any sort of pride. In fact, it crushes it and affirms our reliance upon Him.
I find the results of the poll interesting, but I don't tend to set much in store by asking people if they trust atheists, gays, lesbians, muslims, jews, christians, etc. Mainly because we don't trust in groups, we place our trust in people. My question would be, what was the belief base of the people questioned?
To date I have not physically met anyone who claims to be an atheist.
Now I have met people that I know lie, cheat, steal, etc., and are generally untrustworthy. They have all been Christians or raised in Christian homes.
Even though I was raised in the church, my moral base comes from my parents. My daughter was not raised in the church and her moral base comes from me and my husband. Our example. She had friends who were Christians that I didn't consider to be a good influence and their parents thought my daughter was a bad influence just because she didn't go to church. It had nothing to do with anything she had done wrong.
Who I trust or don't trust is based on their actions, not their category.
I wouldn't say that I don't trust Christians, but there are Christians that I don't trust.
I wouldn't say that I don't trust African Americans, but there are African Americans that I don't trust.
I have not, that I know of to date, been wronged by any gays, lesbians, muslims, or jews. But then again, I don't ask people I meet what group they fall into.
I'm not sure why people would assume a whole group would have no moral base, just because they don't believe in a god or follow a religion.
From experience, I don't see that a belief in a god guarantees a good moral base.
As far as atheism itself, I don't see them making a claim that there is emphatically no God.
If I believe that someone can heal the sick, that doesn't mean that they can. If I don't believe that someone can heal the sick, that doesn't mean that they can't.
Because someone believes in a god, doesn't mean that a god exists and by the same token, just because someone doesn't believe in a god, doesn't mean that a god doesn't exist.
I don't see how a claim is made unless someone is trying to convince or force someone else to believe the way they do.

Why does someone believe you when you say there are four billion stars, but check when you say the paint is wet?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Hyroglyphx, posted 03-10-2007 1:33 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 94 of 300 (389272)
03-12-2007 8:40 AM
Reply to: Message 90 by Phat
03-12-2007 2:20 AM


Re: Say Again?
quote:
Why does everything in life need to be examined via the scientific method? Can't we trust each other anymore?
If I knew you and ordinarily thought you to be rational and sane, and one day you reported that you had what you thought to be an unverifiable experience (UFO or something)why would I be wrong to trust you pending further validation? Why would I assume you were suddenly daft?
I'll quote Feynman here:
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool."
Phat, most people don't use the scientific method to examine things, because they don't know what it is or how to use it. It takes education and a lot of practice to do it well.
That's why Bush was able to convince people that Saddam Hussein was involved in the WTC bombings, and why people believe in astrology and alien visitation and "get-rich quick in real estate" claims, and on and on and on.
Just because someone is "rational and sane" doesn't mean they are able to apply the scientific method successfuly to stuff that happens to them in their own lives. That takes a certain amount of courage, as well, since most people like feeling right and don't actually want to know the truth if it means they were wrong.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by Phat, posted 03-12-2007 2:20 AM Phat has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 95 of 300 (389273)
03-12-2007 8:47 AM
Reply to: Message 91 by Brian
03-12-2007 3:25 AM


Re: Clarifying positions
quote:
I think that you are a dyed in the wool fundy who is playing the 'I used to be an atheist card' because you think that this somehow means that Christianity is clearly true. I mean wow, you were an atheist and now you are a Xians, it must be a true.
I think he was the sort of Atheist who, while he claims to not believe in God, is actually a "lapsed believer" who is defiant of or angry at God.
Sort of like a rebellious teenager or young adult who cuts his parents out of his life and pretends they don't exist but who never actually believes that he never had parents.
So, he never really went all the way to Atheism.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by Brian, posted 03-12-2007 3:25 AM Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 99 by Brian, posted 03-12-2007 9:40 AM nator has not replied

Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003
Member Rating: 8.7


Message 96 of 300 (389276)
03-12-2007 9:11 AM
Reply to: Message 91 by Brian
03-12-2007 3:25 AM


Re: Clarifying positions
And talking of morals, atheists are far more moral than Christians will ever be. Apart from the fact that there are far more Xians in jail that there are atheists, Xians ONLY do ”good’ deeds because they want a reward at the end of their lives. We atheists only help others out of the kindness of our hearts.
Christians are extremely selfish.
This is utter crap; while it may be true of some to generalise to Christians in general is patently false of many, many of the Christians I know.
I doubt that you ever were an atheist. The unbelievable ignorance that you have displayed on this thread shows that you do not have a clue about an atheist’s beliefs, so I doubt you ever were an atheist.
I think that you are a dyed in the wool fundy who is playing the 'I used to be an atheist card' because you think that this somehow means that Christianity is clearly true. I mean wow, you were an atheist and now you are a Xians, it must be a true.
If you were ever an atheist, then I used to be the Pope
You know, when I tell Christians I used to be a Christian they reply in a way very similar to yours. I think presuming to tell someone you've never even met what they believe or believed is extremely arrogant, completely unhelpful to useful debate and dangerously close to being a case of the True Scotsman.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by Brian, posted 03-12-2007 3:25 AM Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 98 by Brian, posted 03-12-2007 9:36 AM Dr Jack has not replied

