Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery

Magic-Mushrooms-Shop.com
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Unfolding Nature Shop: Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |  [ show all ]
Re: Atheistic vs. theistic killing [Re: thefloodbehind]
    #15343189 -

Ah yes, the words of a dead, alcoholic, wife-beater to the rescue. That was a great addition to the thread. :rolleyes:


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Atheistic vs. theistic killing [Re: Icelander]
    #15343197 -

OrgoneConclusion said:
Quote:
Jeffrey Dahmer, an infamous serial killer and atheist sentenced to 900 years in prison, said “if a person doesn’t think that there is a God to be accountable to, then what’s the point of trying to modify your behavior to keep it within acceptable ranges?”.


It has already been shown that a belief in God is not a deterrent to any form of behavior so I have no idea what point you are attempting to make.


this example disproves that because in this case, all the information suggests that belief in god may have very well prevented his crimes.

My point is non-belief in god is not a deterrent to any form of behavior either, and in that mathematical equation you opened this thread with, there's nothing atheism has over theism.

If this man believed in god, it might have stopped him from killing. If religious murderers didn't believe in god it might have stopped them from killing.

Or maybe neither would have stopped either of them from killing? Maybe they would've killed anyway and maybe that's my larger point, that it's not about religion or non-religion and that people are gonna find whatever belief that is within their socio-economic-geographic-psychologic grasp to do whatever it is and exist in whatever way they have to/want to

Icelander said:
It's all power dude.  In this life or the next. Power over anxiety. Power over others. Power over belief.  It's all the same, atheist, religious, politico, mom and dad.


bed time for me, thanks for the brain food shroomerites

Edited by helix (11/09/11 06:45 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Atheistic vs. theistic killing [Re: helix]
    #15343207 -

OrgoneConclusion said:
Ah yes, the words of a dead, alcoholic, wife-beater to the rescue. That was a great addition to the thread. :rolleyes:


Fuck you and your ad motherfucking hominem bullshit (edit: this is for literary effect, I'm not really trying to attack you).

Just because someone has problems doesn't mean they're wrong. Fuck, Nietzsche lost most of his friends, only got laid via prostitutes, and went insane. Pretty sure he still had one of the most cutting insights into the human condition this side of the big bang.

Like your bud Icelander seems to think:

"There is no doubt that healthy-mindedness is inadequate as a philosophical doctrine, because the evil facts that it positively refuses to account for are a genuine portion of reality; and they may after all be the best key to life's significance, and possibly the only openers of our eyes to the deepest levels of truth." - William James

Edited by thefloodbehind (11/09/11 06:26 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Atheistic vs. theistic killing [Re: thefloodbehind]
    #15344141 -

your ad motherfucking hominem bullshit

Actually, I believe the ad hominem is not fallacious in this specific case. From the Fallacies of Philosophical Debate sticky:

Ad hominem is not fallacious if the attack goes to the credibility of the argument. For instance, the argument may depend on its presenter's claim that he's an expert. That is, there is an Argument From Authority. Trial judges allow this category of attacks. In this very narrow case, the Ad hominem is valid because the foundation of the counter-argument is the opponent making claims based on his status as an expert.

Since you're using Alan Watts as an expert on mysticism to support your argument, then his personal qualifications and status as an alcoholic wife-beater are apropos to the debate, hence the ad hominem is not fallacious. :shrug:


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Atheistic vs. theistic killing [Re: Diploid]
    #15344157 -

fallacious.

For some reason this word reminds me of something. :confused:

Oh yeah, my ex. :lol: God rest her soul.


--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.

" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.

With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Atheistic vs. theistic killing [Re: Diploid]
    #15344203 -

Diploid said:
your ad motherfucking hominem bullshit

Actually, I believe the ad hominem is not fallacious in this specific case. From the Fallacies of Philosophical Debate sticky:

Ad hominem is not fallacious if the attack goes to the credibility of the argument. For instance, the argument may depend on its presenter's claim that he's an expert. That is, there is an Argument From Authority. Trial judges allow this category of attacks. In this very narrow case, the Ad hominem is valid because the foundation of the counter-argument is the opponent making claims based on his status as an expert.

Since you're using Alan Watts as an expert on mysticism to support your argument, then his personal qualifications and status as an alcoholic wife-beater are apropos to the debate, hence the ad hominem is not fallacious. :shrug:


How so? There's such a thing as dark mysticism. "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law." So Mr. Watts liked getting fucked up and got violent with his wife a bit. Maybe she liked it.

And dude, he was probably battling delusions of grandeur on the daily. I don't blame him for getting his drunk on.

