Home | Community | Message Board

Cannabis Seeds Zamnesia
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


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!

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom

Jump to first unread post Pages: < First | < Back | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | Next > | Last >
Offlineclam_dude
stranger in astrange land

Registered: 09/10/03
Posts: 1,717
Loc: twilight zone
Last seen: 6 years, 3 months
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: teknix]
    #17796166 - 02/13/13 03:58 PM (10 years, 11 months ago)

Einstein didn't believe in a god that intervenes in human affairs.  I agree with Einstein on this.  And if god doesn't intervene in human affairs, the it doesn't matter to me if it exists or not.  So it's not that I disbelieve in God, it's just that it's a non-issue.  Sure, maybe there is a "god" that doesn't intervene in human affairs.  But then why would anyone concern themselves with this god?  I would argue that it's an inappropriate us of the word "god."  Do you understand what I'm saying? Why have a placeholder word for something that has yet to be defined/discovered?


--------------------
"I would like to thank god for making me an atheist" - Ricky Gervais


Edited by clam_dude (02/13/13 03:59 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineclam_dude
stranger in astrange land

Registered: 09/10/03
Posts: 1,717
Loc: twilight zone
Last seen: 6 years, 3 months
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: teknix]
    #17796181 - 02/13/13 04:02 PM (10 years, 11 months ago)

Quote:

teknix said:
If you lack a belief in god then you would be agnostic. Because you don't know either way. If you disbelieve in god then you are athiest.




Would you say that you don't believe in the tooth fairy?


--------------------
"I would like to thank god for making me an atheist" - Ricky Gervais


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinesonamdrukpa
Wayfarer


Registered: 10/18/11
Posts: 2,777
Last seen: 2 months, 7 days
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: clam_dude]
    #17796464 - 02/13/13 04:52 PM (10 years, 11 months ago)

Quote:

As for not merely being my body, I'm not exactly sure what you mean.  I'm a materialist myself, and think we are just atoms.  If there is something else, then what is it?




There are also emergent phenomenon.  For reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epiphenomenalism

Quote:

If somebody says to me in conversation that "peace is a concept", I go with them and know what they mean.  In conversational english, it's fine.  But technically, a concept of peace is a concept.




No, peace itself is a concept even in the strictest sense of the word - what kind of odd definition of "concept" do you have where abstractions like peace aren't concepts?  Would you really cop to a proposition like "3 isn't a concept - only my concept of 3 is!"?

Quote:

However, a word like "peace," does not describe a physical entity anyway.  It is, as you say, more abstract.  It is more loosely defined, and therefore, it's definition could be taken to mean "concept of peace".




No, what the word "peace" refers to is peace.  The definition is the "concept of peace", true, but propositions involving the word "peace" are judged on the qualities of peace itself, not on the concept of peace.  Otherwise, if I said, "I wish there were peace in the world" I would be wishing for something that's already happened - the concept of peace already exists.

One of the qualities of peace is that it is an abstraction.  It is a concept.  Concepts are abstractions.  Concepts don't have to be actively conceived in order to still be conceptions.  The number 3 would still be a concept even if people had never evolved to think it.

Quote:

But an apple is not a concept.  And so if you want to put god in the category of words like "love," "peace," "happiness," etc....then fine, but that's just an admission that it's not a physical being.




No, it's not, any more than saying money is a concept is an admission that there is no physical incarnations of the concept - dollar bills, coins, etc.  A quarter is money, even if money is an abstraction.

Quote:

The bible is important in understanding history.  But there's no reason to believe that anything in it is inherently true, or relevant in today's world....other than in the context of understanding history.




If you're gay, you can be prevented from seeing your dying spouse in the hospital because they're not legally your spouse because gay people can't get married in most of this country...because in Leviticus 18:22 it says "One should not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable." and voters care about that.  I can come up with a thousand similar examples.  You may think that the Bible is irrelevant to today's world, but it clearly is.  I think you're confusing "should be relevant" with "is relevant".


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


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinesonamdrukpa
Wayfarer


Registered: 10/18/11
Posts: 2,777
Last seen: 2 months, 7 days
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: clam_dude]
    #17796556 - 02/13/13 05:07 PM (10 years, 11 months ago)

Quote:

clam_dude said:
Quote:

sonamdrukpa said:
I spoke wrongly, but that actually makes my point more clear: disbelief in God is required to be an atheist; lack of belief is not.  A lack of evidence for the existence of 3 is, to fix the analogy, similarly not sufficient to be an athree-ist, since that would require disbelief.





