Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 79 (8897 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 03-20-2019 9:21 PM
33 online now:
AZPaul3, LamarkNewAge, Tanypteryx (3 members, 30 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 848,507 Year: 3,544/19,786 Month: 539/1,087 Week: 129/212 Day: 45/14 Hour: 2/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
...
789
10
1112Next
Author Topic:   The Law Of Contradiction
Hyroglyphx
Member
Posts: 5622
From: Austin, TX
Joined: 05-03-2006


Message 136 of 177 (339985)
08-14-2006 11:57 AM
Reply to: Message 119 by MangyTiger
08-13-2006 2:06 PM


Re: Welcome to EvC
Why do you attribute this damage to your car to the Calvary Chapel sticker in the back window?

Because I also have an, "Annoy a Liberal: Work hard and be happy" sticker too. I also have a, "I don't like war, but I think I don't like terrorists even more" sticker. I also have a few others concerning my affection for Jesus. Oh, who am I kidding? Its a propagandamobile. Its obvious that I've been vandalized over my beliefs, especially when driving down the street and we get honked at, and flipped off, and things thrown at us, people driving by shaking their head in dismay. When I look in my rear view mirror, I see people behind me screaming at me. LOL! Remember, I live in Portland, Oregon, which is easily a major west coast hub for atheism and a liberal playground, trailing just behind San Francisco and maybe Seattle. For however ecletic they portray the city to be, I sure do seem to be heavily outnumbered, especially on the westside. In Flagstaff, where some of the other vandalism occured, I just had the Calvary Chapel sticker. One could say that I got hit by random vandalism, but it seemed to happen an awful lot to be random. Arizona is typically considered a "red" state, but Flagstaff is the polar opposite.

We went to see John Kerry in Flagstaff and was nearly beaten to a pulp, and then we went to the Bush rally in Phoenix and nearly got beaten to a pulp there too. Those peaceful hippies have funny way of showing their cosmic love.

As nwr pointed out, cars get vandalised all the time. There can be any number of reasons. The most common reason in places I've lived is that the local hooligans have had too much to drink and randomly pick on vehicles to attack as the stagger by.

No, this seems to happen when at home or when I'm at the grocery store. Not too many drunk hooligans randomly targeting people just to be an a-hole I would think.

Oh and as an aside - how do you know it was a pint of urine?

That was hyperbole for effect. However, who ever did it sat that there a long time spitting. There was so much spit and urine. They must have been very dedicated to their cause.


“If chance be the father of all flesh then disaster is his rainbow in the sky. And when you hear of, state of emergencies, sniper kills ten, youths go looting, bomb blasts school, it is but the sound of man worshipping his maker” –Steve Turner
This message is a reply to:
 Message 119 by MangyTiger, posted 08-13-2006 2:06 PM MangyTiger has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 140 by MangyTiger, posted 08-14-2006 3:12 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

    
Hyroglyphx
Member
Posts: 5622
From: Austin, TX
Joined: 05-03-2006


Message 137 of 177 (339987)
08-14-2006 12:24 PM
Reply to: Message 120 by Annafan
08-13-2006 4:00 PM


Re: Welcome to EvC
Maybe an example will help: what do you think about the Snarfs?

I love Snarfs! They're little, and blue, and they sing, "La-la-la-la-la-la...la-la-la-la-la... There is Papa Snarf, and... oh, wait. Those are Smurfs. Nevermind.

Since you've (probably) never seen a Snarf, I guess you will ask me to show you one before you give an opinion. I will answer that that is impossible, but that we know from ancient writings what a Snarf is, and how it behaves. But then you will meet other people who also claim they know Snarfs and what they stand for. And their ideas about Snarfs will in all likeliness differ from mine. Significantly, or only in details.

Until Snarfs can demonstrate through their ancient writings how they couldn't possibly have known future events without some sort of Snarf revelation, I'll listen to people who talk about them, but remain skeptic. You have every concievable right to be skeptic. I don't deny your right.

But the Snarfs themselves, who could give you the opportunity to decide for yourself instead of relying on stories and interpretations of stories, they just keep hiding themselves!

Snarfs are very reclusive little guys. They don't like alot of noise.

Nevertheless I could ask you what your opinion of Snarfs is. What would you answer?

I would say that they sound like loveable, huggable, kissable little fella's.

It may be irrelevant to you, but it isn't to me. How in the world can you have an opinion about something, if you are not even able to define exactly what it is??? I never have opinions about things that I don't know the first thing about. And I find it highly amusing how some can argue so strongly about their version of something that nobody obviously knows the first thing about, lol.