Edited by thefloodbehind (11/09/11 03:57 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Atheistic vs. theistic killing [Re: Icelander]
    #15344268 -

OrgoneConclusion said:
These guys keep missing the point no matter how clearly it is explained. I knew the +1 extra reason to kill was going to stump the brilliant thinkers here.


I will try one last time:

Am atheist would never kill for a belief in an ancient scripture nor for an all powerful being. Never.

Someone please name a reason that an atheist might kill that a theist would never ever do so for. (And try to do it WITHOUT using The True Scotsman Fallacy!)


Icelander beat me to it.

Icelander said:
Don't know what that fallacy is but an atheist might kill because someone believed in a god.


Militant atheist kills believer for believing in ancient scripture and God. See: Mao, Chairman


--------------------
In the name of God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful
Read, in the name of your Lord, who created.
He created man from an embryo.
Read, and your Lord, Most Exalted.
Teaches by means of the pen.
He teaches man what he never knew.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Atheistic vs. theistic killing [Re: thefloodbehind]
    #15344310 -

There's such a think as dark mysticism. "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law." So Mr. Watts liked getting fucked up and got violent with his wife a bit. Maybe she liked it.

If this is so, you may have a valid argument but it looked like you were quoting him to support non-dark mysticism.

In any case, my comment doesn't go to the quality of your argument, only to the fact that since you're using Watts as a mysticism expert, he personally becomes fair game in the debate. It's a narrow exception to the ad hominem fallacy.

In court, you generally can't bring up a witness' job competence on direct or cross. It's not relevant. But if he's an expert witness, then you can because his competence bears on the weight a jury will give his expert opinion.


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Atheistic vs. theistic killing [Re: Psychopharmakos]
    #15344331 -

Militant atheist kills believer for believing in ancient scripture and God. See: Mao, Chairman

You're STILL not getting it.

Third try: Mao killed because he was a mean asshole, or for revenge, or for power, or out of jealousy, or for other reasons not to do with faith. He didn't kill because he thought that god wanted him to.

Meanwhile, Muslims kill for all of the above reasons AND ALSO because allah tells them to. Catholics kill for all of the above reasons AND ALSO because god tells them to.

Do you get it yet?


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Atheistic vs. theistic killing [Re: Icelander]
    #15344350 -

Icelander said:
fallacious.

For some reason this word reminds me of something. :confused:

Oh yeah, my ex. :lol: God rest her soul.



Fallacious is the present. Fallacio is the past. :shrug:


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Atheistic vs. theistic killing [Re: Diploid]
    #15344354 -

Diploid said:
Militant atheist kills believer for believing in ancient scripture and God. See: Mao, Chairman

You're STILL not getting it.

Third try: Mao killed because he was a mean asshole, or for revenge, or for power, or out of jealousy, or for other reasons not to do with faith. He didn't kill because he thought that god wanted him to.

Meanwhile, Muslims kill for all of the above reasons AND ALSO because allah tells them to. Catholics kill for all of the above reasons AND ALSO because god tells them to.

Do you get it yet?



I can't hear you! *plugs ears* La la lala la la!


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Atheistic vs. theistic killing [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
    #15344362 -

OrgoneConclusion said:
Icelander said:
fallacious.

For some reason this word reminds me of something. :confused:

Oh yeah, my ex. :lol: God rest her soul.



Fallacious is the present. Fallacio is the past. :shrug:


:sad: Well got to take the good with the bad.


--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.

" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.

With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Atheistic vs. theistic killing [Re: helix]
    #15344428 -

Diploid said:
Militant atheist kills believer for believing in ancient scripture and God. See: Mao, Chairman

You're STILL not getting it.

Third try: Mao killed because he was a mean asshole, or for revenge, or for power, or out of jealousy, or for other reasons not to do with faith. He didn't kill because he thought that god wanted him to.

Meanwhile, Muslims kill for all of the above reasons AND ALSO because allah tells them to. Catholics kill for all of the above reasons AND ALSO because god tells them to.

Do you get it yet?


We're running in circles here. :willynilly:

Please show me exactly where in the following train of thought is my argument not a valid response to this argument so that i can shut up or we can move forward

This argument^ rests on the idea that that religious people have one more reason to kill than atheists, right? But as this example shows, that is not true.

:
aronf13 said:
OrgoneConclusion said:
These guys keep missing the point no matter how clearly it is explained. I knew the +1 extra reason to kill was going to stump the brilliant thinkers here.


I will try one last time:

Am atheist would never kill for a belief in an ancient scripture nor for an all powerful being. Never.

Someone please name a reason that an atheist might kill that a theist would never ever do so for. (And try to do it WITHOUT using The True Scotsman Fallacy!)