I don't think I responded well enough to this last time.  You can't compare 3 to "god." That is a category error.  3 is a concept.  Here it's appropriate to say that, as I explained with "peace." So if you want to say that "god," too, is just a concept, then fine.  But then it's not a physical entity.  If you want a more accurate analogy, just take the tooth fairy (defined for this purpose as a physical entity). 

Do you believe in the tooth fairy?  If not, would you call yourself an a-toothfairyest?  I would. 

If you think god is a physical entity, then compare it to a physical entity
If you think god is a concept, then compare it to a concept.

But you can't have it both ways.




Regardless of your personal definition of what a concept is, the analogy still holds.  I don't believe in [some primitive culture's boogeyman that I've never heard of], but that doesn't make me an a-[some primitive culture's boogeyman that I've never heard of]-ist.  And I've never believed in the existence of [some number I've never thought about], but that doesn't make me an a-[some number I've never thought about]-ist. 

I am an a-toothfairy-ist, and that is because I actively deny the existence of the tooth fairy.  People in Finland that have never heard of the tooth fairy are not a-toothfairy-ists.  Active disbelief is required to be an atheist, regardless of whether or not you think God is a concept or a physical being or both.


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


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAlphaFalfa
imagine


Registered: 06/16/08
Posts: 3,857
Loc: 3 Seconds Ago. Flag
Last seen: 9 years, 10 months
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: sonamdrukpa]
    #17796818 - 02/13/13 05:52 PM (10 years, 11 months ago)

Quote:

sonamdrukpa said:
Quote:

clam_dude said:
Quote:

sonamdrukpa said:
I spoke wrongly, but that actually makes my point more clear: disbelief in God is required to be an atheist; lack of belief is not.  A lack of evidence for the existence of 3 is, to fix the analogy, similarly not sufficient to be an athree-ist, since that would require disbelief.





I don't think I responded well enough to this last time.  You can't compare 3 to "god." That is a category error.  3 is a concept.  Here it's appropriate to say that, as I explained with "peace." So if you want to say that "god," too, is just a concept, then fine.  But then it's not a physical entity.  If you want a more accurate analogy, just take the tooth fairy (defined for this purpose as a physical entity). 

Do you believe in the tooth fairy?  If not, would you call yourself an a-toothfairyest?  I would. 

If you think god is a physical entity, then compare it to a physical entity
If you think god is a concept, then compare it to a concept.

But you can't have it both ways.




Regardless of your personal definition of what a concept is, the analogy still holds.  I don't believe in [some primitive culture's boogeyman that I've never heard of], but that doesn't make me an a-[some primitive culture's boogeyman that I've never heard of]-ist.  And I've never believed in the existence of [some number I've never thought about], but that doesn't make me an a-[some number I've never thought about]-ist. 

I am an a-toothfairy-ist, and that is because I actively deny the existence of the tooth fairy.  People in Finland that have never heard of the tooth fairy are not a-toothfairy-ists.  Active disbelief is required to be an atheist, regardless of whether or not you think God is a concept or a physical being or both.





Gods MOM is a physical being.

BITCH WHAT!!!


--------------------
if you ever feel lost, just remember, life is not a journey, it is entertainment, all 4 fun...



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineclam_dude
stranger in astrange land

Registered: 09/10/03
Posts: 1,717
Loc: twilight zone
Last seen: 6 years, 3 months
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: sonamdrukpa]
    #17797000 - 02/13/13 06:23 PM (10 years, 11 months ago)

Quote:

sonamdrukpa said:
Quote:

clam_dude said:
Quote:

sonamdrukpa said:
I spoke wrongly, but that actually makes my point more clear: disbelief in God is required to be an atheist; lack of belief is not.  A lack of evidence for the existence of 3 is, to fix the analogy, similarly not sufficient to be an athree-ist, since that would require disbelief.





I don't think I responded well enough to this last time.  You can't compare 3 to "god." That is a category error.  3 is a concept.  Here it's appropriate to say that, as I explained with "peace." So if you want to say that "god," too, is just a concept, then fine.  But then it's not a physical entity.  If you want a more accurate analogy, just take the tooth fairy (defined for this purpose as a physical entity). 

Do you believe in the tooth fairy?  If not, would you call yourself an a-toothfairyest?  I would. 

If you think god is a physical entity, then compare it to a physical entity
If you think god is a concept, then compare it to a concept.

But you can't have it both ways.




