Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 59 (9208 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: Skylink
Post Volume: Total: 919,436 Year: 6,693/9,624 Month: 33/238 Week: 33/22 Day: 6/9 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   An Atheist By Any Other Name . . .
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9580
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 6.6


Message 121 of 209 (658370)
04-04-2012 12:28 PM
Reply to: Message 116 by New Cat's Eye
04-04-2012 11:48 AM


Re: "Positive" Atheism
CS writes:
Right. But its there none the less
and it's still wrong, nonetheless.
You can reasonably answer "no" to the question "does god exist?" without having to make a statement of fact.
That's why, if we're not just talking casually - which I assumed we weren't because we were discussing how Dawkins can be an agnostic AND an atheist and how there are several kinds of atheist etc - two questions are required. One that deals with belief and one that deals with fact.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-04-2012 11:48 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 124 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-04-2012 2:11 PM Tangle has replied

  
shadow71
Member (Idle past 3185 days)
Posts: 706
From: Joliet, il, USA
Joined: 08-31-2010


Message 122 of 209 (658379)
04-04-2012 1:43 PM
Reply to: Message 112 by Taq
04-04-2012 11:14 AM


Re: hedging
Taq writes:
"If someone arrives at the belief that the Hindu pantheon really does exist after a lifetime of study, mediation, introspection, and life experiences would you feel compelled to believe in the Hindu pantheon as well?" Your answer in message 97 was "No". So it would seem that a lifetime of study, mediation (meditation?), introspection, and life experiences is not acceptable to you, either.
You are assuming I would accept a lifetime of study, meditation, introspection and life experiences of someone else and if I do not then I don't accept MY own lifetime of study, meditation, introspection, and life experiences. That's not really fair to require me to accept someone's conclusions, is it?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by Taq, posted 04-04-2012 11:14 AM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 125 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-04-2012 2:17 PM shadow71 has not replied
 Message 130 by Taq, posted 04-04-2012 3:13 PM shadow71 has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 123 of 209 (658381)
04-04-2012 2:08 PM
Reply to: Message 120 by Straggler
04-04-2012 12:26 PM


Re: "Positive" Atheism
What you can't logically do is know that life evolved on Earth whilst also claiming to have no idea if it didn't.
But I'm not claiming that I have no idea if it didn't. As I said:
quote:
When I say that I know life evolved, I'm not saying that I know the universe wasn't created last thursday.
Technically, I'd be "trivially agnostic" to evolution because of Last Thursdayism but I've already stipulated that the distinction from that is not enough to get me to stop saying that I know evolution is true.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 120 by Straggler, posted 04-04-2012 12:26 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 128 by Straggler, posted 04-04-2012 3:06 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 124 of 209 (658382)
04-04-2012 2:11 PM
Reply to: Message 121 by Tangle
04-04-2012 12:28 PM


Re: "Positive" Atheism
and it's still wrong, nonetheless.
What is wrong?
That's why, if we're not just talking casually - which I assumed we weren't because we were discussing how Dawkins can be an agnostic AND an atheist and how there are several kinds of atheist etc - two questions are required. One that deals with belief and one that deals with fact.
Oh, yeah, in a more formal sense you're right. I'm basically saying that we can allow for it in the casual sense. And that its not wrong to do so.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by Tangle, posted 04-04-2012 12:28 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 126 by Tangle, posted 04-04-2012 2:34 PM New Cat's Eye has seen this message but not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 125 of 209 (658383)
04-04-2012 2:17 PM
Reply to: Message 122 by shadow71
04-04-2012 1:43 PM


Re: hedging
You are assuming I would accept a lifetime of study, meditation, introspection and life experiences of someone else and if I do not then I don't accept MY own lifetime of study, meditation, introspection, and life experiences. That's not really fair to require me to accept someone's conclusions, is it?
That's why crashfrog's question in Message 106 was pertinent:
quote:
Question: if you know the reasons that you believe in God wouldn't be sufficient to convince anybody else, then why did you allow them to convince you?
What led you to adopt a lower standard of evidence than you believe others hold?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 122 by shadow71, posted 04-04-2012 1:43 PM shadow71 has not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9580
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 6.6


Message 126 of 209 (658384)
04-04-2012 2:34 PM
Reply to: Message 124 by New Cat's Eye
04-04-2012 2:11 PM


Re: "Positive" Atheism
CS writes:
What is wrong?
Doesn't matter now, I think we're in agreement :-)
Edited by Tangle, : I swear, if I get the bloody quote syntax wrong one more time, i'll go out and give five quid to a Christian.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

