Total Posts:78|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Athiest Lie: defualt position

Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2015 10:32:58 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
There is no logical argument, philosophical principle, scientific evidence, or any evidence at all that the Atheist default position (instantly disbelieve before evaluating) is rational or accurate position to advance.

It is in every way Bull Shite.

The only rational use of default positions is in constructed systems for pragmatic reasons. Such as Law. Where time and resources and the swift execution of justice make it cost prohibitive to have two equal sides debate.

Hope this helps some read a book
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,641
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2015 10:36:31 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/10/2015 10:32:58 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
There is no logical argument, philosophical principle, scientific evidence, or any evidence at all that the Atheist default position (instantly disbelieve before evaluating) is rational or accurate position to advance.

It is in every way Bull Shite.

The only rational use of default positions is in constructed systems for pragmatic reasons. Such as Law. Where time and resources and the swift execution of justice make it cost prohibitive to have two equal sides debate.

Hope this helps some read a book

Yes, I hope it is you who reads a book...

http://editthis.info...
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
dhardage
Posts: 4,545
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2015 10:49:39 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/10/2015 10:36:31 AM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 7/10/2015 10:32:58 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
There is no logical argument, philosophical principle, scientific evidence, or any evidence at all that the Atheist default position (instantly disbelieve before evaluating) is rational or accurate position to advance.

It is in every way Bull Shite.

The only rational use of default positions is in constructed systems for pragmatic reasons. Such as Law. Where time and resources and the swift execution of justice make it cost prohibitive to have two equal sides debate.

Hope this helps some read a book

Yes, I hope it is you who reads a book...

http://editthis.info...

I am currently reading it and so far it only reinforces the lack of strength in the Theist assertions.
dhardage
Posts: 4,545
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2015 11:06:07 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/10/2015 10:49:39 AM, dhardage wrote:
At 7/10/2015 10:36:31 AM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 7/10/2015 10:32:58 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
There is no logical argument, philosophical principle, scientific evidence, or any evidence at all that the Atheist default position (instantly disbelieve before evaluating) is rational or accurate position to advance.

It is in every way Bull Shite.

The only rational use of default positions is in constructed systems for pragmatic reasons. Such as Law. Where time and resources and the swift execution of justice make it cost prohibitive to have two equal sides debate.

Hope this helps some read a book

Yes, I hope it is you who reads a book...

http://editthis.info...

I am currently reading it and so far it only reinforces the lack of strength in the Theist assertions.

Of particular relevance to this particular post.

"Shifting the Burden of Proof

The burden of proof is always on the person asserting something. Shifting the burden of proof, a special case of Argumentum ad Ignorantiam, is the fallacy of putting the burden of proof on the person who denies or questions the assertion. The source of the fallacy is the assumption that something is true unless proven otherwise. This is not the case. You can't assume the truth of a proposition without proof. If we could assume truth until disproven, we would be stuck with the ridiculous conclusion that anything we said to be true, must be true, and would only become false when proven false. Reread the ignorantiam law if you are still confused.

This error, above nearly all others, indicates a lack of knowledge of the tenets of logic. Those who commit it require remedial learning. "
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,134
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2015 11:16:03 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/10/2015 10:32:58 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
There is no logical argument, philosophical principle, scientific evidence, or any evidence at all that the Atheist default position (instantly disbelieve before evaluating) is rational or accurate position to advance.

Really?! Do you know how many years of evaluation were necessary before I realized disbelief was reasonable? Get out of here with that shhtuff. Disbelief is the default position. If I propose any extraordinary concept which is not congruous with your current knowledge, then you (by default) will withhold belief. I know many have provided examples of this to you. Do you deny this? If so, your words and your actions must be contradictory. I see no way for a rational person to function while accepting every claim by default, and while this post is not your best example, I have seen very reasonable post from you leading me to think you are a rational being.

It is in every way Bull Shite.

The only rational use of default positions is in constructed systems for pragmatic reasons. Such as Law. Where time and resources and the swift execution of justice make it cost prohibitive to have two equal sides debate.

Hope this helps some read a book
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Reasonslap
Posts: 221
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2015 11:22:50 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
What a wasted human being. He could become a great person, but damn religion holds him back. The ignorance of religion makes him ignorant.
Floid
Posts: 751
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2015 11:24:41 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/10/2015 10:32:58 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
There is no logical argument, philosophical principle, scientific evidence, or any evidence at all that the Atheist default position (instantly disbelieve before evaluating) is rational or accurate position to advance.

Assuming a claim false until evidence has been provided to support its validity (something you can evaluate) is the default position in logic, philosophy, and science. This idea is commonly called "the burden of proof".
annanicole
Posts: 19,791
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2015 11:27:24 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/10/2015 11:16:03 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 7/10/2015 10:32:58 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
There is no logical argument, philosophical principle, scientific evidence, or any evidence at all that the Atheist default position (instantly disbelieve before evaluating) is rational or accurate position to advance.