Regardless of your personal definition of what a concept is, the analogy still holds.  I don't believe in [some primitive culture's boogeyman that I've never heard of], but that doesn't make me an a-[some primitive culture's boogeyman that I've never heard of]-ist.  And I've never believed in the existence of [some number I've never thought about], but that doesn't make me an a-[some number I've never thought about]-ist. 

I am an a-toothfairy-ist, and that is because I actively deny the existence of the tooth fairy.  People in Finland that have never heard of the tooth fairy are not a-toothfairy-ists.  Active disbelief is required to be an atheist, regardless of whether or not you think God is a concept or a physical being or both.




I disagree.  I would say that I am an a-[something I've never heard of].
Because atheism just means that you don't happen to hold a belief in something. 

My point is that you do not have to deny that thing's existence.  You say that you deny the existence of the tooth fairy.  I wouldn't go that far.  I don't believe in the tooth fairy. 

You can't deny the existence of anything.  This is why the burden of proof is on the person who positively believes in something.

Here is a good analogy:  In a court of law, the defendant is either found guilty or not guilty.  Not 'guilty or innocent'.  That's because you can't prove a negative.  You can't prove someone's innocence.  So by finding someone not guilty, we don't necessarily believe them to be innocent.  I find "god" not guilty of the existing. 

So I don't believe in god, like I don't believe in the tooth fairy.  But I don't deny their existence either.  Yet I am an atoothfairyest just like you.


--------------------
"I would like to thank god for making me an atheist" - Ricky Gervais


Edited by clam_dude (02/13/13 06:51 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineclam_dude
stranger in astrange land

Registered: 09/10/03
Posts: 1,717
Loc: twilight zone
Last seen: 6 years, 3 months
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: clam_dude]
    #17797053 - 02/13/13 06:31 PM (10 years, 11 months ago)

As for the number 3 analogy, I did grant that it makes sense to say "peace is a concept," or "3 is a concept," although I thought about it for a while, and am still not sure myself.  Interesting question. 

And so even if I grant you that "3 is a concept," comparing it to god doesn't help god's case.  3 is not a physical object.  So the number 3 is just a concept and not a physical object.  Even if you can find a word that can be used to describe a physical object, and a concept, then that just means there are two uses of the word. 

The object is a separate entity from the concept of the object.  It's playing with words to try and make them one and the same.


--------------------
"I would like to thank god for making me an atheist" - Ricky Gervais


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineclam_dude
stranger in astrange land

Registered: 09/10/03
Posts: 1,717
Loc: twilight zone
Last seen: 6 years, 3 months
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: sonamdrukpa]
    #17797127 - 02/13/13 06:42 PM (10 years, 11 months ago)

Quote:

sonamdrukpa said:
Quote:

The bible is important in understanding history.  But there's no reason to believe that anything in it is inherently true, or relevant in today's world....other than in the context of understanding history.




If you're gay, you can be prevented from seeing your dying spouse in the hospital because they're not legally your spouse because gay people can't get married in most of this country...because in Leviticus 18:22 it says "One should not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable." and voters care about that.  I can come up with a thousand similar examples.  You may think that the Bible is irrelevant to today's world, but it clearly is.  I think you're confusing "should be relevant" with "is relevant".




Well that fits into the category of being relevant historically.  It's current history, sure.  I could have worded that better and said the bible is relevant in understand society today, as well as historically. 

My point is the same: There is no inherent truth in the bible, and there is certainly nothing in it that we need the bible specifically to tell us.  Though shall not kill? Variations of that had been around before the bible.  The contents of the bible matter only because of their effect on society and history.  On a side note, I would argue that this effect has been negative - the example you gave about gay rights is a good one.


--------------------
"I would like to thank god for making me an atheist" - Ricky Gervais


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinesonamdrukpa
Wayfarer


Registered: 10/18/11
Posts: 2,777
Last seen: 2 months, 7 days
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: clam_dude]
    #17798653 - 02/14/13 12:02 AM (10 years, 11 months ago)

Quote:

clam_dude said:
I disagree.  I would say that I am an a-[something I've never heard of].
Because atheism just means that you don't happen to hold a belief in something.




I've gone too far; we've lost the point of the metaphor since no one actually ever uses the word a-toothfairy-ist.  I'm simply going along with my argument, and you with yours.

Quote:

My point is that you do not have to deny that thing's existence.  You say that you deny the existence of the tooth fairy.  I wouldn't go that far.  I don't believe in the tooth fairy.

