‹ First  < 2 3 4 5 > 
 
   
 

Evolution of Religion and Language

 
santhosh
 
Avatar
 
 
santhosh
Total Posts:  1318
Joined  01-06-2011
 
 
 
12 January 2013 23:13
 

.

[ Edited: 21 January 2013 17:06 by santhosh]
 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  17892
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
13 January 2013 00:57
 
stardust91977 - 12 January 2013 10:13 PM

Being atheists does not mean we have to bind ourselves to false claims of knowledge. Isn’t that what makes theism so revolting?

What false claims of knowledge would those be?

Today we may be on the cusp of discovering that believing our universe to be the only one was just another example of human-centric thinking and drawing lines in the sand prematurely. In our lifetime scientists have gone from saying that there are no other universes, and that even if there were we could never prove it, to saying that the math is suggestive of all kinds of other universes and that there may be some way to verify that. They’re even talking up the possibility of universes exactly like this one, complete with people just like us, doing what we do. 

To that I add the fact that we have taken every opportunity to explore, experiment with, and test nature and the limits of our power. Amongst members of our young species, scientists are already creating mini- big bangs in labs, have already created the foundations of life in beakers, already lock life up in cages that become their universes, and are already altering and creating new life by utilizing the forces of nature to rearrange matter. I daresay that if someone could create a new universe, it would already be done. That is how curious and creative and determined we are.

Now, that surely doesn’t mean any other species strive to be creators, but the very fact that we do it proves that such species can exist.  Further, we have been humbled by our ignorance so many times, imagining ourselves to be central, so important, so vital to all that is, and immune from the kinds of things we do to other life.

All that helps create my reluctance to insist that I know the status of our universe and am sure we aren’t the product of some other species work.  The very existence of intelligence and creativity leaves me believing that it’s too soon to draw a line in the sand.

I think I see your problem here in your little rant. We are talking about human gods and magic and you are talking about aliens and science. Except for maybe Scientology which is a gray area atheism is about human gods not aliens. And for you to say that atheism can not make any positive claims against gods who, for example, command the death of homosexuals because there might be aliens or a multiverse is, well, just silly.

 
 
santhosh
 
Avatar
 
 
santhosh
Total Posts:  1318
Joined  01-06-2011
 
 
 
13 January 2013 03:32
 

.

[ Edited: 21 January 2013 17:07 by santhosh]
 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  17892
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
13 January 2013 06:02
 
stardust91977 - 13 January 2013 02:32 AM

Rant?

Rubbish.

You picked one sentence out of a post I made to someone else, took it out of context, and began complaining that I don’t practice your brand of atheism. In my second post to you I said the question was a scientific one so right there you should have known this was about science. My being an atheist should’ve tipped you off to the fact that this is about aliens. (What is the claim that someone from beyond the earth created the universe but a claim that some alien species evolved creative powers similar to those we desire?)The fact that the central tenet of theism is that some creative intelligence is behind the existence of the universe should have tipped you off to the fact that if we are to leave the door ajar for science and aliens, then we leave the door open for that much to be true.

You respond to all that as though it is a threat and accuse me of ranting and saying that we can’t make any positive claims against theism, which I would never do. Further, you speak to me as though you are an authority on atheism, which is an utterly proposterous thing for you to be doing.


Why not just admit you’re not the atheist King and move on?

Clearly I picked the right sentence and was correct in it’s context as this absurdly conflated post so clearly demonstrates.  Really what’s left but for me to to leave on that high note.

 
 
santhosh
 
Avatar
 
 
santhosh
Total Posts:  1318
Joined  01-06-2011
 
 
 
13 January 2013 07:30
 

.

[ Edited: 21 January 2013 17:07 by santhosh]
 
dacecain
 
Avatar
 
 
dacecain
Total Posts:  255
Joined  07-10-2012
 
 
 
13 January 2013 11:03
 
GAD - 12 January 2013 05:26 PM
dacecain - 12 January 2013 07:32 AM
GAD - 12 January 2013 07:04 AM
dacecain - 12 January 2013 06:12 AM
Epaminondas - 12 January 2013 01:15 AM

Atheism is actually based on ignorance. We have no knowledge of God, based on evidence, thus we are atheistic to it’s existence.

Atheism is a statement of a lack of belief, and not a lack of knowledge. Perhaps you meant Agnosticism and agnostic here?

To be consistent atheism must be positive.