I don't know every single aspect of where love comes from to know that I've felt it, to know that it exists, to know that I enjoy it. Its kind of like food. Ancient people probably had no idea what nutrition was. They probably didn't know about carbohydrates or protein, minerals, or vitamins, even still, they knew they felt better when they ate and understod that sustenence is a very important aspect of life. I don't need to know every single aspect about God in order to believe in God.

Like I pointed out in your poll, I remain sort of agnostic towards a 'first cause' God, but on the other hand firmly atheist when it comes to a benevolent, watching-over-everything God. So depending on what kind of God the person who asks me, refers to, my answer should be different.

Those are typically referred to as Deists. According to the Judeo-Christian God, YHWH, He created everything in six days, then He rested on the seventh. From then on, He intercedes on behalf of those who would call on Him. According to Deists, God created the atom on the first day, then He's rested ever since then.


“If chance be the father of all flesh then disaster is his rainbow in the sky. And when you hear of, state of emergencies, sniper kills ten, youths go looting, bomb blasts school, it is but the sound of man worshipping his maker” –Steve Turner
This message is a reply to:
 Message 120 by Annafan, posted 08-13-2006 4:00 PM Annafan has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 149 by Annafan, posted 08-16-2006 11:44 AM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

    
robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 138 of 177 (339988)
08-14-2006 12:24 PM
Reply to: Message 135 by PurpleYouko
08-14-2006 11:45 AM


Re: Welcome to EvC
The trouble is that I don't know what other word to actually use in its place to get my meaning across.

"Hypothesis," perhaps? Although that connotes TOO much uncertainty.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 135 by PurpleYouko, posted 08-14-2006 11:45 AM PurpleYouko has not yet responded

  
Hyroglyphx
Member
Posts: 5622
From: Austin, TX
Joined: 05-03-2006


Message 139 of 177 (339989)
08-14-2006 12:33 PM
Reply to: Message 122 by Annafan
08-13-2006 5:00 PM


Re: What atheism really means
I would say I'm an "Atheist", only because the word "Theist" exists.

The only purpose words serve are to convey meanings toward descriptions. Did you listen to the link I sent you? The narrator goes into this very thing. You are against a concept, not a meaningless word.

Think about it: from our point of view, a-theism could be seen as a lack of something that doesn't exist. Which is... utter nonsense. Yet another illustration that, by itself, it doesn't even need a word. It only exists indirectly because of the word "theism".

There is only one answer that makes any sense for anyone would obstinantly oppose a notion they don't believe exists in the first place. Only one person has said it and he summed it up in one sentence. There is only one reason for the atheist to care enough about the subject, aside from what I asserted. Who can figure it out? It was robinrohan who stated it. Everything else defies logic.


“If chance be the father of all flesh then disaster is his rainbow in the sky. And when you hear of, state of emergencies, sniper kills ten, youths go looting, bomb blasts school, it is but the sound of man worshipping his maker” –Steve Turner
This message is a reply to:
 Message 122 by Annafan, posted 08-13-2006 5:00 PM Annafan has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 141 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-14-2006 7:48 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded
 Message 142 by Annafan, posted 08-16-2006 6:31 AM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded
 Message 143 by robinrohan, posted 08-16-2006 8:03 AM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

    
MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 4428 days)
Posts: 989
From: Leicester, UK
Joined: 07-30-2004


Message 140 of 177 (340014)
08-14-2006 3:12 PM
Reply to: Message 136 by Hyroglyphx
08-14-2006 11:57 AM


Re: Welcome to EvC
Its obvious that I've been vandalized over my beliefs, especially when driving down the street and we get honked at, and flipped off, and things thrown at us, people driving by shaking their head in dismay. When I look in my rear view mirror, I see people behind me screaming at me.

Maybe you're just a really bad driver?

As nwr pointed out, cars get vandalised all the time. There can be any number of reasons. The most common reason in places I've lived is that the local hooligans have had too much to drink and randomly pick on vehicles to attack as the stagger by.

No, this seems to happen when at home or when I'm at the grocery store. Not too many drunk hooligans randomly targeting people just to be an a-hole I would think.

Well it might be different over there because of the physical difference in the way our cities are laid out but I would hazard a guess those are two of three most likely places to get your car vandalised (parked anywhere in a city or town centre being the most likely).


