Total Posts:15|Showing Posts:1-15
Jump to topic:

Atheism?

000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2011 3:48:08 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I don't understand Atheism. You cannot prove or disprove the existence of a higher power. You cannot argue against nor can you argue for a belief that exists outside our five senses and conscious perception. Religion is fueled by faith and trust in what may or may not exist. I understand fully the skepticism, and I understand fully that one could believe religions are probably untrue, but those who argue as if the KNOW FOR FACT the religion is false puzzle me.

You cannot apply the logic of the conscious world to a concept that transcends the conscious world. That in and of itself is illogical.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2011 3:51:52 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/18/2011 3:48:08 PM, 000ike wrote:
I don't understand Atheism. You cannot prove or disprove the existence of a higher power. You cannot argue against nor can you argue for a belief that exists outside our five senses and conscious perception. Religion is fueled by faith and trust in what may or may not exist. I understand fully the skepticism, and I understand fully that one could believe religions are probably untrue, but those who argue as if the KNOW FOR FACT the religion is false puzzle me.

You cannot apply the logic of the conscious world to a concept that transcends the conscious world. That in and of itself is illogical.

You're refering only to Strong Atheism (according to Dawkin's 7 part belief scale). Both Strong Atheism and Strong Theism are flawed in that they claim to know for truth. Most atheists (here at least) are de facto, meaning that they don't know for sure, but they are fairly confident and live as though he is not there.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2011 3:52:11 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/18/2011 3:48:08 PM, 000ike wrote:
I don't understand Atheism. You cannot prove or disprove the existence of a higher power. You cannot argue against nor can you argue for a belief that exists outside our five senses and conscious perception. Religion is fueled by faith and trust in what may or may not exist. I understand fully the skepticism, and I understand fully that one could believe religions are probably untrue, but those who argue as if the KNOW FOR FACT the religion is false puzzle me.

You cannot apply the logic of the conscious world to a concept that transcends the conscious world. That in and of itself is illogical.

I think what you're referring to is strong atheism, or anti-theism, which is fairly rare in the atheist community.

What I believe on the other hand, is weak atheism or agnostic atheism. It's basically that I don't BELIEVE there's a god, but I'm not asserting that there isn't one.

Make sense?
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2011 4:04:01 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/18/2011 3:52:11 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 8/18/2011 3:48:08 PM, 000ike wrote:
I don't understand Atheism. You cannot prove or disprove the existence of a higher power. You cannot argue against nor can you argue for a belief that exists outside our five senses and conscious perception. Religion is fueled by faith and trust in what may or may not exist. I understand fully the skepticism, and I understand fully that one could believe religions are probably untrue, but those who argue as if the KNOW FOR FACT the religion is false puzzle me.

You cannot apply the logic of the conscious world to a concept that transcends the conscious world. That in and of itself is illogical.

I think what you're referring to is strong atheism, or anti-theism, which is fairly rare in the atheist community.

What I believe on the other hand, is weak atheism or agnostic atheism. It's basically that I don't BELIEVE there's a god, but I'm not asserting that there isn't one.

Make sense?

ha! you were 19 seconds too slow!
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2011 9:37:56 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I don't believe in god for the same reason you don't believe in mythra. I mean you seriously can't be this retarded. You don't believe in 1000's of gods for the same reason I don't believe in any. The complete and utter lack of evidence.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
Dan4reason
Posts: 1,168
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2011 12:46:15 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/18/2011 3:48:08 PM, 000ike wrote:
I don't understand Atheism. You cannot prove or disprove the existence of a higher power. You cannot argue against nor can you argue for a belief that exists outside our five senses and conscious perception. Religion is fueled by faith and trust in what may or may not exist. I understand fully the skepticism, and I understand fully that one could believe religions are probably untrue, but those who argue as if the KNOW FOR FACT the religion is false puzzle me.

You cannot apply the logic of the conscious world to a concept that transcends the conscious world. That in and of itself is illogical.

Actually many atheists simply lack a belief in God, and don't necessarily say that he positively doesn't exist.

When you have trust in something, you don't have trust in it for no reason at all. It must deserve your trust. Why else do you trust your doctor more than a faith healer? Doctors have a better track record. This is the real stuff of trust.