JavaMan
Member (Idle past 2319 days)
Posts: 475
From: York, England
Joined: 08-05-2005


Message 97 of 300 (389277)
03-12-2007 9:13 AM
Reply to: Message 47 by crashfrog
03-11-2007 12:10 AM


Re: Rebutting myths about atheism
Nonetheless I conclude that if science and logic are in conflict, then it's logic that's wrong, somehow. I don't know what that makes me (aside from a really shitty Vulcan.)
It makes you an empiricist, I think, crash.
Empiricist philosophers like Locke, Hume and Mill are just as scathing about logic you are. And it's no coincidence that these are the philosophers who provided the philosophical justification for the scientific method when science was in its infancy.

'I can't even fit all my wife's clothes into a suitcase for travelling. So you want me to believe we're going to put all of the planets and stars and everything into a sandwich bag?' - q3psycho on the Big Bang

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by crashfrog, posted 03-11-2007 12:10 AM crashfrog has not replied

Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 98 of 300 (389278)
03-12-2007 9:36 AM
Reply to: Message 96 by Dr Jack
03-12-2007 9:11 AM


Re: Clarifying positions
This is utter crap; while it may be true of some to generalise to Christians in general is patently false of many, many of the Christians I know.
Why do your Xian friends do good deeds?
I think presuming to tell someone you've never even met what they believe or believed is extremely arrogant,
Tell me, how can Nem be an ex-atheist when he doesnt even know what the word means, and has hugely misrepresented atheism on this very thread. NO one who claims to have had a particular faith can be as ignorant of that faith as Nem is of Atheism.
So, I don't presume anything. I know that Nem was never an atheist because he hasn't got a clue what Atheism is.
Brian.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Dr Jack, posted 03-12-2007 9:11 AM Dr Jack has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 103 by jar, posted 03-12-2007 11:07 AM Brian has replied

Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 99 of 300 (389279)
03-12-2007 9:40 AM
Reply to: Message 95 by nator
03-12-2007 8:47 AM


Re: Clarifying positions
All Nem has done is to give the fundy view of Atheism. If he ever was an atheist he would know that the views of Atheism that he has outlayed here are garbage.
It is a typical fundy trick to claim that they were once an atheist but now they are saved by the wonderful Lord Jesus. They think it is somehow more impressive. But they then turn around and give a false definition of Atheism. It's laughable.
Brian.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by nator, posted 03-12-2007 8:47 AM nator has not replied

Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 100 of 300 (389280)
03-12-2007 10:00 AM
Reply to: Message 42 by jar
03-10-2007 8:48 PM


Re: NJ, please give an honest answer to this question:
I think the issue here is that part of NJ's religion is a dogma about the uniqueness of God.
So therefore, any attempt to try to get NJ to admit some seeming hypocrisy with regard to belief will fail because his disbelief in Loki comes FROM his beliefs within Christianity and not in and of itself.

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by jar, posted 03-10-2007 8:48 PM jar has not replied

Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 101 of 300 (389281)
03-12-2007 10:26 AM
Reply to: Message 63 by Hyroglyphx
03-11-2007 12:59 PM


Re: What is atheism?
I don't think it is a stretch for me to say that atheists view morality in relative terms. Its also not a stretch for me to say that the predominant atheistic view is that life is ultimately purposeless and directionless.
It IS a stretch NJ! There is a pragmatic difference between this:
Atheist Definition & Meaning | Dictionary.com
and this
Nihilism Definition & Meaning | Dictionary.com
You only make your posts sound more and more foolish as you continue to make this fundamental mistake.
Edited by Jazzns, : No reason given.