This message is a reply to:
 Message 124 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-04-2012 2:11 PM New Cat's Eye has seen this message but not replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6484
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 8.6


Message 127 of 209 (658393)
04-04-2012 3:04 PM
Reply to: Message 112 by Taq
04-04-2012 11:14 AM


Re: hedging
Taq writes:
So it would seem that a lifetime of study, mediation (meditation?), introspection, and life experiences is not acceptable to you, either.
What shadow71 believes, and how he comes to those beliefs are up to him. As long as he does not try to impose those beliefs on others, I have no problem with him. And if he wants to express those beliefs in public, I don't have a problem with that either. That's what free speech is about.

Jesus was a liberal hippie

This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by Taq, posted 04-04-2012 11:14 AM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 129 by Taq, posted 04-04-2012 3:11 PM nwr has seen this message but not replied

  
Straggler
Member (Idle past 317 days)
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 128 of 209 (658396)
04-04-2012 3:06 PM
Reply to: Message 123 by New Cat's Eye
04-04-2012 2:08 PM


Re: "Positive" Atheism
CS writes:
Technically, I'd be "trivially agnostic" to evolution because of Last Thursdayism but I've already stipulated that the distinction from that is not enough to get me to stop saying that I know evolution is true.
Technically I am "trivially agnostic" to Leprechauns/gods/fairies etc. because I cannot disprove the existence of these things any more than you can disprove Last Thursdayism. But, like you, I've already stipulated that the distinction from that is not enough to get me to stop saying that these entities are products of human psychology.
Straggler writes:
What you can't logically do is know that life evolved on Earth whilst also claiming to have no idea if it didn't.
CS writes:
But I'm not claiming that I have no idea if it didn't.
If Last Thursdayism occurred then evolution didn't. You have claimed to be (non-trivially) agnostic towards Last Thursdayism. If you don't know whether or not Last Thursdayism occurred then how can you claim to know that evolution did?
You cannot logically know that life evolved on Earth whilst also claiming to have no idea if it didn't.
Yet this is the contradictory position you find yourself in.
CS writes:
The real test is to answer this question succinctly: 'Does god exist?'
The real (comparative) test is to answer this question succinctly:'Did the universe come into being fully formed Last Thursday?
I maintain that my position on god(s) is pretty much identical to yours on Last Thursdayism. The key difference is that you are still operating under the illogical assumption that you can be simultaneously ignorant that something hasn't happened whilst having positive (albeit tentative) knowledge that it has.
Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 123 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-04-2012 2:08 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 133 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-04-2012 3:46 PM Straggler has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10297
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 7.1


Message 129 of 209 (658398)
04-04-2012 3:11 PM
Reply to: Message 127 by nwr
04-04-2012 3:04 PM


Re: hedging
What shadow71 believes, and how he comes to those beliefs are up to him. As long as he does not try to impose those beliefs on others, I have no problem with him. And if he wants to express those beliefs in public, I don't have a problem with that either. That's what free speech is about.
I agree. What I am replying to is his question:
"Yes, it is I the theist, who after study, mediation, introspection and life experiences does come to a belief.
Is that something the atheist cannot accept?"
When that method arrives at a god that shadow71 does not believe in he does not accept it. That is the point I was trying to make. It goes back to the famous Stephen Roberts quote:
"I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."
I am merely phrasing it in a way that is more accessible to shadow71.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 127 by nwr, posted 04-04-2012 3:04 PM nwr has seen this message but not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10297
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 7.1


Message 130 of 209 (658401)
04-04-2012 3:13 PM
Reply to: Message 122 by shadow71
04-04-2012 1:43 PM


Re: hedging
You are assuming I would accept a lifetime of study, meditation, introspection and life experiences of someone else and if I do not then I don't accept MY own lifetime of study, meditation, introspection, and life experiences. That's not really fair to require me to accept someone's conclusions, is it?
I think you answered your own question.
From you in message 71:
"Yes, it is I the theist, who after study, mediation, introspection and life experiences does come to a belief.
Is that something the atheist cannot accept?"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 122 by shadow71, posted 04-04-2012 1:43 PM shadow71 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 132 by shadow71, posted 04-04-2012 3:44 PM Taq has replied

  
Artemis Entreri 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4480 days)
Posts: 1194
From: Northern Virginia
Joined: 07-08-2008