Oops! Wrong Planet
This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-14-2006 11:57 AM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

    
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16085
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 141 of 177 (340079)
08-14-2006 7:48 PM
Reply to: Message 139 by Hyroglyphx
08-14-2006 12:33 PM


Re: What atheism really means
There is only one answer that makes any sense for anyone would obstinantly oppose a notion they don't believe exists in the first place.

You are right.

There is only one reason why anyone would argue against God when they "don't believe it exists in the first place".

There is only one reason why anyone would argue against evolution when they "don't believe it exists in the first place".

There is only one reason why anyone would argue against the existence of intermediate forms in the fossil record when they "don't believe they exist in the first place".

There is only one reason why anyone would argue against crystal healing when they "don't believe it exists in the first place".

There is only one reason why people would argue against the Loch Ness Monster when they "don't believe it exists in the first place".

There is only one reason why people argue against Uri Geller's psychic ability to bend spoons when they "don't believe it exists in the first place".

Yes, there is only one answer that makes sense, when explaining why people argue against the existence of things.

The answer is ... and this, it seems, will astonish you ...

* drumroll please *

The answer is --- that they don't believe that these things exist.

When someone argues that something doesn't exist, it is because they think that that thing does not exist.

How many times does this need to be explained to you before it sinks in?

People argue FOR things which they BELIEVE, and AGAINST things which they DISBELIEVE.

Sheesh.

The "creationist theory of psychology", if I may call it such, is crazier than all the rest put together. We are not born with a knowledge of geology or biology or genetics or paleontology or morphology --- but even as children we all understood human nature just by instinct, like we could throw or catch a ball without learning physics.

You have managed to suppress this ability. You are incapable of even reaching the most basic and obvious conclusions to be drawn from the behavior of others.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 139 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-14-2006 12:33 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

  
Annafan
Member (Idle past 2654 days)
Posts: 418
From: Belgium
Joined: 08-08-2005


Message 142 of 177 (340439)
08-16-2006 6:31 AM
Reply to: Message 139 by Hyroglyphx
08-14-2006 12:33 PM


Re: What atheism really means
NJ writes:

quote:
I would say I'm an "Atheist", only because the word "Theist" exists.

The only purpose words serve are to convey meanings toward descriptions. Did you listen to the link I sent you? The narrator goes into this very thing. You are against a concept, not a meaningless word.

So? Do you think something can't be imaginary and silly just because it wears the label "concept"?

NJ writes:

quote:
Think about it: from our point of view, a-theism could be seen as a lack of something that doesn't exist. Which is... utter nonsense. Yet another illustration that, by itself, it doesn't even need a word. It only exists indirectly because of the word "theism".

There is only one answer that makes any sense for anyone would obstinantly oppose a notion they don't believe exists in the first place.

Oppose?

I'm pretty sure it's just as useless as all the previous attempts, but I'll try it again:

Put aside all you believe and imagine a time and place where:

a) Gods don't exist
b) nobody talks about these non-existing Gods

In this world, the word "Atheist" doesn't exist. There IS no issue. This is the world Annafan lives in by default.

Now somebody comes along and starts talking about God. He calls himself a "Theist", and since he notices that not everybody follows him in his delusion, he needs to make a distinction between his sort of people and the others. Thus, together with the word "Theist", he invents the word "Atheist". Suddenly, normal people become "Atheists". They didn't do anything for that. They didn't ask for it. It was ASSIGNED. They didn't suddenly start to 'oppose' something, in order to deserve their qualification. Simply "existing" seems to be enough, lol.

NJ writes:

Only one person has said it and he summed it up in one sentence. There is only one reason for the atheist to care enough about the subject, aside from what I asserted. Who can figure it out? It was robinrohan who stated it. Everything else defies logic.

I think it's best to "agree to disagree". Which, through the Nemesis filter, probably sounds more like "agree to agree" anyway, lol.

So I throw the towel and officially recognise Nemesis Juggernaut as the ultimate authority in what Annafan feels and thinks.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 139 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-14-2006 12:33 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

    
robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 143 of 177 (340449)
08-16-2006 8:03 AM
Reply to: Message 139 by Hyroglyphx
08-14-2006 12:33 PM


Re: What atheism really means
It was robinrohan who stated it.

I guess you mean when I said I wasn't certain? NO, I'm not certain that God doesn't exist. I would like to be certain one way or the other.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 139 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-14-2006 12:33 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

  
Archer Opteryx
Member (Idle past 1673 days)
Posts: 1811
From: East Asia
Joined: 08-16-2006


Message 144 of 177 (340468)
08-16-2006 10:29 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by Hyroglyphx
08-11-2006 12:52 PM


Re: those 'rabid' atheists
See Message 145.