So why does certain ancient mythology deserve your trust? Mythology has a pretty bad track record.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2011 12:53:03 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/18/2011 3:48:08 PM, 000ike wrote:
I don't understand Atheism. You cannot prove or disprove the existence of a higher power. You cannot argue against nor can you argue for a belief that exists outside our five senses and conscious perception. Religion is fueled by faith and trust in what may or may not exist. I understand fully the skepticism, and I understand fully that one could believe religions are probably untrue, but those who argue as if the KNOW FOR FACT the religion is false puzzle me.

You cannot apply the logic of the conscious world to a concept that transcends the conscious world. That in and of itself is illogical.

There are certain forms of God that we can confidently say are false and others which we cannot.

If such a thing as assigning "true" and "false" to empirical statements is possible, I can say that the 6 day creationist god of 6,000 years ago does not exist. I can say with that much, much more certainty than whether unicorns or leprechauns exist.

However, when you move to the other end of the spectrum bordering Deism, empirical claims about God fail.

I find it entirely possible that a deistic god exists. However, the world as I experience it would be the same whether or not the deistic god existed.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2011 1:37:07 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/18/2011 3:48:08 PM, 000ike wrote:
I don't understand Atheism. You cannot prove or disprove the existence of a higher power. You cannot argue against nor can you argue for a belief that exists outside our five senses and conscious perception. Religion is fueled by faith and trust in what may or may not exist. I understand fully the skepticism, and I understand fully that one could believe religions are probably untrue, but those who argue as if the KNOW FOR FACT the religion is false puzzle me.

You cannot apply the logic of the conscious world to a concept that transcends the conscious world. That in and of itself is illogical.

Firstly atheists rarely make the claim that they are absolutely certain that God does not exist, for the simple reason that an intelligent rational person can't make such a claim.

For me there are two angles,
You do not believe that I have a Dragon named George living in my garage. It does not seem likely does it? If I were to insist that it were the case a rational person would imagine that it is far more likely I am somehow mistaken, deluded or simply lying. In the same way that if you tell me you have an imaginary friend that created and rules the universe etc etc... I am not going to believe you. Both claims require evidence.

In addition a number of religions can be shown to be false, because they posit mutually exclusive things. Such as an omniscient, omnibenevolent, omnipotent God full of regret and remorse for flooding the earth and committing mass genocide.

As no religion can provide evidence, and as most are self refuting, atheism becomes a reasonable position.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2011 2:42:45 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/18/2011 3:48:08 PM, 000ike wrote:
I don't understand Atheism. You cannot prove or disprove the existence of a higher power. You cannot argue against nor can you argue for a belief that exists outside our five senses and conscious perception. Religion is fueled by faith and trust in what may or may not exist. I understand fully the skepticism, and I understand fully that one could believe religions are probably untrue, but those who argue as if the KNOW FOR FACT the religion is false puzzle me.


Those who argue there isn't an alien mothership with a cloaking device hovering about earth puzzle me.
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12
wiploc
Posts: 1,485
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/21/2011 12:21:41 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/18/2011 3:48:08 PM, 000ike wrote:
I don't understand Atheism.

Okay.

You cannot prove or disprove the existence of a higher power.

You can disprove lots of powers that some people call higher.

You cannot argue against nor can you argue for a belief that exists outside our five senses and conscious perception.

Nonsense.

... I understand fully the skepticism, and I understand fully that one could believe religions are probably untrue,

Then you understand atheism after all. "Strong atheism" is the belief that gods don't exist. "Weak atheism" encompasses anyone who is neither a strong atheist or a theist.

but those who argue as if the KNOW FOR FACT the religion is false puzzle me.

Ah, gnostic strong atheists. Happens I am one of those, but only as regards the standard Christian god: omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, and coexistent with evil. That god is impossible, like a square circle. Since he cannot exist, he does not exist. Therefore, I know he does not exist.

I can't say that about all gods, but that one is just so easy to disprove.

You cannot apply the logic of the conscious world to a concept that transcends the conscious world. That in and of itself is illogical.