Hello GAD, I’m afraid I don’t understand. Is there any chance you could explain what you mean here, perhaps providing the inconsistencies of negative atheism for comparison. Thanks.

Try this.

The gods of humanity are either real or they are not. So ask yourself, are they real or not? Work through the possible answers and see where negative atheism falls.

I don’t believe any of the gods of humanity are real. If I did, I would not be atheist. However, does my lack of belief make them not real to anyone other than me? I’m afraid I still don’t see the inconsistency.

As to the “strong” atheism claim, that has been tacked on to what atheism means (no doubt by someone attempting to distance themselves from this position or to just sell books), that says: the statement “at least one deity exists” is a false statement. I actually agree with this statement because I do not believe any deities do exist, again that is why I call myself an atheist – but belief either way does not make it fact except in my own head and to think that it does probably goes a long way to people believing that atheism is just another religion where “belief equals fact”. I feel I’m clearly missing a definition of something to get to where you’re coming from.

 
 
EN
 
Avatar
 
 
EN
Total Posts:  21925
Joined  11-03-2007
 
 
 
13 January 2013 13:27
 
GAD - 12 January 2013 11:57 PM

What false claims of knowledge would those be?

For strong atheists such as yourself, the false claim of knowledge is that you know that God does not exist.

 
Dennis Campbell
 
Avatar
 
 
Dennis Campbell
Total Posts:  19830
Joined  20-07-2007
 
 
 
13 January 2013 14:00
 
Ecurb Noselrub - 13 January 2013 12:27 PM
GAD - 12 January 2013 11:57 PM

What false claims of knowledge would those be?

For strong atheists such as yourself, the false claim of knowledge is that you know that God does not exist.

Agree.  I cannot know that anything does not exist, one cannot prove a negative, even if the probabilities are quite small.  As a basis for any decision-making, such a probability is insufficient to me on which to base any plan of action not otherwise justified.  Those who do so for themselves, that’s their decision; and I’ve no problem with that provided they do not seek to impose their decisions onto me, as being something I should do as well.  Atheism is not a basis for any decision making, it just means the atheist does not share a belief in a god, but says nothing about any other value system on which choices may be made.

 
 
The Voice of Reason
 
Avatar
 
 
The Voice of Reason
Total Posts:  109
Joined  09-01-2013
 
 
 
13 January 2013 14:29
 
Ecurb Noselrub - 13 January 2013 12:27 PM
GAD - 12 January 2013 11:57 PM

What false claims of knowledge would those be?

For strong atheists such as yourself, the false claim of knowledge is that you know that God does not exist.

I know that Unicorns do not exist.

How is that any different than god?

 
 
nv
 
Avatar
 
 
nv
Total Posts:  7998
Joined  29-04-2005
 
 
 
13 January 2013 14:38
 
The Voice of Reason - 13 January 2013 01:29 PM
Ecurb Noselrub - 13 January 2013 12:27 PM
GAD - 12 January 2013 11:57 PM

What false claims of knowledge would those be?

For strong atheists such as yourself, the false claim of knowledge is that you know that God does not exist.

I know that Unicorns do not exist.

How is that any different than god?

But how sure are you that unicorns don’t exist on some distant earth-like planet? GAD’s point relates only to the over-obvious delusion of a cranky, forgiving, horrifically inhumane, coy, overemotional, nonmaterial biblical God. That creature is as certainly fictional as spongebob.

 
 
dacecain
 
Avatar
 
 
dacecain
Total Posts:  255
Joined  07-10-2012
 
 
 
13 January 2013 14:57
 
nonverbal - 13 January 2013 01:38 PM
The Voice of Reason - 13 January 2013 01:29 PM
Ecurb Noselrub - 13 January 2013 12:27 PM
GAD - 12 January 2013 11:57 PM

What false claims of knowledge would those be?

For strong atheists such as yourself, the false claim of knowledge is that you know that God does not exist.

I know that Unicorns do not exist.

How is that any different than god?

But how sure are you that unicorns don’t exist on some distant earth-like planet? GAD’s point relates only to the over-obvious delusion of a cranky, forgiving, horrifically inhumane, coy, overemotional, nonmaterial biblical God. That creature is as certainly fictional as spongebob.

Monodon monoceros - the one-toothed unicorn of the sea!