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by Hyroglyphx, posted 03-11-2007 12:59 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 102 by nator, posted 03-12-2007 11:00 AM Jazzns has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 102 of 300 (389283)
03-12-2007 11:00 AM
Reply to: Message 101 by Jazzns
03-12-2007 10:26 AM


Re: What is atheism?
I already told him that he was confusing atheists with nihilists, but I was ignored.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by Jazzns, posted 03-12-2007 10:26 AM Jazzns has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 103 of 300 (389284)
03-12-2007 11:07 AM
Reply to: Message 98 by Brian
03-12-2007 9:36 AM


Re: Clarifying positions
Why do your Xian friends do good deeds?
Christians do good deeds for the same reason atheists do good deeds.
Because it is the right thing to do.
It really is that simple.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by Brian, posted 03-12-2007 9:36 AM Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 111 by Brian, posted 03-12-2007 3:29 PM jar has not replied

Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 104 of 300 (389285)
03-12-2007 11:23 AM
Reply to: Message 19 by Straggler
03-10-2007 1:25 PM


Topic Synopsis Part One
Topic Synopsis:
Straggler writes:
What is atheism?
Is it simply a disbelief in deities of any kind or is it more than that?
Well... I have never knowingly been an atheist, so I cannot speak from experience. I have followed the philosophical exchanges as I am doing here. Several observations have sprung to mind and heart. (soul? ) I always thought that atheism simply meant without theism...kinda like asexual means
well...you know.
straggler writes:
Do atheists and non-atheists have the same view of what exactly atheism is??
One thing to keep in mind is that no two atheists and definitely no two theists are alike. I would imagine that it is a higher probability that many fundamentalist Christians think alike due to adherence to a set of beliefs. Atheists do not necessarily have a set of beliefs aside from atheism which bonds them together. Of course, there is the Humanist Manifesto !
Straggler writes:
We seem to spend a great deal of time on this forum examining the theistic position and it's viability in one form or another.
It seems only fair that the atheistic position undergo the same sort of challenge and scrutiny.
Straggler, if you know me at all, you know that I am synonamous with Mr.Dictionary.
For your sake I will stick my neck out and wing it so that we may have an opportunity to foster further dialogue on this matter. Noam Chomsky had an interview in The Humanist where he stated:
quote:
When people ask me, as they sometimes
do, ”Are you an atheist?’ I can only
respond that I can’t answer . . . unless
there’s some clarification of what we’re
supposed to believe in or disbelieve in,
I can’t answer.
Mr.Jack writes:
There is, of course, much we don't understand and quite possibly will never understand - there is no real reason to suppose that the world is such that it can be understood by human minds, yet alone will be - but a naturalist view at least presents us with a world that is accessible. ...I choose Atheism not because I reject ideas of god, and the supernatural, but because I embrace the notion of a material world - one we can touch and feel and test.
A very respectable and illuminating answer!
Straggler writes:
To play devils advocate (in the absence of any anti atheist postings as yet)- Is it possible that the desire for a Godless natural material universe leads us to conclude that this is one?
I think that would definitely be the religious fundamentalist position.
How are they wrong?
Fundamentalism presupposes a belief without any overwhelming external or verifiable evidence. I could give you all sorts of Theological and Philosophical reasons why I believe in Jesus and had a touch and awareness that gravitated me away from a desire to be otherwise sane, but I may just sum my belief up by declaring that I want to believe in a loving, benevolant, and approachable God. I am not sure if I believe that humanity in general is predisposed to desire a godless universe....although I have been taught that no one seeks God in and of themselves....rather God finds us. Why He is taking His time on some folks is not for me to speculate on, however! I don't want to come across as exclusivist!
Nemesis writes:
I think an honest analysis of the common atheist would reveal that they view themselves as being among the upper crust of any given society. In stark contrast, they view a theist as somewhat of a scathing lunatic, bent on world domination through proselytizing. Why such diametric opposites?
I dunno, Nem... some would say that an honest analysis of the typical fundamentalist would reveal that they view themselves as exclusivist and/or chosen.
In stark contrast, atheists are often viewed as demon possessed people who are minions of an antichrist and working towards ridding the world of all religions and fundamental beliefs.
Nemesis writes:
An atheist cannot be pinned down to any true moral position, where as a theistic position is easily identifiable because its parameters have been officially established. Its easy to sit on a pedestal and cast judgment on the theist for failing to conform to the precepts or tenets of their faith. On that pedestal is very safe because they have opted for relativism-- that is, their morals are relative to what ever beliefs about they are prepared to identify with.
Hopefully, we all can debate quite vociferously without casting judgement on anybody!
Straggler writes:
I would suggest that virtually all atheists share the same sort of rationale for this rejection of gods. Namely an evidence based, pro scientific thinking attitude...
I agree, Straggler. You desire facts rather than fantasies. You desire evidence versus belief. I guess I hold tightly to belief for a couple of reasons.
  • I have surrendered my right to question the character of it...effectively taking a fundamental or definite stand. (Primarily because I believe God to be personal and thus feel that to question His existance is a private matter between myself and Him.)
  • I feel uncomfortable with the idea that humanity is alone in this universe. I don't trust our ability to pull ourselves out of any upcoming quicksand....
    Crashfrog writes:
    The burden of proof is always on he who makes the positive claim of existence, not he who points out that no evidence for the positive claim has been provided.
    In a sense, yes. IF God exists, He has the burden of proving it to you. If you are tenacious enough in having to win every logic argument, however...you may be allowed to hold tightly to your freethinking veto yet effectively block any belief from taking root in your logical mind. Am I right?
    Crashfrog writes:
    Thus it's sufficient to find only one place where there is no God to prove that there's no God, anywhere.
    And that place is in your own mind. Is that the definition of a fundamentalist atheist/humanist?
    I will agree that atheists are better behaved...in general...than are theists, but only because they do not as easily follow any set of doctorine. The freethinking critical analysis aspect allows them to thrive and create.
    Jar writes:
    The Theists moral positions are every bit as relative as the atheists. For example, the Theists morality depends on the particular code set he chooses and on the era, mores and culture he lives within.
    I believe in a statement I read once....We become the decisions that we make..
    Ringo writes:
    Nobody is born owning a belief in gods. Some people buy into a belief and some don't.
    So what are you saving your money for? A rainy day? What? You expect a Global Flood or something?
    Straggler writes:
    When we are born we don't even know what a house is nevermind whether or not we want to buy one.
    Yes...but we are protected by our parents. Maybe little war orphans learn very early that they want shelter....and all they know how to do is cry!
    We are born crying, after all! What it is we want is inconclusive....
    Crashfrog writes:
    Lack of belief in God is atheism. To lack the belief in something's existence is the same as believing that the something doesn't exist.
    So would you say that atheists lean towards need of facts and evidence versus need of belief and emotional confirmation?