Edited by Archer Opterix, : I accidentally posted twice.
(Sorry folks. I'm still evolving.)


Archer
_
This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-11-2006 12:52 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

  
Archer Opteryx
Member (Idle past 1673 days)
Posts: 1811
From: East Asia
Joined: 08-16-2006


Message 145 of 177 (340469)
08-16-2006 10:31 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by Hyroglyphx
08-11-2006 12:52 PM


Re: those 'rabid' atheists
nemesis juggernaut writes:

If atheists claim they don't believe in God, then why spend so much time showing all of us just how much they disbelieve?

Have you considered that atheists' presentation of their views might also represent a normal part of a normal conversation about beliefs? A conversation is a dialogue.

Consider, too, that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Have you given any thought to the possibility that aggressive proselytizing efforts by theists over the years might be one factor in the intensity of response you see from atheists?

If they truly disbelieved, then what compulsion is there is in telling us all about it? Who cares, right? Why not just choose something arbitrary to get angry about?

One could ask theists, by the same logic, why so many of them feel the compulsion to proselytize. If the existence of their deity is as self-evident as they say, belief will come naturally. The chatter should be unnecessary.

This leads me to believe that there is something in themselves that recognizes God as a threat. But a threat only comes from a fear that He might just exist.

That's a big stretch. And an invalid premise.

Faced with aggressive efforts to proselytize them, people often feel something they value is under threat. But it's silly to say the feeling can come 'only' from one thing. People can, and do, perceive a threat toward a number of things they value, including these:

- Rational discourse.

- Intellectual honesty.

- Good taste.

- Religious tolerance.

- Mutual acceptance.

- Productive use of time.

- Quality of public school education.

- Freedom to maintain one's beliefs in an atmosphere of respect.

...To suggest a few.

It is thus not realistic, in our diverse world, to imagine that everyone who disagrees with you does so only out of a secret fear that you are right. But I can see how this would be reassuring if one wants to think one is special.

The best way for them to argue for their own atheism is not to engage in an argument.

The logic escapes me but I can see why you like the picture. Non-resistance makes it easier for the mighty juggernaut to blow through the town, doesn't it? It's harder for a juggernaut to make headway when it gets caught in a game of bumper cars. Now it takes rude hits, it gets pounded on every blind spot, it makes negligible forward progress, and the whole scene inspires more amusement from witnesses than awe. In fact, a vehicle caught in a game of bumper cars ends up looking not much like a juggernaut at all. It looks more like just another bumper car in a crowded game of bumper cars.

Talking about God only ensures that the concept of God will always exist. If they simply gave it no thought and refused to spend ridiculous amounts of time trying to disprove God, this would show everyone their truest intent. Does that make sense?

As much sense as it makes to say the flip side of it: Theists should stop talking about God, because talking about God only ensures that the concept of atheism will always exist.

How much sense does that make to you?

[....] But had they figured out that not talking about God is the best way to deny God, they might not be in this precarious situation that they're in.

But again, by your same reasoning: Not talking about God is also the best way to affirm God. Precarious situations can take interesting forms.

Imagine you are sitting on the bus. The passenger next to you grabs you by the arm and says 'Hey, my heart is beating! I'm so glad my heart beats! Want to hear my heart beat? How lucky I am to have a heart that beats! You should take one of these pamphlets about heart disease and heartbeats. I carry these with me everywhere I go! Boy, I'm so glad I'm not one of those stupid people whose heart doesn't beat. I'm just a juggernaut of heart-beating energy! I'm glad my heart beats! Want to feel my heart beat? The first thing I do every morning is feel my heart beat! The last thing I do every night is feel my heart beat! I just want to feel my heart beat all the day long! By the way, have I mentioned lately that my heart beats?'

What do you think if you meet someone like this? Do you think you have met a person who is confident? Who is in excellent health?

Or do you rather suspect the opposite?


Archer
_
This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-11-2006 12:52 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 146 by Phat, posted 08-16-2006 10:53 AM Archer Opteryx has not yet responded
 Message 148 by Annafan, posted 08-16-2006 11:34 AM Archer Opteryx has not yet responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 12159
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 146 of 177 (340474)
08-16-2006 10:53 AM
Reply to: Message 145 by Archer Opteryx
08-16-2006 10:31 AM


Re: those 'rabid' atheists
Archer Opterix writes:

One could ask theists, by the same logic, why so many of them feel the compulsion to proselytize. If the existence of their deity is as self-evident as they say, belief will come naturally. The chatter should be unnecessary.