Really?! Do you know how many years of evaluation were necessary before I realized disbelief was reasonable? Get out of here with that shhtuff. Disbelief is the default position.

With all due respect (and I don't have much for 90% of the clowns on here, on both sides), you are hardly a disbeliever. You have a definite belief system, and one can piece it together from your conversations with PGA, mainly.

You know and understand full well the significance of:

Date of Acts --> Date of Luke --> if prior to AD 62 --> inexplicable prophesies.

Therefore, on that point alone, you have a belief system, albeit a sort-of supporting structure, that is 99.4% imperative that you follow. You nearly have to assert that those "prophesies" were recorded and embellished (or fabricated) after-the-fact. The same holds true, possibly to a greater extent, on the prophesies in Daniel.

Thus, one can hardly "default" to atheism. Agnosticism ("I don't know - maybe and maybe not.") is closer to the default.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
Burzmali
Posts: 1,310
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2015 11:28:16 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/10/2015 10:32:58 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
There is no logical argument, philosophical principle, scientific evidence, or any evidence at all that the Atheist default position (instantly disbelieve before evaluating) is rational or accurate position to advance.

It is in every way Bull Shite.

The only rational use of default positions is in constructed systems for pragmatic reasons. Such as Law. Where time and resources and the swift execution of justice make it cost prohibitive to have two equal sides debate.

Hope this helps some read a book

This is the kind of reasoning I'd expect from someone who hasn't actually given any thought to what it means to evaluate a claim and determine whether it is believable. What does it mean to disbelieve without evaluating? For anyone, atheist or otherwise, to disbelieve a claim without evaluating it would be to disbelieve a stream of syllables or characters that haven't been understood as a claim to begin with. Just parsing languages requires evaluation, even if it is subconscious.

If you want to say you meant thorough, conscious evaluation, then I defer to Skepticalone who has already thoroughly explained how wrong you are.
bulproof
Posts: 25,296
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2015 11:29:48 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/10/2015 10:32:58 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
There is no logical argument, philosophical principle, scientific evidence, or any evidence at all that the Atheist default position (instantly disbelieve before evaluating) is rational or accurate position to advance.
Except that the existence of gods (thousands of) are only the claim of MEN.
Men also claim the existence of many other mythological characters.
Believe the fantasies that you choose.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2015 11:44:52 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/10/2015 11:24:41 AM, Floid wrote:
At 7/10/2015 10:32:58 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
There is no logical argument, philosophical principle, scientific evidence, or any evidence at all that the Atheist default position (instantly disbelieve before evaluating) is rational or accurate position to advance.

Assuming a claim false until evidence has been provided to support its validity (something you can evaluate) is the default position in logic, philosophy, and science. This idea is commonly called "the burden of proof".

Assuming a claim false... no read a book on Argument from Ignorance.
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,134
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2015 12:03:56 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/10/2015 11:27:24 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 7/10/2015 11:16:03 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 7/10/2015 10:32:58 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
There is no logical argument, philosophical principle, scientific evidence, or any evidence at all that the Atheist default position (instantly disbelieve before evaluating) is rational or accurate position to advance.

Really?! Do you know how many years of evaluation were necessary before I realized disbelief was reasonable? Get out of here with that shhtuff. Disbelief is the default position.

With all due respect (and I don't have much for 90% of the clowns on here, on both sides), you are hardly a disbeliever. You have a definite belief system, and one can piece it together from your conversations with PGA, mainly.

You know and understand full well the significance of:

Date of Acts --> Date of Luke --> if prior to AD 62 --> inexplicable prophesies.

Therefore, on that point alone, you have a belief system, albeit a sort-of supporting structure, that is 99.4% imperative that you follow. You nearly have to assert that those "prophesies" were recorded and embellished (or fabricated) after-the-fact. The same holds true, possibly to a greater extent, on the prophesies in Daniel.

Thus, one can hardly "default" to atheism. Agnosticism ("I don't know - maybe and maybe not.") is closer to the default.

Well, that is fair point about my position on the Christian god, and I do not claim I merely have disbelief on that god although I do disbelieve the claims of Christians. My belief that "the Christian God does not exist" is another matter and as to the specifics you mentioned, that is for another thread. The OP has not defined god so I assume he is referring to a deistic God, and I am very much (and only) a nonbeliever in regards to that concept. I am a non believer either way.

As to the thread, my personal beliefs or disbeliefs are irrelevant to disbelief being the default position. All claims are not accepted by default, thus disbelief is the default.

Also, Agnosticism is disbelief.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
EtrnlVw
Posts: 2,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2015 12:07:28 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/10/2015 11:22:50 AM, Reasonslap wrote:
What a wasted human being. He could become a great person, but damn religion holds him back. The ignorance of religion makes him ignorant.

