Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Percy is a Deist - Now what's the difference between a deist and an atheist?
petrophysics1
Inactive Member


Message 144 of 375 (499547)
02-19-2009 6:58 AM
Reply to: Message 140 by RAZD
02-18-2009 11:32 PM


compare & contrast D & A
The atheist says:
All other people’s observations and experience are totally and purely subjective, so any decisions, conclusions, or beliefs they have based on them are irrational
My observation of no evidence is the only objective experience and observation in existence.
How rational does this sound? I tested this observation of atheists on this board by mentioning a large meteor I’d seen when I was 16. True to form they did not believe me, and suggested I didn’t see what I saw. No point in answering them as if they won’t accept a commonly know physical event that I experienced, they would deny about anything else I’d have to say regarding the spiritual.
4:46 Pm EST Dec 9, 1965
The Fireball of December 9, 1965-Part I - NASA/ADS
As a deist I say:
I NEED TO BE VERY CAREFUL ABOUT BIASING EVIDENCE/EXPERIENCE IN ANY WAY.
There appears to be more going on here than just our easily observed physical reality.
God exists.
God does not appear to be doing anything in this universe, but I am interested in hearing about any observations you might have that He is.
I have no idea how this universe came to be, and will consider all possibilities
Man is a spiritual being, who has probably lived many times; at least I am and have
I do not discount out of hand other people’s experience. I want to hear about it even if I don’t agree with their interpretation of it. The evidence still exists, what it means is the question.
"Don’t believe what I say, look for yourself and see what you find
The essential similarity with all people is that we base our opinions on our world views, where world views are based on experience and knowledge. The belief comes first, then it is justified by applying our world view to the belief.
I do not completely agree with this although I have observed this bias. In fact when training new exploration geologists for a major oil company I would not allow them to read any scientific papers about the area they were assigned to. If they did I could see it bias their interpretation of the raw data. (You’ll never find an undiscovered oil and gas deposit in a scientific paper.)
At some point in your life, the experience came first; from it you built your world view. Now you must take care to eliminate that bias.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 140 by RAZD, posted 02-18-2009 11:32 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
petrophysics1
Inactive Member


Message 282 of 375 (503276)
03-17-2009 8:10 AM
Reply to: Message 281 by Straggler
03-17-2009 1:05 AM


Re: "Absence" Of Evidence
Yes, let's be honest.
Straggler and RAZD both observe the world and make interpretations of what occurs here.
What is the probability that their observations and then their interpretations are correct?
Well for RAZD it would be "B.high or perhaps almost certain to be verified" (if it is something that can be verified). I also have a high level of confidence in his ability to observe the world without bias.
For Staggler it would be "D.Low or perhaps essentially zero" I have no confidence in his ability to observe the world without bias.
My observation is based on having read thousands of each of their posts, nothing more or less.
It appears to me both atheists and creationists in general bias their observation of the world while deists in general do not.
A deist considers all of human existence and experience while the atheist and creationist picks and chooses what to deny out of hand.
A deist has no "answers" for you, you must find it out for yourself, they are not sure of the answers to this existence so are always looking.
The atheist and creationist both know completely what is going on here, and will tell you over, and over, and over, and over, and over again how they have it all figured out. Don't agree with them and you are bound for hell, or irrational with your brains spilling out on the floor.
The difference between deists and atheists/creationists is actually quite large psychologically.
Edited by petrophysics1, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 281 by Straggler, posted 03-17-2009 1:05 AM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 283 by Modulous, posted 03-17-2009 8:40 AM petrophysics1 has not replied
 Message 284 by Straggler, posted 03-17-2009 9:12 AM petrophysics1 has not replied
 Message 285 by mark24, posted 03-17-2009 1:05 PM petrophysics1 has not replied
 Message 291 by RAZD, posted 03-17-2009 7:52 PM petrophysics1 has not replied

  
petrophysics1
Inactive Member


Message 356 of 375 (504275)
03-26-2009 8:08 AM
Reply to: Message 353 by Minnemooseus
03-26-2009 3:53 AM


Re: Doin' the deist/atheist flip-flop
Moose
350 posts and you still don’t get it.
Consider your life and who you are. Are you the result of only things which CAN BE REPEATED and TESTED. At 4:46PM EST on Dec.9,1965 I saw a large meteor, can’t repeat that, can’t test it, there is no physical evidence of it, so does that mean it didn’t exist and that it didn’t happen?
It doesn’t matter to me or any rational person that it was reported in the papers or reported to be seen by people from Toronto to Detroit, it exists because I saw it. If I was the only person who saw it, it doesn’t change a thing, except if fools like Straggler believe me. Who cares? Who died and made him or you the God of what is acceptable human experience?
Do fantastic claims require fantastic evidence? No they require the same evidence as everything else. For that matter WHO decides what is fantastic.
In Straggler’s thread on morality being relative his main point is that asking anyone about morals yields differing opinions. This therefore proves his point that morals are relative and made up by people. Is this the same standard of evidence he is using here?
Why doesn’t he just go out and ask ANYONE what they think about god/s. It was acceptable for him with morality. Why not here? Or did RAZD see the same thing I did?
Straggler changes his evidence criteria to push his belief agenda. Does RAZD do that? Not that I can see. He appears to use, like everyone in real life, all of his experience regardless if it can be reproduced or tested. He weights it differently and that depends on his viewpoint and past subjective experience. No one operates in life like Straggler is suggesting, and he knows that.
I don’t see much difference between some theists and atheists and they produce the same results in history. Theists have been killing others for their god for centuries. Atheists like Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot have done the same. Straggler has made scores and scores of posts here, just like some born again Christian nutcase. He can’t have RAZD being different. Now, why does that remind me of Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot?
Name a deist who has done likewise. There maybe one, but I can’t think of any.
Deists have pissed lots of people off. They wrote this
we hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights.
The major religions had over a thousand years to say the same, and never did. No atheist would have written that either.
Still don’t see the difference?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 353 by Minnemooseus, posted 03-26-2009 3:53 AM Minnemooseus has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 357 by mark24, posted 03-26-2009 3:07 PM petrophysics1 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