Jeffrey Dahmer, an infamous serial killer and atheist sentenced to 900 years in prison, said “if a person doesn’t think that there is a God to be accountable to, then what’s the point of trying to modify your behavior to keep it within acceptable ranges?”. He brutally killed seventeen men and boys, dismembering them, storing their parts and indulging in cannibalism and necrophilia. In 1991, he was caught by the police after one of his would-be victims escaped.


Atheists have also have ONE REASON to kill that any religious person does NOT have. This puts them at even, right? The +1 argument doesn't hold

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Atheistic vs. theistic killing [Re: helix]
    #15344646 -

aronf13 said:
Atheists have also have ONE REASON to kill that any religious person does NOT have. This puts them at even, right? The +1 argument doesn't hold


Exactly!


--------------------
In the name of God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful
Read, in the name of your Lord, who created.
He created man from an embryo.
Read, and your Lord, Most Exalted.
Teaches by means of the pen.
He teaches man what he never knew.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Atheistic vs. theistic killing [Re: Diploid]
    #15345135 -

Diploid said:
Militant atheist kills believer for believing in ancient scripture and God. See: Mao, Chairman

You're STILL not getting it.

Third try: Mao killed because he was a mean asshole, or for revenge, or for power, or out of jealousy, or for other reasons not to do with faith. He didn't kill because he thought that god wanted him to.

Meanwhile, Muslims kill for all of the above reasons AND ALSO because allah tells them to. Catholics kill for all of the above reasons AND ALSO because god tells them to.

Do you get it yet?


4th try. Mao violently eradicated religious people from china, to impose State Atheism as part of his doctrine. He did in fact kill people for THEIR belief in a god. This is a proven fact.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_atheism


--------------------
[EQ Tub]|[Penis]|[Rez]|[APE]

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Atheistic vs. theistic killing [Re: helix]
    #15345163 -

Some people like running in circles.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Atheistic vs. theistic killing [Re: thefloodbehind]
    #15345774 -

thefloodbehind said:
Some people like running in circles.


Welcome to PS&P.


--------------------
Enlil said:
You really are the worst kind of person.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Atheistic vs. theistic killing [Re: EliteAmericans]
    #15345781 -

He did in fact kill people for THEIR belief in a god.

But not because god told him to.

/sigh


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Atheistic vs. theistic killing [Re: Diploid]
    #15345834 -

Diploid said:
He did in fact kill people for THEIR belief in a god.

But not because god told him to.

/sigh



So what? The fact of the matter is that people have and do kill in the name of atheism, just like they kill in the name of God. The binary perspective you are imposing on theism and the people who do or don't practice it is childish and provincial at best; and virulently dogmatic at worst.

Furthermore, you are taking the semantics of mass murderers at face value. I can only guess you have been doing this for a long time, because when you say things such as "Theists are inherently irrational" based upon your superficial view of beliefs you demonstrably can't understand, you are promoting the very same kind of ideological hatred that leads to genocide and religious war.

I know you think that human beings are cruel, miserable creatures, and that the world is a sad, ugly place. I agree - specifically, because of people like you.

Now let us all say a prayer of thanks that Diploid's power does not reach beyond the capacity to ban people from the Shroomery.

Edited by Tchan909 (11/09/11 08:08 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Atheistic vs. theistic killing [Re: Sophistic Radiance] * 1
    #15345845 -

Equally fascinating is the fact that single people never kill their spouses.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |  [ show all ]

Unfolding Nature Shop: Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* are buddhists atheist?
( 1 2 all )		 purenergy 3,655 26 09/29/03 07:40 AM
by chrispc
* Christians v. Lions Frog 639 3 12/09/03 02:34 AM
by Frog
* Why are atheists more moral?
( 1 2 3 all )		 Swami 3,611 44 12/07/03 11:09 PM
by enotake2
* the Muslim and the Atheist Zahid 1,282 9 07/26/02 04:13 PM
by Anonymous
* Bigotry and stinginess are affronts to God! OrgoneConclusion 426 4 10/26/13 02:27 PM
by NetDiver
* Some Christians and the Atheist
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 all )		 Swami 15,252 119 07/31/02 09:19 AM
by Sclorch
* Agnostics and atheists will you succumb just before the end?
( 1 2 all )		 Scarfmeister 3,714 25 04/23/03 08:18 PM
by CeeEssGee
* Atheist Website responds to Christian Letter
( 1 2 all )		 Swami 4,276 20 06/22/03 05:55 PM
by Sclorch

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
3,528 topic views. 2 members, 60 guests and 30 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.029 seconds spending 0.006 seconds on 18 queries.