Yeah, you believed the lies and brainwashing from militant atheists that Theists are the dumb ones and they're indoctrinated. Now you're getting a taste of the real world and it won't be long before you realize it's the atheists that are the stupid ones and you've been spoon fed cheap hogwash, now you're a part of the herd.

Look pipsqueak, the only waste that is transpiring is your vulnerable mind, theists believe it or not are the true free thinkers, we have not the restrictions and filters the atheist mindset has and our dimension of thinking is much higher.
Mhyke is too decent to give you a proper lashing but your comment is the epitome of atheist dogma.
dhardage
Posts: 4,545
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2015 12:32:37 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/10/2015 12:07:28 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 7/10/2015 11:22:50 AM, Reasonslap wrote:
What a wasted human being. He could become a great person, but damn religion holds him back. The ignorance of religion makes him ignorant.

Yeah, you believed the lies and brainwashing from militant atheists that Theists are the dumb ones and they're indoctrinated. Now you're getting a taste of the real world and it won't be long before you realize it's the atheists that are the stupid ones and you've been spoon fed cheap hogwash, now you're a part of the herd.

Look pipsqueak, the only waste that is transpiring is your vulnerable mind, theists believe it or not are the true free thinkers, we have not the restrictions and filters the atheist mindset has and our dimension of thinking is much higher.
Mhyke is too decent to give you a proper lashing but your comment is the epitome of atheist dogma.

And yours is a prime example of theist egomania. You somehow believe that you're superior to anyone who doesn't believe as you do and seek to demean and demonize them by any means possible. What was it the Christian holy book said? Oh, right. "Pride goeth before destruction, and a haughty attitude before a fall." It's one of those seven deadly sins you're warned about too but I suppose that's one of those parts of that book that is only allegory and not supposed to be taken literally.
Reasonslap
Posts: 221
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2015 12:48:23 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/10/2015 12:07:28 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 7/10/2015 11:22:50 AM, Reasonslap wrote:
What a wasted human being. He could become a great person, but damn religion holds him back. The ignorance of religion makes him ignorant.

Yeah, you believed the lies and brainwashing from militant atheists that Theists are the dumb ones and they're indoctrinated. Now you're getting a taste of the real world and it won't be long before you realize it's the atheists that are the stupid ones and you've been spoon fed cheap hogwash, now you're a part of the herd.

Look pipsqueak, the only waste that is transpiring is your vulnerable mind, theists believe it or not are the true free thinkers, we have not the restrictions and filters the atheist mindset has and our dimension of thinking is much higher.
Mhyke is too decent to give you a proper lashing but your comment is the epitome of atheist dogma.

Really? And what evidence do you have for religion? And which religion is right?
annanicole
Posts: 19,791
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2015 12:53:42 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/10/2015 12:03:56 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 7/10/2015 11:27:24 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 7/10/2015 11:16:03 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 7/10/2015 10:32:58 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
There is no logical argument, philosophical principle, scientific evidence, or any evidence at all that the Atheist default position (instantly disbelieve before evaluating) is rational or accurate position to advance.

Really?! Do you know how many years of evaluation were necessary before I realized disbelief was reasonable? Get out of here with that shhtuff. Disbelief is the default position.

With all due respect (and I don't have much for 90% of the clowns on here, on both sides), you are hardly a disbeliever. You have a definite belief system, and one can piece it together from your conversations with PGA, mainly.

You know and understand full well the significance of:

Date of Acts --> Date of Luke --> if prior to AD 62 --> inexplicable prophesies.

Therefore, on that point alone, you have a belief system, albeit a sort-of supporting structure, that is 99.4% imperative that you follow. You nearly have to assert that those "prophesies" were recorded and embellished (or fabricated) after-the-fact. The same holds true, possibly to a greater extent, on the prophesies in Daniel.

Thus, one can hardly "default" to atheism. Agnosticism ("I don't know - maybe and maybe not.") is closer to the default.

Well, that is fair point about my position on the Christian god, and I do not claim I merely have disbelief on that god although I do disbelieve the claims of Christians. My belief that "the Christian God does not exist" is another matter and as to the specifics you mentioned, that is for another thread. The OP has not defined god so I assume he is referring to a deistic God, and I am very much (and only) a nonbeliever in regards to that concept. I am a non believer either way.

As to the thread, my personal beliefs or disbeliefs are irrelevant to disbelief being the default position. All claims are not accepted by default, thus disbelief is the default.

Also, Agnosticism is disbelief.

Well, you are pulling a MadCornish and redefining the word, then. The very derivation of the word means "not to know", of course. Thus, it is the equivalent of saying, "I just don't know."

