Forum Index            

Cookies Consent Information
SelectSmart.com®
Before you decide
Over 20,000 selectors

Join to post comments.
Share
Try These Selectors:
Best college values

Good jobs in gig economy

Right religion for you

Presidential candidates

Best US city for you

Know your philosophy

Landmark decisions
Is your name welcomed below? Then you can post here. Otherwise, click "Log In" to post!
Welcome! » Log In » Create A New Profile

Towards a constructive and meaningful conversation on the fundamental nature of the universe

Posted by TheThorn 
If all belief is faith-based it renders faith meaningless.

All belief is not faith based. Belief based on logical proof or material evidence is a rational belief.

If it's reserved only for beliefs that are irrational then it's useless.

What in the hell are you talking about?

Tuk has a lot of faith in foundational beingthings and he wants to make sure everyone else CONFESSES they have faith, too,

No dipshit, it's about intellectual honesty. You have none. All you care about is cheerleading atheist nonsense.

He pretends I'm talking gibberish but Dick didn't have any trouble at all understanding my arguments.

You are talking gibberish. Eg how do you know one day God isn't a square circle nonsense...

Tuk has plugged his god into an equation where it is not only unnecessary but improbable and possibly impossible! Poor agnogs got nuthin'...

Possibly impossible... Ugh

Sam impossible means: not possible...
Just because you don't get it doesn't mean it's gibberish, lol. You actually think some godbeing created the universe! I don't think I'm much worried about your opinion of me. "Intellectual honesty"?? What could be more intellectually dishonest than making up a diety that has no attributes but is somehow responsible for the creation of the universe? And name calling, dipshit? Really? ugh
You people were talking past each other 3 years ago. Good Lord - give it up already.
Just because you don't get it doesn't mean it's gibberish, lol.

It's gibberish cause it's gibberish. It makes no sense to think something that is coherent is possibly nonsense.

You actually think some godbeing created the universe

No I think it's possible and not obvious at all that it's improbable. We have given you time and time again to defend yourself and you fail hard each time. Atheistic arguments are unconvincing at best and fallacious at worst. Especially fallacious when you try to defend it.

esty"?? What could be more intellectually dishonest than making up a diety that has no attributes but is somehow responsible for the creation of the universe?

There is no reason to assume particular attributes. All that is necessary are the terms being, eternal, and foundational. If I added a particular attribute one can conceive of a simpler explanation to account for all reality.

Yes name calling. You lost your right to a civil conversation a long time ago. Who is it that has been calling her debating partner crazy and deluded for years just because they hold a different metaphysic? Who are you kidding?
Horns I'm hearing every word she is saying...

Philosophers have known for years strong Atheism isn't rational. Nobody seriously defends it.
Well I wish you continued fun now and in the years to come. grinning smiley



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/18/2015 06:14AM by Hornswoggle.
How you view the world ie your philosophy shapes your values, your politics, your attitude, our society, our country...
Re: Towards a constructive and meaningful conversation on the fundamental nature of the universe
March 18, 2015 08:51AM
Quote
tuk22
Horns I'm hearing every word she is saying...

Philosophers have known for years strong Atheism isn't rational. Nobody seriously defends it.

LOL You got that just about backward.

Philosophers are atheist by a wide margin. There are relatively few theists in that profession and virtually no fundamentalists. Virtually all philosophers who call themselves theists specialize in philosophy of religion just as you would probably expect.
.
Most philosophers and atheists are weak atheists. Very few people defend the idea we live in a world absent of God and everyone I've read trying to defend it on rational grounds have failed miserably.
Re: Towards a constructive and meaningful conversation on the fundamental nature of the universe
March 18, 2015 05:39PM
The vast majority of philosophers no more believe God, as commonly defined, exists than believe Nessie, as commonly defined, exists.

The definition of God, like the definition of anything else, can be changed so that the concept of belief no longer applies.
All definitions of God are theological constructs. Strong atheists assert the positive claim that no Gods exist. They also claim they have special knowledge... They know no gods exist.
Re: Towards a constructive and meaningful conversation on the fundamental nature of the universe
March 18, 2015 10:28PM
Atheists no more claim "special knowledge" of God's nonexistence than they claim special knowledge of the nonexistence of fairies. I as a strong atheist know that Gods, as commonly defined, no more exist in this world than fairies, as commonly defined, do. I don't have to examine all of spacetime to assert, "I know that fairies don't exist even though they could." Neither do I have to examine all of spacetime to assert "I know that God doesn't exist even though (by some definitions) he could."
Ugh everybody is a strong atheist for some Gods that's really not interesting.

I don't care to entertain religious concepts. Religion is not a threat to rationality or science. It's just not. It's like saying Hampton is a threat to Kentucky. If you truly want to promote rationality and thought you're doing it all wrong...
Re: Towards a constructive and meaningful conversation on the fundamental nature of the universe
March 20, 2015 02:33AM
Quote
tuk
Religion is not a threat to rationality or science.

Religion is the biggest source of irrationality in the world today. Just a couple, among millions, of examples:

One, you may think it's no big deal for someone to walk into a crowd of innocent people and blow himself and them to smithereens because he's become convinced by poor, weak, fallacy-ridden arguments that a heaven exists and that's the way to get there, but I do.

Two, the completely wrongheaded opposition to embryonic stem cell research based on the irrational notion that people are people before they are people.

It's religion. It's lunacy. It needs to end.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/20/2015 02:34AM by Dick.
Re: Towards a constructive and meaningful conversation on the fundamental nature of the universe
March 20, 2015 02:48AM
Quote
tuk
Ugh everybody is a strong atheist for some Gods that's really not interesting.

That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that atheists do not claim to have the "special knowledge" that you say they claim. By "special knowledge" I assume (and please correct me if my assumption is mistaken) you mean that atheists claim to know beyond any possible doubt that God is nonexistent. Well, this is not what strong atheists claim. We claim to know that God doesn't exist in the same way that we claim to know fairies don't exist.

Could some god or fairy exist? Of course, one could; but the possibility that one does exist, given what we know about the concepts of gods and fairies, make the probability so remote that it's not worthy of serious consideration.
Translation of tuk's nonreligious (hehe) godthing: being, foundational, eternal. Being=Is, Foundational=Was, Eternal=Always shall be. Is, was and always shall be. Sound familiar to anyone? I think I heard that in church once a long time ago before my lazy brainwashers let me stay home on sundays. Join the Agnogs today and you, too, can have all the warm fuzzies of the goddy religions without having to sound crazy (or so silly agnogs think).
Lol I can't believe you actually think the god = fairies argument is convincing... It's so stupid...
I had the flying spaghetti monster for dinner tonight.
I can't believe in an eternal foundation being either. So veryvery stupid.
Re: Towards a constructive and meaningful conversation on the fundamental nature of the universe
March 21, 2015 01:34AM
Quote
Hornswoggle
I had the flying spaghetti monster for dinner tonight.

I had Jesus for dinner in the Eucharist the other day. He's actually quite tasty for a nonexistent god but I found his blood a bit sweet for the palette.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login


This forum powered by Phorum

Cookies Consent Policy & Privacy Statement. All Rights Reserved. SelectSmart® is a registered trademark. | Contact SelectSmart.com | Advertise on SelectSmart.com | This site is for sale!