I'm not following you here. But if you're saying that god isn't logical according to regular logic, then I'm with you.
Steve0Yea
Posts: 91
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/21/2011 2:58:29 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/18/2011 3:48:08 PM, 000ike wrote:
I don't understand Atheism. You cannot prove or disprove the existence of a higher power. You cannot argue against nor can you argue for a belief that exists outside our five senses and conscious perception. Religion is fueled by faith and trust in what may or may not exist. I understand fully the skepticism, and I understand fully that one could believe religions are probably untrue, but those who argue as if the KNOW FOR FACT the religion is false puzzle me.

You cannot apply the logic of the conscious world to a concept that transcends the conscious world. That in and of itself is illogical.

I am an anti-theist, the same can be said about religious people buddy... my ansewr to this is for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

People like Godsands made me who i am...
KaelanArgues
Posts: 2
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2013 4:58:56 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/18/2011 3:48:08 PM, 000ike wrote:
I don't understand Atheism. You cannot prove or disprove the existence of a higher power. You cannot argue against nor can you argue for a belief that exists outside our five senses and conscious perception. Religion is fueled by faith and trust in what may or may not exist. I understand fully the skepticism, and I understand fully that one could believe religions are probably untrue, but those who argue as if the KNOW FOR FACT the religion is false puzzle me.

You cannot apply the logic of the conscious world to a concept that transcends the conscious world. That in and of itself is illogical.

Actually you can it's called proving that God or Gods didn't make the Universe and that some bizarre theory probably proved by physics is right but in science we don't like making something a fact just because there is a lot of information and truth (Theory of Evolution which disproves that God or Gods created humans and due to leading data is true but what if there is a better answer, Gravity... still a theory) behind it because it undermines our whole foundation of science which is to prove the idea now wrong. Example in 1903 the whole of physics believed in something called the aether and it was a medium that was believed to permeate all of space until a man called Albert Einstein came and disproved it with Special Theory of Relativity. Now legally you can't disprove religion because it's a never ending cop out of "God or Gods did it" which is undeniably a cop out.
A Skeptic who loves to think.
Dragonfang
Posts: 1,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2013 5:10:17 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
One may doubt as long as he does not doubt the truth.

Can weak atheism be taken as a permament rule for life? If skepticism was a comfortable state, there would be no advancement in human life, our nature requires us to seek facts and follow them.
Drayson
Posts: 288
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2013 5:42:44 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/29/2013 5:10:17 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
One may doubt as long as he does not doubt the truth.

Can weak atheism be taken as a permament rule for life? If skepticism was a comfortable state, there would be no advancement in human life, our nature requires us to seek facts and follow them.

Yes, our nature requires us to seek answers, but logic requires us to base those answers on evidence and rational thought.
I would completely disagree with you and say that skepticism is absolutely necessary for the advancement of human life because it's skepticism that allows us to question everything and evaluate all possibilities. The opposite of skepticism, actually, is faith. That is, the complete and utter adherence to one view or belief without question. And if a person cannot move from one view or belief, or even question it, they can't advance their knowledge in any way.
"I'm not saying I don't trust you...and I'm not saying I do. But I don't"

-Topper Harley
Dragonfang
Posts: 1,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2013 7:34:02 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/29/2013 5:42:44 PM, Drayson wrote:
At 7/29/2013 5:10:17 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
One may doubt as long as he does not doubt the truth.

Can weak atheism be taken as a permament rule for life? If skepticism was a comfortable state, there would be no advancement in human life, our nature requires us to seek facts and follow them.

Yes, our nature requires us to seek answers, but logic requires us to base those answers on evidence and rational thought.
I would completely disagree with you and say that skepticism is absolutely necessary for the advancement of human life because it's skepticism that allows us to question everything and evaluate all possibilities. The opposite of skepticism, actually, is faith. That is, the complete and utter adherence to one view or belief without question. And if a person cannot move from one view or belief, or even question it, they can't advance their knowledge in any way.

"There is no better soporific and sedative than skepticism." -Nietzche

ٍSkepticism is necessary, but it exists for a finite period of time multiple times. Challenges in life is what makes us want to improve ourselves. The reason we have advancement is because we found facts and truths and worked on them.
From skepticism we reach truth, but weak atheist's version is stuck in a permanent state of skepticism, thus the truth cannot be reached individually.

God either exists or not. Doubting the existence of truth is self-refuting and collapses on itself.
I see no logical reason to not pursue this truth. Lazy judgement on a potentially deep and critical issue in my opinion.