According to the philosopher William L. Rowe: "In the popular sense of the term, an agnostic is someone who neither believes nor disbelieves in the existence of God, while a theist believes that God exists, an atheist disbelieves in God" - copied from Wikipedia

I'll agree with that. I think I could soap up that explanation and make it lather. According to whatever definition you are using, agnosticism and atheism are functionally the same thing, perhaps differing only in degree.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
IceCreamforBreakfast
Posts: 51
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2015 12:56:56 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Hey OP, take a guess as to why I don't agree with your arguments against the default position being negative.
EtrnlVw
Posts: 2,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2015 1:01:36 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/10/2015 12:32:37 PM, dhardage wrote:
At 7/10/2015 12:07:28 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 7/10/2015 11:22:50 AM, Reasonslap wrote:
What a wasted human being. He could become a great person, but damn religion holds him back. The ignorance of religion makes him ignorant.

Yeah, you believed the lies and brainwashing from militant atheists that Theists are the dumb ones and they're indoctrinated. Now you're getting a taste of the real world and it won't be long before you realize it's the atheists that are the stupid ones and you've been spoon fed cheap hogwash, now you're a part of the herd.

Look pipsqueak, the only waste that is transpiring is your vulnerable mind, theists believe it or not are the true free thinkers, we have not the restrictions and filters the atheist mindset has and our dimension of thinking is much higher.
Mhyke is too decent to give you a proper lashing but your comment is the epitome of atheist dogma.

And yours is a prime example of theist egomania. You somehow believe that you're superior to anyone who doesn't believe as you do and seek to demean and demonize them by any means possible. What was it the Christian holy book said? Oh, right. "Pride goeth before destruction, and a haughty attitude before a fall." It's one of those seven deadly sins you're warned about too but I suppose that's one of those parts of that book that is only allegory and not supposed to be taken literally.

Nice try Hardage, you can break out Christian teaching while you're running for cover but I'm not gonna stand by and watch any of you degrade my brother without reason and atheists have taken the high road too long around here. That was entirely out of line, I've done my share but only with bullies and atheists who spout this nonsense like it is truth.
Atheists are notorious for dishing out what they can't take and of course once again your taste for double standards is shown when you get a little hot under the collar at my comment yet ignore your haughty boy just called an outstanding member a wasted human being, that is about as low as you can get so maybe you should buzz off.
EtrnlVw
Posts: 2,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2015 1:07:28 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/10/2015 12:48:23 PM, Reasonslap wrote:
At 7/10/2015 12:07:28 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 7/10/2015 11:22:50 AM, Reasonslap wrote:
What a wasted human being. He could become a great person, but damn religion holds him back. The ignorance of religion makes him ignorant.

Yeah, you believed the lies and brainwashing from militant atheists that Theists are the dumb ones and they're indoctrinated. Now you're getting a taste of the real world and it won't be long before you realize it's the atheists that are the stupid ones and you've been spoon fed cheap hogwash, now you're a part of the herd.

Look pipsqueak, the only waste that is transpiring is your vulnerable mind, theists believe it or not are the true free thinkers, we have not the restrictions and filters the atheist mindset has and our dimension of thinking is much higher.
Mhyke is too decent to give you a proper lashing but your comment is the epitome of atheist dogma.

Really? And what evidence do you have for religion? And which religion is right?

You disgust me and that was a pretty low comment to someone I really doubt deserved it, me on the other hand maybe but certainly not Mhyke. I'm not going to answer any of your questions.
To call someone a wasted human being for no apparent reason shows you are not even worth talking to.
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,134
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2015 1:43:58 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/10/2015 12:53:42 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 7/10/2015 12:03:56 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 7/10/2015 11:27:24 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 7/10/2015 11:16:03 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 7/10/2015 10:32:58 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
There is no logical argument, philosophical principle, scientific evidence, or any evidence at all that the Atheist default position (instantly disbelieve before evaluating) is rational or accurate position to advance.

Really?! Do you know how many years of evaluation were necessary before I realized disbelief was reasonable? Get out of here with that shhtuff. Disbelief is the default position.

With all due respect (and I don't have much for 90% of the clowns on here, on both sides), you are hardly a disbeliever. You have a definite belief system, and one can piece it together from your conversations with PGA, mainly.

You know and understand full well the significance of:

Date of Acts --> Date of Luke --> if prior to AD 62 --> inexplicable prophesies.

Therefore, on that point alone, you have a belief system, albeit a sort-of supporting structure, that is 99.4% imperative that you follow. You nearly have to assert that those "prophesies" were recorded and embellished (or fabricated) after-the-fact. The same holds true, possibly to a greater extent, on the prophesies in Daniel.

Thus, one can hardly "default" to atheism. Agnosticism ("I don't know - maybe and maybe not.") is closer to the default.

Well, that is fair point about my position on the Christian god, and I do not claim I merely have disbelief on that god although I do disbelieve the claims of Christians. My belief that "the Christian God does not exist" is another matter and as to the specifics you mentioned, that is for another thread. The OP has not defined god so I assume he is referring to a deistic God, and I am very much (and only) a nonbeliever in regards to that concept. I am a non believer either way.