(4)
Message 131 of 209 (658403)
04-04-2012 3:17 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Taq
03-28-2012 12:46 PM


shit disturbers.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Taq, posted 03-28-2012 12:46 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 142 by Taq, posted 04-04-2012 5:40 PM Artemis Entreri has not replied
 Message 161 by bluegenes, posted 04-06-2012 1:42 PM Artemis Entreri has replied

  
shadow71
Member (Idle past 3185 days)
Posts: 706
From: Joliet, il, USA
Joined: 08-31-2010


Message 132 of 209 (658411)
04-04-2012 3:44 PM
Reply to: Message 130 by Taq
04-04-2012 3:13 PM


Re: hedging
Taq writes:
I think you answered your own question. From you in message 71: "Yes, it is I the theist, who after study, mediation, introspection and life experiences does come to a belief. Is that something the atheist cannot accept?"
Your reading my question wrong. I am not saying an atheist must accet my conclusions. I am asking if an atheist cannot accept the fact that after study, dediation, introspection and life experiences I have come to my belief. I have no problem with an atheist accepting his or her non-beliefs. I was just struck at the reluctance to accept their non-beliefs. Especially as in the quote in Granny Magda's post from Carl Sagan where in the last sentence he used the term delusional to describe anyone who accepted a deity.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by Taq, posted 04-04-2012 3:13 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 134 by ringo, posted 04-04-2012 4:24 PM shadow71 has replied
 Message 135 by Taq, posted 04-04-2012 4:57 PM shadow71 has replied
 Message 136 by hooah212002, posted 04-04-2012 5:09 PM shadow71 has seen this message but not replied
 Message 137 by Rahvin, posted 04-04-2012 5:15 PM shadow71 has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 133 of 209 (658412)
04-04-2012 3:46 PM
Reply to: Message 128 by Straggler
04-04-2012 3:06 PM


Re: "Positive" Atheism
If Last Thursdayism occurred then evolution didn't.
But even tho it didn't, I could still know that it did. (I'd just be wrong) ...and now I'm repeating myself.
You have claimed to be (non-trivially) agnostic towards Last Thursdayism. If you don't know whether or not Last Thursdayism occurred then how can you claim to know that evolution did?
Because the evidence that shows me that evolution occured does not show me that Last Thursdayism didn't.
You cannot logically know that life evolved on Earth whilst also claiming to have no idea if it didn't.
Yet this is the contradictory position you find yourself in.
But I don't, because when I say that I know evolution occured I am not saying that I know that LT didn't.
I think that's the third time I've said that now. If you're just gonna keep spinning round and round trying to trip me up then I'm just going to stop replying. This seems to be your standard MO and its annoying.
The real (comparative) test is to answer this question succinctly:'Did the universe come into being fully formed Last Thursday?
I maintain that my position on god(s) is pretty much identical to yours on Last Thursdayism.
"I don't know but I doubt it"? That's a move away from the positive atheist position...
In order for my position to match yours, I'd have to have the evidence for evolution also be evidence against LT. But I don't because you can't have evidence against LT.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 128 by Straggler, posted 04-04-2012 3:06 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 151 by Straggler, posted 04-05-2012 12:14 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 663 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(1)
Message 134 of 209 (658420)
04-04-2012 4:24 PM
Reply to: Message 132 by shadow71
04-04-2012 3:44 PM


Re: hedging
shadow71 writes:
I am asking if an atheist cannot accept the fact that after study, dediation, introspection and life experiences I have come to my belief.
I think it's entirely possible to "come to" theistic beliefs. In my case, however, study, dedication, introspection and life experiences have taken me continuously away from theistic beliefs.
It often seems to be a case of starting at a theistic belief and using one's confirmation bias to convince oneself that one got there progressively.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 132 by shadow71, posted 04-04-2012 3:44 PM shadow71 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 140 by shadow71, posted 04-04-2012 5:31 PM ringo has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10297
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 7.1


(1)
Message 135 of 209 (658422)
04-04-2012 4:57 PM
Reply to: Message 132 by shadow71
04-04-2012 3:44 PM


Re: hedging
I am asking if an atheist cannot accept the fact that after study, dediation, introspection and life experiences I have come to my belief.
Can you accept the fact that after study, introspection, and life experiences that someone can come to a belief in the Hindu pantheon?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 132 by shadow71, posted 04-04-2012 3:44 PM shadow71 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 138 by shadow71, posted 04-04-2012 5:17 PM Taq has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024