I quite agree. :) Welcome to EvC, Archer!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 145 by Archer Opteryx, posted 08-16-2006 10:31 AM Archer Opteryx has not yet responded

  
Tusko
Member
Posts: 605
From: London, UK
Joined: 10-01-2004


Message 147 of 177 (340475)
08-16-2006 10:54 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by Hyroglyphx
08-11-2006 12:52 PM


Re: Welcome to EvC
nemesis_juggernaut writes:

If atheists claim they don't believe in God, then why spend so much time showing all of us just how much they disbelieve?

There are two reasons why I think this is a bit of a silly idea. Apologies if someone else has already noted them, I just noticed this thread and haven't read it all.

1) Does my desire to engage in theological debate with people who believe in any god increase the likelyhood that their particular god or gods exist?

2) Does the fact that I think the death penalty is a bad idea and I tell people this make the death penalty a better idea than if I just kept my thoughts to myself?

Added by edit:
I read on a bit more, and saw that you were musing why it was predominantly a christian god that we are debating here. I would have thought that would be obvious - No-one is making claims about Freya or Ra here that I profoundly disagree with. If however, someone made an argument for the existence of Shiva or Quetzacoutl(sp?) here that I considered to be fallacious, I wouldn't be any less interested in debating the point. But they aren't. I'd ascribe this to no more profound reason than that there are a lot more people who believe in a Christian God who speak English and thus wash up on EvC's balmy shores. Do you think different?

Edited by Tusko, : I added more when it became clear my initial comments were a bit out of date


This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-11-2006 12:52 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

  
Annafan
Member (Idle past 2654 days)
Posts: 418
From: Belgium
Joined: 08-08-2005


Message 148 of 177 (340486)
08-16-2006 11:34 AM
Reply to: Message 145 by Archer Opteryx
08-16-2006 10:31 AM


Re: those 'rabid' atheists
That was a truly great post. At times like these, I regret my inadequate English. :) Although the biggest problem is probably that most of this should be so self-evident that it is quite hard to even start explaining it... Hope to see more contributions of you old transitional, lol
This message is a reply to:
 Message 145 by Archer Opteryx, posted 08-16-2006 10:31 AM Archer Opteryx has not yet responded

    
Annafan
Member (Idle past 2654 days)
Posts: 418
From: Belgium
Joined: 08-08-2005


Message 149 of 177 (340491)
08-16-2006 11:44 AM
Reply to: Message 137 by Hyroglyphx
08-14-2006 12:24 PM


Re: Welcome to EvC
NJ writes:

quote:
Like I pointed out in your poll, I remain sort of agnostic towards a 'first cause' God, but on the other hand firmly atheist when it comes to a benevolent, watching-over-everything God. So depending on what kind of God the person who asks me, refers to, my answer should be different.

Those are typically referred to as Deists. According to the Judeo-Christian God, YHWH, He created everything in six days, then He rested on the seventh. From then on, He intercedes on behalf of those who would call on Him. According to Deists, God created the atom on the first day, then He's rested ever since then.

I'm not quite a Deist though... When I say I'm agnostic towards a first-cause God, it's not really in the way that I somehow "have a desire to know, but think that it is inherently unknowable". I simply don't feel it is worth trying to find out, at all. But on the other hand, I would not define it as an absolute certainty (in which case I would maybe be more inclined to call it a truely atheist position even towards a first-cause diety) since there seems to be no absolutely objective, scientific test to warrant absolute certainty.

Considering the existence of a diety simply doesn't have a place in my life, to put it simply.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 137 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-14-2006 12:24 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 150 by robinrohan, posted 08-16-2006 11:59 AM Annafan has responded

    
robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 150 of 177 (340493)
08-16-2006 11:59 AM
Reply to: Message 149 by Annafan
08-16-2006 11:44 AM


Re: Welcome to EvC
Considering the existence of a diety simply doesn't have a place in my life, to put it simply.

How very odd. "Considering" it seems to me like something very natural.

Edited by robinrohan, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 149 by Annafan, posted 08-16-2006 11:44 AM Annafan has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 151 by Annafan, posted 08-16-2006 12:31 PM robinrohan has not yet responded

  
Prev1
...
789
10
1112Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019