As to the thread, my personal beliefs or disbeliefs are irrelevant to disbelief being the default position. All claims are not accepted by default, thus disbelief is the default.

Also, Agnosticism is disbelief.

Well, you are pulling a MadCornish and redefining the word, then. The very derivation of the word means "not to know", of course. Thus, it is the equivalent of saying, "I just don't know."

Yes, I agree with this. However, if you don't know if a claim is true, then you disbelieve it. Agnostics don't believe there is sufficient knowledge to accept the claims "God Exists" or "God does not exist". They disbelieve both claims. I stand by "agnosticism is disbelief".

According to the philosopher William L. Rowe: "In the popular sense of the term, an agnostic is someone who neither believes nor disbelieves in the existence of God, while a theist believes that God exists, an atheist disbelieves in God" - copied from Wikipedia

I'll agree with that. I think I could soap up that explanation and make it lather. According to whatever definition you are using, agnosticism and atheism are functionally the same thing, perhaps differing only in degree.

Agnosticism is fundamentally disbelief of both claims, while atheism disbelieves "God Exists" and may claim "God does not exist"
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
annanicole
Posts: 19,791
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2015 1:50:33 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/10/2015 1:43:58 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 7/10/2015 12:53:42 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 7/10/2015 12:03:56 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 7/10/2015 11:27:24 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 7/10/2015 11:16:03 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 7/10/2015 10:32:58 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
There is no logical argument, philosophical principle, scientific evidence, or any evidence at all that the Atheist default position (instantly disbelieve before evaluating) is rational or accurate position to advance.

Really?! Do you know how many years of evaluation were necessary before I realized disbelief was reasonable? Get out of here with that shhtuff. Disbelief is the default position.

With all due respect (and I don't have much for 90% of the clowns on here, on both sides), you are hardly a disbeliever. You have a definite belief system, and one can piece it together from your conversations with PGA, mainly.

You know and understand full well the significance of:

Date of Acts --> Date of Luke --> if prior to AD 62 --> inexplicable prophesies.

Therefore, on that point alone, you have a belief system, albeit a sort-of supporting structure, that is 99.4% imperative that you follow. You nearly have to assert that those "prophesies" were recorded and embellished (or fabricated) after-the-fact. The same holds true, possibly to a greater extent, on the prophesies in Daniel.

Thus, one can hardly "default" to atheism. Agnosticism ("I don't know - maybe and maybe not.") is closer to the default.

Well, that is fair point about my position on the Christian god, and I do not claim I merely have disbelief on that god although I do disbelieve the claims of Christians. My belief that "the Christian God does not exist" is another matter and as to the specifics you mentioned, that is for another thread. The OP has not defined god so I assume he is referring to a deistic God, and I am very much (and only) a nonbeliever in regards to that concept. I am a non believer either way.

As to the thread, my personal beliefs or disbeliefs are irrelevant to disbelief being the default position. All claims are not accepted by default, thus disbelief is the default.

Also, Agnosticism is disbelief.

Well, you are pulling a MadCornish and redefining the word, then. The very derivation of the word means "not to know", of course. Thus, it is the equivalent of saying, "I just don't know."

Yes, I agree with this. However, if you don't know if a claim is true, then you disbelieve it.

Ummm ... I think the problem is right there: agnostics "do not know" if a claim is true; therefore, they do NOT say "I disbelieve it." They very accurately say, "I do not know."

Agnostics don't believe there is sufficient knowledge to accept the claims "God Exists" or "God does not exist".

Not necessarily. Insufficient knowledge is but one of the reasons. However, assuming the accuracy of your statement, they say, "I refuse to place myself in one corner or another because there is insufficient knowledge."

They disbelieve both claims. I stand by "agnosticism is disbelief".

They according to you, nobody could ever claim, "I do not know" on any subject whatsoever without being classed as an unbeliever.

According to the philosopher William L. Rowe: "In the popular sense of the term, an agnostic is someone who neither believes nor disbelieves in the existence of God, while a theist believes that God exists, an atheist disbelieves in God" - copied from Wikipedia

I'll agree with that. I think I could soap up that explanation and make it lather. According to whatever definition you are using, agnosticism and atheism are functionally the same thing, perhaps differing only in degree.

Agnosticism is fundamentally disbelief of both claims, while atheism disbelieves "God Exists" and may claim "God does not exist"

Then by your definition, even theism qualifies as disbelief. A disbelief in the negative, i. e. that they disbelieve the claim that there is no God or gods.

Your remodeling of the definition is causing to you classify everyone as a disbeliever. I'd rethink that if I were you.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
SamStevens
Posts: 3,819
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2015 1:54:52 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/10/2015 1:07:28 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 7/10/2015 12:48:23 PM, Reasonslap wrote:
At 7/10/2015 12:07:28 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 7/10/2015 11:22:50 AM, Reasonslap wrote:
What a wasted human being. He could become a great person, but damn religion holds him back. The ignorance of religion makes him ignorant.