 
 
The Voice of Reason
 
Avatar
 
 
The Voice of Reason
Total Posts:  109
Joined  09-01-2013
 
 
 
13 January 2013 15:02
 
nonverbal - 13 January 2013 01:38 PM
The Voice of Reason - 13 January 2013 01:29 PM
Ecurb Noselrub - 13 January 2013 12:27 PM
GAD - 12 January 2013 11:57 PM

What false claims of knowledge would those be?

For strong atheists such as yourself, the false claim of knowledge is that you know that God does not exist.

I know that Unicorns do not exist.

How is that any different than god?

But how sure are you that unicorns don’t exist on some distant earth-like planet? GAD’s point relates only to the over-obvious delusion of a cranky, forgiving, horrifically inhumane, coy, overemotional, nonmaterial biblical God. That creature is as certainly fictional as spongebob.

I don’t need to care whether unicorns exist on some far away planet. It is logically equal to say “Unicorns do not exist” vs “Unicorns do not exist on my planet” because we lack the ability to view other planets.  Once we gain that ability, then we can say “Unicorns do not exist anywhere in the universe”.

My argument is that we are able to say that “Unicorns do not -effectively- exist for all practical purposes”.  So therefore, we, here on earth, must live our lives in a unicorn-less universe.  At least, right now we must.

I see no distinction between “unicorns do not exist” and “unicorns do not exist as far as we know.”  Therefore I see no distinction between “gods do not exist” and “gods do not exist as far as we know.”  To me its just semantics.

 
 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  17892
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
13 January 2013 15:07
 
Ecurb Noselrub - 13 January 2013 12:27 PM
GAD - 12 January 2013 11:57 PM

What false claims of knowledge would those be?

For strong atheists such as yourself, the false claim of knowledge is that you know that God does not exist.

Prove that your invented god is real then. Go on, I’ll wait.

Your logic dictates that;

If I said the creator of the universe was a butt fairy who sent his butt fairy son to live in my ass so that he could direct me to tell you what foods you should eat so that your shit pleases his butt fairies desires

that you have to accept that as it can’t be proven wrong.

That is ludicrous but that is the corner you have painted yourself into in order to claim that your invented gods could be real somewhere, somehow. That’s a high price to pay to keep your delusions alive.

Now bow down to my ass and hear the odorous commands of the one true butt fairy.

 
 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  17892
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
13 January 2013 15:40
 
The Voice of Reason - 13 January 2013 02:02 PM
nonverbal - 13 January 2013 01:38 PM
The Voice of Reason - 13 January 2013 01:29 PM
Ecurb Noselrub - 13 January 2013 12:27 PM
GAD - 12 January 2013 11:57 PM

What false claims of knowledge would those be?

For strong atheists such as yourself, the false claim of knowledge is that you know that God does not exist.

I know that Unicorns do not exist.

How is that any different than god?

But how sure are you that unicorns don’t exist on some distant earth-like planet? GAD’s point relates only to the over-obvious delusion of a cranky, forgiving, horrifically inhumane, coy, overemotional, nonmaterial biblical God. That creature is as certainly fictional as spongebob.

I don’t need to care whether unicorns exist on some far away planet. It is logically equal to say “Unicorns do not exist” vs “Unicorns do not exist on my planet” because we lack the ability to view other planets.  Once we gain that ability, then we can say “Unicorns do not exist anywhere in the universe”.

My argument is that we are able to say that “Unicorns do not -effectively- exist for all practical purposes”.  So therefore, we, here on earth, must live our lives in a unicorn-less universe.  At least, right now we must.

I see no distinction between “unicorns do not exist” and “unicorns do not exist as far as we know.”  Therefore I see no distinction between “gods do not exist” and “gods do not exist as far as we know.”  To me its just semantics.

Semantics is all they have here. But as you can see even people who call themselves atheists play the same game as well because they believe it makes them more reasonable then the theists. The irony being they commit the same fallacies they think they are above.

 
 
nv
 
Avatar
 
 
nv
Total Posts:  7998
Joined  29-04-2005
 
 
 
13 January 2013 15:41
 
The Voice of Reason - 13 January 2013 02:02 PM

I don’t need to care whether unicorns exist on some far away planet. It is logically equal to say “Unicorns do not exist” vs “Unicorns do not exist on my planet” because we lack the ability to view other planets. . .

Is that an argument or an admission of an under-formed thought?

Have you posted here in the past under a different name?

 
 
‹ First  < 2 3 4 5 >