You can't deny the existence of anything.  This is why the burden of proof is on the person who positively believes in something.

Here is a good analogy:  In a court of law, the defendant is either found guilty or not guilty.  Not 'guilty or innocent'.  That's because you can't prove a negative.  You can't prove someone's innocence.  So by finding someone not guilty, we don't necessarily believe them to be innocent.  I find "god" not guilty of the existing.

So I don't believe in god, like I don't believe in the tooth fairy.  But I don't deny their existence either.  Yet I am an atoothfairyest just like you.




I know "you can't prove a negative" is a popular slogan in these sorts of discussions, but it's merely a handy gloss - in reality, there are many cases in people have proven what could be considered a "negative." For instance, it's been proven that there are no sets of positive integers a, b, and c such that a^n + b^n = c^n for any integer value greater than two.  I'd say that it's conclusively proven that there were no people living in North America at the time of the Dinosaurs, as another example.  It's not possible to come up with evidence of nonexistence, but it is possible to come up with evidence that implies the nonexistence of something else.

Now, it is true that there is no such thing as certain proof in the strictest sense of the word.  But to claim that all or most atheists are also agnostics because they know it's possible they're wrong or misinformed is a level of technicality far too precise to apply to a word so rarely used in such a way. Vigorously proselytizing for positive atheism while at the same time claiming to be nothing but a passive atheist as well as agnostic based on strict definitions of these word that you know your opponents aren't using and don't believe are the proper definitions...I can admit that there is an extremely small possibility that, say, the Earth is flat, but if I visited the nearest geology department proclaiming "I don't deny that the Earth is flat", well, that would be nothing more than philosophical wanking.


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


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineclam_dude
stranger in astrange land

Registered: 09/10/03
Posts: 1,717
Loc: twilight zone
Last seen: 6 years, 3 months
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: sonamdrukpa]
    #17798746 - 02/14/13 12:29 AM (10 years, 11 months ago)

Quote:

sonamdrukpa said:
I'd say that it's conclusively proven that there were no people living in North America at the time of the Dinosaurs, as another example.  It's not possible to come up with evidence of nonexistence, but it is possible to come up with evidence that implies the nonexistence of something else.





We are talking about technicalities here, as I'm sure you are aware.  Technically, I can't be certain "god" doesn't exist.  This is why I am, technically, an agnostic.  Likewise, I don't believe there were people living in North America at the time of the Dinosaurs.  Neither does any serious scientist.  That's because there is no evidence of this  But technically speaking, you cannot prove that humans were not around then.  Yes, if there were humans around at the time of the dinosaurs, it would change everything we know about biology, geography, etc... But anything is possible.  Likewise, if there is a "god" (depending on how it's defined,) that too would change everything we know about astronomy, physics, etc...


Quote:

sonamdrukpa said:
But to claim that all or most atheists are also agnostics because they know it's possible they're wrong or misinformed is a level of technicality far too precise to apply to a word so rarely used in such a way. Vigorously proselytizing for positive atheism while at the same time claiming to be nothing but a passive atheist as well as agnostic based on strict definitions of these word that you know your opponents aren't using and don't believe are the proper definitions...





I understand that many people take atheism to mean an absolute denial of god's existence.  But that's a misinterpretation.  The vast majority of atheists themselves claim to be agnostic as well.  That's actually one of the reasons I made this thread - to help clear up any misconceptions. 

To me, the word agnostic implies, or is often interpreted to mean, that there is a 50/50 chance of god's existence. 

If atheism means a complete denial of god's existence, then what do you call people like myself who don't believe in god, yet don't deny it?  You can say agnostic (which I am,) but the bottom line is that I don't believe in god.

That is the atheist position.  Trust me, you will have a very difficult time finding an atheist who denies the possibility of god's existence.


--------------------
"I would like to thank god for making me an atheist" - Ricky Gervais


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineclam_dude
stranger in astrange land

Registered: 09/10/03
Posts: 1,717
Loc: twilight zone
Last seen: 6 years, 3 months
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: sonamdrukpa]
    #17798905 - 02/14/13 01:20 AM (10 years, 11 months ago)

Let me clarify

Quote:

sonamdrukpa said:
But to claim that all or most atheists are also agnostics because they know it's possible they're wrong or misinformed is a level of technicality far too precise to apply to a word so rarely used in such a way.
[




The only reason i claim to be "agnostic" is because of this technicality.  I know that to in order to not have a dogmatic position, I must admit I could be wrong.  In this sense, I am agnostic about god like I am about the tooth fairy.