Yeah, you believed the lies and brainwashing from militant atheists that Theists are the dumb ones and they're indoctrinated. Now you're getting a taste of the real world and it won't be long before you realize it's the atheists that are the stupid ones and you've been spoon fed cheap hogwash, now you're a part of the herd.

Look pipsqueak, the only waste that is transpiring is your vulnerable mind, theists believe it or not are the true free thinkers, we have not the restrictions and filters the atheist mindset has and our dimension of thinking is much higher.
Mhyke is too decent to give you a proper lashing but your comment is the epitome of atheist dogma.

Really? And what evidence do you have for religion? And which religion is right?

You disgust me and that was a pretty low comment to someone I really doubt deserved it, me on the other hand maybe but certainly not Mhyke. I'm not going to answer any of your questions.
To call someone a wasted human being for no apparent reason shows you are not even worth talking to.

+1
"This is the true horror of religion. It allows perfectly decent and sane people to believe by the billions, what only lunatics could believe on their own." Sam Harris
Life asked Death "Why do people love me but hate you?"
Death responded: "Because you are a beautiful lie, and I am the painful truth."
Chaosism
Posts: 2,674
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2015 1:58:09 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/10/2015 1:43:58 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 7/10/2015 12:53:42 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 7/10/2015 12:03:56 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 7/10/2015 11:27:24 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 7/10/2015 11:16:03 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 7/10/2015 10:32:58 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
There is no logical argument, philosophical principle, scientific evidence, or any evidence at all that the Atheist default position (instantly disbelieve before evaluating) is rational or accurate position to advance.

Really?! Do you know how many years of evaluation were necessary before I realized disbelief was reasonable? Get out of here with that shhtuff. Disbelief is the default position.

With all due respect (and I don't have much for 90% of the clowns on here, on both sides), you are hardly a disbeliever. You have a definite belief system, and one can piece it together from your conversations with PGA, mainly.

You know and understand full well the significance of:

Date of Acts --> Date of Luke --> if prior to AD 62 --> inexplicable prophesies.

Therefore, on that point alone, you have a belief system, albeit a sort-of supporting structure, that is 99.4% imperative that you follow. You nearly have to assert that those "prophesies" were recorded and embellished (or fabricated) after-the-fact. The same holds true, possibly to a greater extent, on the prophesies in Daniel.

Thus, one can hardly "default" to atheism. Agnosticism ("I don't know - maybe and maybe not.") is closer to the default.

Well, that is fair point about my position on the Christian god, and I do not claim I merely have disbelief on that god although I do disbelieve the claims of Christians. My belief that "the Christian God does not exist" is another matter and as to the specifics you mentioned, that is for another thread. The OP has not defined god so I assume he is referring to a deistic God, and I am very much (and only) a nonbeliever in regards to that concept. I am a non believer either way.

As to the thread, my personal beliefs or disbeliefs are irrelevant to disbelief being the default position. All claims are not accepted by default, thus disbelief is the default.

Also, Agnosticism is disbelief.

Well, you are pulling a MadCornish and redefining the word, then. The very derivation of the word means "not to know", of course. Thus, it is the equivalent of saying, "I just don't know."

Yes, I agree with this. However, if you don't know if a claim is true, then you disbelieve it. Agnostics don't believe there is sufficient knowledge to accept the claims "God Exists" or "God does not exist". They disbelieve both claims. I stand by "agnosticism is disbelief".

According to the philosopher William L. Rowe: "In the popular sense of the term, an agnostic is someone who neither believes nor disbelieves in the existence of God, while a theist believes that God exists, an atheist disbelieves in God" - copied from Wikipedia

I'll agree with that. I think I could soap up that explanation and make it lather. According to whatever definition you are using, agnosticism and atheism are functionally the same thing, perhaps differing only in degree.

Agnosticism is fundamentally disbelief of both claims, while atheism disbelieves "God Exists" and may claim "God does not exist"

The way I have understood it is that an Agnostic in one who believes that no one can know the truth about God; "a-" (without) + "-gnosis" (knowledge). This is a belief.

This word is defined differently regionally, apparently:

Oxford British & World Definition:
Agnostic : A person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God.

Oxford US Definition:
Agnostic : A person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena; a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God.

Secondary Oxford definition for both:
Agnostic: (In a nonreligious context) having a doubtful or noncommittal attitude toward something.
dhardage
Posts: 4,545
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2015 2:20:38 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/10/2015 1:01:36 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 7/10/2015 12:32:37 PM, dhardage wrote:
At 7/10/2015 12:07:28 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 7/10/2015 11:22:50 AM, Reasonslap wrote:
What a wasted human being. He could become a great person, but damn religion holds him back. The ignorance of religion makes him ignorant.