  • This message is a reply to:
     Message 19 by Straggler, posted 03-10-2007 1:25 PM Straggler has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 108 by ringo, posted 03-12-2007 2:05 PM Phat has not replied
     Message 118 by Straggler, posted 03-12-2007 6:13 PM Phat has replied

    Hyroglyphx
    Inactive Member


    Message 105 of 300 (389287)
    03-12-2007 11:58 AM
    Reply to: Message 64 by crashfrog
    03-11-2007 1:29 PM


    Re: What is atheism?
    Well, that's certainly a misrepresentation of Dawkins' thesis, as well as a strawman. Nobody's trying to lay all evils at the feet of religion.
    The difference, in this instance, between all or most is so negligible that its pointless to distinguish between the two. Religion is always the blame, whether real or imagined.
    But it's undeniable that religion comes with negative consequences. I don't see how anybody can open a newspaper in these times and deny that.
    Nobody denies that its being used as a front to express other sentiments. I see it as just the scapegoat for a much larger problem. The people that honestly believe that eradicating religion would allow them to finally live in a utopian civilization is just as delusional as the religious folk they claim are delusional.
    It can't be denied, though, that religion gives these terrors opportunities that they would not otherwise have.
    Religion is something that can be easily manipulated and easily hijacked. I would wholeheartedly agree with that. My issue is to say that blaming religion itself is a dangerous endeavor. We could blame politics in the exact same way. How many crazy political ideologies have surfaced since the dawn of man? More than I could count. But rarely do we see people all the travails of society on politics itself. Rather, they blame specific ideologies and the specific ideologues that announce them.
    quote:
    Its also not a stretch for me to say that the predominant atheistic view is that life is ultimately purposeless and directionless.
    Every atheist here is telling you that, yes, it is a stretch. Why aren't you listening?
    Alright then, then what is the meaning of life? Did we have a purpose for being here in the beginning? Do we now have a purpose for existing? Are we heading in a discernable direction, or an indiscernable one? If you answer yes to any of these then you unequivocally must answer by whom or what arbitrates or facilitates the existence, the purpose, and the direction. Is that not all indicative of intent? Is not the common atheist averse to such sentiments over its implications? How am I off the mark about this?
    quote:
    When an atheist declares that there is no God, he is essentially making a positive affirmation that God does not exist.
    As I told you before, this is a contradiction in terms. To assert that something doesn't exist is, by definition, to make a negative assertion.
    I think you are misunderstanding me and, apparently, Mr. Jack, who has already explained it.
    "Strong atheism, sometimes called positive atheism, hard atheism or gnostic atheism, is the philosophical position that no deity exists. It is a form of explicit atheism, meaning that it consciously rejects theism." -Wiki

    "Somewhere at the back of my father's mind, at the bottom of his heart, in the depth of his soul, there was an empty space that had once been filled by God and he never found anything else to put in it... At the centre of me is always an eternally terrible pain - a curious wild pain - a searching for something beyond what the world contains." -Bertrand Russell

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 64 by crashfrog, posted 03-11-2007 1:29 PM crashfrog has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 106 by Modulous, posted 03-12-2007 12:55 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied
     Message 107 by crashfrog, posted 03-12-2007 1:08 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.2
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024