I can't claim to know there is no god, but I do personally believe there is no god.  I believe this with the same level of certainty that I believe there is no tooth fairy.  I don't like to call myself agnostic about god for the same reason you don't like to call yourself agnostic regarding the tooth fairy.


--------------------
"I would like to thank god for making me an atheist" - Ricky Gervais


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleteknix
𓂀⟁𓅢𓍝𓅃𓊰𓉡 𓁼𓆗⨻
 User Gallery


Registered: 09/16/08
Posts: 11,953
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: clam_dude]
    #17799149 - 02/14/13 03:18 AM (10 years, 11 months ago)

Quote:

clam_dude said:
Quote:

teknix said:
If you lack a belief in god then you would be agnostic. Because you don't know either way. If you disbelieve in god then you are athiest.




Would you say that you don't believe in the tooth fairy?




That has nothing to do with athiesm and god, so address the question/circumstance if you can, if not then stfu.

:yarly:

/thread


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblebudmanman
OTD Masterbater
Male


Registered: 02/07/07
Posts: 17,974
Loc: PNW
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: teknix]
    #17799164 - 02/14/13 03:26 AM (10 years, 11 months ago)

What teknix is trying to say, is yes, he does believe in the tooth fairy. And he is fucking embarrassed as shit about it.


--------------------
Everything I have ever said is total bogus bs I am full of crud therefore everything I say should never be taken literal.

And I am mentally unstable.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleteknix
𓂀⟁𓅢𓍝𓅃𓊰𓉡 𓁼𓆗⨻
 User Gallery


Registered: 09/16/08
Posts: 11,953
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: budmanman]
    #17799167 - 02/14/13 03:28 AM (10 years, 11 months ago)

haha no, show the strwman to your mother as i light it on fire for all the stupid bitches.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMarkostheGnostic
Elder
Male User Gallery


Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida Flag
Last seen: 3 years, 1 day
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: clam_dude]
    #17799394 - 02/14/13 05:43 AM (10 years, 11 months ago)

Quote:

clam_dude said:
I'm not trying to be confrontational.  That's just my honest opinion.




Ultimate Reality is, well, Ultimate Reality. You may choose not to anthropomorphize It and personify it, as does theism,' but your "honest opinion" is informed by your experience alone. Ultimate Reality has been referred to in many thousands of names under the categories of theism, deism, pantheism, panentheism, monism, tritheism, monotheism, polytheism, and I'm sure I'm missing many additional categories. Denying that there is no Ultimate Reality, or an Origin to existence is what is irrational (not non-rational or transnational, but irrational). Even an 'atheist' must admit that there is an Original Condition whence all else proceeded.


--------------------
γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineclam_dude
stranger in astrange land

Registered: 09/10/03
Posts: 1,717
Loc: twilight zone
Last seen: 6 years, 3 months
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: MarkostheGnostic]
    #17800088 - 02/14/13 09:50 AM (10 years, 11 months ago)

Quote:

MarkostheGnostic said:
Quote:

clam_dude said:
I'm not trying to be confrontational.  That's just my honest opinion.




Ultimate Reality is, well, Ultimate Reality. You may choose not to anthropomorphize It and personify it, as does theism,' but your "honest opinion" is informed by your experience alone. Ultimate Reality has been referred to in many thousands of names under the categories of theism, deism, pantheism, panentheism, monism, tritheism, monotheism, polytheism, and I'm sure I'm missing many additional categories. Denying that there is no Ultimate Reality, or an Origin to existence is what is irrational (not non-rational or transnational, but irrational). Even an 'atheist' must admit that there is an Original Condition whence all else proceeded.




Sure, I don't have a problem with saying there is an "original condition," or "origin to existence," though I'm not sure exactly what that means.  And yes, there is no denying ultimate reality.  I just don't see the point in, as you say, personifying it.


--------------------
"I would like to thank god for making me an atheist" - Ricky Gervais


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineclam_dude
stranger in astrange land

Registered: 09/10/03
Posts: 1,717
Loc: twilight zone
Last seen: 6 years, 3 months
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: teknix]
    #17800095 - 02/14/13 09:52 AM (10 years, 11 months ago)

Quote:

teknix said:
Quote:

clam_dude said:
Quote:

teknix said:
If you lack a belief in god then you would be agnostic. Because you don't know either way. If you disbelieve in god then you are athiest.