Yeah, you believed the lies and brainwashing from militant atheists that Theists are the dumb ones and they're indoctrinated. Now you're getting a taste of the real world and it won't be long before you realize it's the atheists that are the stupid ones and you've been spoon fed cheap hogwash, now you're a part of the herd.

Look pipsqueak, the only waste that is transpiring is your vulnerable mind, theists believe it or not are the true free thinkers, we have not the restrictions and filters the atheist mindset has and our dimension of thinking is much higher.
Mhyke is too decent to give you a proper lashing but your comment is the epitome of atheist dogma.

And yours is a prime example of theist egomania. You somehow believe that you're superior to anyone who doesn't believe as you do and seek to demean and demonize them by any means possible. What was it the Christian holy book said? Oh, right. "Pride goeth before destruction, and a haughty attitude before a fall." It's one of those seven deadly sins you're warned about too but I suppose that's one of those parts of that book that is only allegory and not supposed to be taken literally.

Nice try Hardage, you can break out Christian teaching while you're running for cover but I'm not gonna stand by and watch any of you degrade my brother without reason and atheists have taken the high road too long around here. That was entirely out of line, I've done my share but only with bullies and atheists who spout this nonsense like it is truth.
Atheists are notorious for dishing out what they can't take and of course once again your taste for double standards is shown when you get a little hot under the collar at my comment yet ignore your haughty boy just called an outstanding member a wasted human being, that is about as low as you can get so maybe you should buzz off.

If you can't stand the heat, as they say, get out of the kitchen. I'm assuming the 'outstanding member' you are referring to is an adult and as such should be able to defend himself from anything another adult can say. If it is has no merit he should simply ignore it. I would not have mentioned anything but you seem to generalize anyone who does not agree with your belief system into a homogenous group and have no problem spitting out insults and epithets at the group. Seems like you have a rather personal issue with anyone calling Mykhiel out on his remarkable lack of education regarding logic when he tries to tell others how to apply it. If you want to defend him that's your business but when you denigrate an entire group of people due to a fit of personal pique you should be prepared to be called out on that as well.

As with most theist you are a raging hypocrite. You react like an angry child instead of demonstrating that someone was wrong yet claim they are 'haughty' when they simply state an opinion. If you can't act like an adult perhaps you should 'buzz off', to use your own parlance.

As for decent, Mykhiel has been as insulting and disrespectful as anyone else here, perhaps more so, so I doubt that is keeping him from giving anyone a 'tongue lashing' (silly phrase). I have to wonder why you feel it's your duty to act as if you were his father protecting him from a bully.
slo1
Posts: 4,361
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2015 2:51:16 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/10/2015 10:32:58 AM, Mhykiel wrote:

fixed

There is no logical argument, philosophical principle, scientific evidence, or any evidence at all that the Theists default position (instantly believing before evaluating) is rational or accurate position to advance.

It is in every way Bull Shite.

The only rational use of default positions is in constructed systems for pragmatic reasons. Such as Law. Where time and resources and the swift execution of justice make it cost prohibitive to have two equal sides debate.

Hope this helps some burn a book
EtrnlVw
Posts: 2,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2015 4:56:56 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/10/2015 2:20:38 PM, dhardage wrote:
At 7/10/2015 1:01:36 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 7/10/2015 12:32:37 PM, dhardage wrote:
At 7/10/2015 12:07:28 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 7/10/2015 11:22:50 AM, Reasonslap wrote:
What a wasted human being. He could become a great person, but damn religion holds him back. The ignorance of religion makes him ignorant.

Yeah, you believed the lies and brainwashing from militant atheists that Theists are the dumb ones and they're indoctrinated. Now you're getting a taste of the real world and it won't be long before you realize it's the atheists that are the stupid ones and you've been spoon fed cheap hogwash, now you're a part of the herd.

Look pipsqueak, the only waste that is transpiring is your vulnerable mind, theists believe it or not are the true free thinkers, we have not the restrictions and filters the atheist mindset has and our dimension of thinking is much higher.
Mhyke is too decent to give you a proper lashing but your comment is the epitome of atheist dogma.

And yours is a prime example of theist egomania. You somehow believe that you're superior to anyone who doesn't believe as you do and seek to demean and demonize them by any means possible. What was it the Christian holy book said? Oh, right. "Pride goeth before destruction, and a haughty attitude before a fall." It's one of those seven deadly sins you're warned about too but I suppose that's one of those parts of that book that is only allegory and not supposed to be taken literally.

Nice try Hardage, you can break out Christian teaching while you're running for cover but I'm not gonna stand by and watch any of you degrade my brother without reason and atheists have taken the high road too long around here. That was entirely out of line, I've done my share but only with bullies and atheists who spout this nonsense like it is truth.
Atheists are notorious for dishing out what they can't take and of course once again your taste for double standards is shown when you get a little hot under the collar at my comment yet ignore your haughty boy just called an outstanding member a wasted human being, that is about as low as you can get so maybe you should buzz off.