Would you say that you don't believe in the tooth fairy?




That has nothing to do with athiesm and god, so address the question/circumstance if you can, if not then stfu.

:yarly:

/thread




It's called an analogy, teknix.  If you answer the question, you will see where I'm going with it.


--------------------
"I would like to thank god for making me an atheist" - Ricky Gervais


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeaShrooms
The dude
Male User Gallery


Registered: 09/13/05
Posts: 1,989
Loc: Hitchhiking
Last seen: 3 years, 9 days
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: clam_dude] * 1
    #17800346 - 02/14/13 10:48 AM (10 years, 11 months ago)

Which brings a valid point, agnosticism is saying you don't know, atheism is saying you know there is no god, how exactly did you obtain this world shattering knowledge that there absolutely can't be a god, which you hold so firmly you say it is the only rational position?


--------------------
The life of a condemned soul is hatred.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineclam_dude
stranger in astrange land

Registered: 09/10/03
Posts: 1,717
Loc: twilight zone
Last seen: 6 years, 3 months
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: SeaShrooms]
    #17800448 - 02/14/13 11:09 AM (10 years, 11 months ago)

Quote:

SeaShrooms said:
Which brings a valid point, agnosticism is saying you don't know, atheism is saying you know there is no god, how exactly did you obtain this world shattering knowledge that there absolutely can't be a god, which you hold so firmly you say it is the only rational position?




I can't keep repeating myself.

I'm just going to post what I said earlier on this page

The only reason i claim to be "agnostic" is because of this technicality.  I know that to in order to not have a dogmatic position, I must admit I could be wrong.  In this sense, I am agnostic about god like I am about the tooth fairy.

I can't claim to know there is no god, but I do personally believe there is no god.  I believe this with the same level of certainty that I believe there is no tooth fairy.  I don't like to call myself agnostic about god for the same reason you don't like to call yourself agnostic regarding the tooth fairy.


--------------------
"I would like to thank god for making me an atheist" - Ricky Gervais


Edited by clam_dude (02/14/13 11:10 AM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineclam_dude
stranger in astrange land

Registered: 09/10/03
Posts: 1,717
Loc: twilight zone
Last seen: 6 years, 3 months
Re: Atheism is the only rational position [Re: clam_dude]
    #17800493 - 02/14/13 11:19 AM (10 years, 11 months ago)

This might also help you to understand my position:

In a court of law, the defendant is found either 'guilty or not guilty.'  Not 'guilty or innocent.'  This is because there is a claim being made that the defendant is guilty.  This claim is either true or untrue.  You could also make the claim that the defendant is innocent.  And that claim is either true or untrue.  So there are four potential positions to take, not two. 

Of course, you can't prove someone's innocence.  In finding someone 'not guilty,' it is not a statement that they are innocent.  A jury member might have their hunch (with varying certainty depending on the case/evidence). 

I find god "not guilty" of existing.  That is, there is not enough evidence to verify the claim that "god" exists.  As for the claim that "god" does not exists, the jury is still out.  But that is not the claim I am addressing.  I am addressing those who claim that god does exist.  The burden of proof is on them (you?) to show god's existence.


--------------------
"I would like to thank god for making me an atheist" - Ricky Gervais


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: < First | < Back | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | Next > | Last >

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* The Recent Oversaturation Of Christian God Shit Here...
( 1 2 3 all )
fireworks_godS 4,701 57 11/27/05 01:15 PM
by Gomp
* Drugs and Christianity shroomsbury 761 5 02/03/03 09:34 AM
by Demon
* why christianity is bullshit
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 all )
KingOftheThing 24,570 161 04/24/11 05:50 PM
by Holy Bud
* I want you guys to understand Christian Judgment
( 1 2 3 4 all )
World Spirit 4,363 65 05/05/03 09:33 PM
by CosmicJoke
* Christian Rationalism. An answer ? MAIA 1,339 2 08/04/02 05:08 AM
by MAIA
* Atheist Website responds to Christian Letter
( 1 2 all )
Swami 4,129 20 06/22/03 03:55 PM
by Sclorch
* Christianity, Colonialism, Capitalism and Islam. atomikfunksoldier 2,017 14 07/14/03 07:44 AM
by gnrm23
* Atheism.
( 1 2 3 4 5 all )
evilchipmunk 8,013 90 07/26/04 09:58 AM
by Hanky

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
84,888 topic views. 0 members, 9 guests and 9 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.026 seconds spending 0.006 seconds on 13 queries.