If you can't stand the heat, as they say, get out of the kitchen. I'm assuming the 'outstanding member' you are referring to is an adult and as such should be able to defend himself from anything another adult can say. If it is has no merit he should simply ignore it. I would not have mentioned anything but you seem to generalize anyone who does not agree with your belief system into a homogenous group and have no problem spitting out insults and epithets at the group. Seems like you have a rather personal issue with anyone calling Mykhiel out on his remarkable lack of education regarding logic when he tries to tell others how to apply it. If you want to defend him that's your business but when you denigrate an entire group of people due to a fit of personal pique you should be prepared to be called out on that as well.

As with most theist you are a raging hypocrite. You react like an angry child instead of demonstrating that someone was wrong yet claim they are 'haughty' when they simply state an opinion. If you can't act like an adult perhaps you should 'buzz off', to use your own parlance.

As for decent, Mykhiel has been as insulting and disrespectful as anyone else here, perhaps more so, so I doubt that is keeping him from giving anyone a 'tongue lashing' (silly phrase). I have to wonder why you feel it's your duty to act as if you were his father protecting him from a bully.

What I said stands as none of this holds any truth, if you think I'm a raging hypocrite you are completely lost.

"State an opinion" LOL no, this is what the other poster did well before me.... "you seem to generalize anyone who does not agree with your belief system into a homogenous group and have no problem spitting out insults and epithets at the group" ...below.... hypocrite....

"What a wasted human being. He could become a great person, but damn religion holds him back. The ignorance of religion makes him ignorant."
That is generalizing people, my comment was a retaliation, if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen, right?
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2015 5:00:05 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/10/2015 11:28:16 AM, Burzmali wrote:
At 7/10/2015 10:32:58 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
There is no logical argument, philosophical principle, scientific evidence, or any evidence at all that the Atheist default position (instantly disbelieve before evaluating) is rational or accurate position to advance.

It is in every way Bull Shite.

The only rational use of default positions is in constructed systems for pragmatic reasons. Such as Law. Where time and resources and the swift execution of justice make it cost prohibitive to have two equal sides debate.

Hope this helps some read a book

This is the kind of reasoning I'd expect from someone who hasn't actually given any thought to what it means to evaluate a claim and determine whether it is believable. What does it mean to disbelieve without evaluating? For anyone, atheist or otherwise, to disbelieve a claim without evaluating it would be to disbelieve a stream of syllables or characters that haven't been understood as a claim to begin with. Just parsing languages requires evaluation, even if it is subconscious.

Atheist tactic: word ambiguity and equivocation fallacy.

While it is understood the "sense" of the word "evaluation" in the OP is "to judge or determine the significance, worth, or quality of; assess: "

You change this in your reply by using the term "evaluation" in the "sense" : "to process for understanding" Or what ever you meant by subconscious evaluation because I couldn't find an appropriate definition int he dictionary for the way you used it.


If you want to say you meant thorough, conscious evaluation, then I defer to Skepticalone who has already thoroughly explained how wrong you are.

I refer you to my reply to Skeptical, coming soon.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2015 5:07:48 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/10/2015 11:16:03 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 7/10/2015 10:32:58 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
There is no logical argument, philosophical principle, scientific evidence, or any evidence at all that the Atheist default position (instantly disbelieve before evaluating) is rational or accurate position to advance.

Really?! Do you know how many years of evaluation were necessary before I realized disbelief was reasonable? Get out of here with that shhtuff. Disbelief is the default position. If I propose any extraordinary concept which is not congruous with your current knowledge, then you (by default) will withhold belief. I know many have provided examples of this to you. Do you deny this? If so, your words and your actions must be contradictory. I see no way for a rational person to function while accepting every claim by default, and while this post is not your best example, I have seen very reasonable post from you leading me to think you are a rational being.

It is in every way Bull Shite.

The only rational use of default positions is in constructed systems for pragmatic reasons. Such as Law. Where time and resources and the swift execution of justice make it cost prohibitive to have two equal sides debate.

Hope this helps some read a book

I said pragmatic reasons. So while a rational person will find difficulty logically addressing every claim they encounter, due to practicality they use presumptions.

But with holding judgement and abstaining from taking a side of "True" or "False" is being a skeptic. Making no judgement. But this is not what is meant or expressed by Atheist when they use the term "default position" They do not say the default position is agnosticism and ignorance. No they say, and you, have said that the default position is to DENY a claim, presume it False.

So those are two completely different things. And the latter is illogic.

interesting as you begin to support your position you start with...

"Really?! Do you know how many years of evaluation were necessary before I realized..."

Well if it took you years to come to a conclusion then it is not a default position.

And you are aware that you are using anecdotal personal experience and trials as evidence to support your position? Tell me do you give weight to the eye witnessing and testimonies of Believers or .. is it only your experience that counts for something? (rhetorical)