Atheism = Farce!
- Thread starter Incocknito
- Start date
- Status
AquaEyes11010
Expert Member
There is nothing wrong with attacking an idea in a debate -- that is what a debate is. If you don't like your beliefs being challenged, then keep them to yourself and don't put them into a forum discussion. And remember that in such an environment, it is the idea being attacked, not the person holding the idea.
Many beliefs have benefits independent of their truth, and for that reason, if your beliefs benefit you, keep them. But if you step up and say that what the belief is actually true, then you leave it vulnerable to argument and debate. Science seeks to discover truth by doing just that, and what remains after the onslaught of debate and testing will be held as truth -- if and until it actually succumbs to an explanation which better fits the data and/or has better predictive power.
AquaEyes11010
Expert Member
Again, it all comes back to what I said earlier. Science offers answers which are supported by evidence and have survived testing. It does not offer answers which have not undergone this process, and thus there are things left unanswered (and so science continues its work). Religion offers more answers that are based on "god did it" or "because I said so" rather than any evidence, and answers which don't survive testing are said to require faith to understand.
If you would rather have any answer to every question, even if they amount to "god did it", go with religion. If you would rather have strong, supported and tested answers with greater predictive power to some questions but will concede an "I don't know" response to others, stick to science.
submit452
Legendary Member
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2007
- Posts
- 2,354
- Media
- 16
- Likes
- 1,039
- Points
- 258
- Location
- Louisville (Kentucky, United States)
- Sexuality
- 50% Straight, 50% Gay
- Gender
- Male
How most people who practice it today have a political side to it and not just un believing in a god an example would be someone who is atheist because of events like terrorism in the name of a god or because the bible is perpetuating violence and not just because they think there is no god.
This is one reason why the assumption that belief in God is, or is supposed to be, an explanation of the natural world or its existence seems to me utterly hopeless, as well as unnecessary. Considered as an explanation of the natural world, theism is a total loser, a non-starter, dead not on arrival but before departure, because, so considered, it is in competition with science, where it has no power to compete. I find it even more bizarre when many of the same people declare that belief in God is a matter of faith. Of course it is; but if it is a matter of faith then it cannot at the same time be a matter of evidence or an explanatory hypothesis.
I really do not know why this assumption is so widespread, but I suspect that the reason is that many people, especially in the US, are very poorly educated in religion, even in their own (if they profess one). Even if they are attracted to a belief in God, they are completely unacquainted with serious religious or theological thought (in which much skeptical thought is included), but imagine that they can figure everything out for themselves. So they unwittingly repeat the most tiresome fallacies of natural theology while concocting some half-baked argument out of misunderstood fragments of knowledge and opinion about the findings of science. The results are just dismal.
Thank you. I am glad to know that at least some of my posts hit their mark.
Last edited:
AquaEyes11010
Expert Member
I belong to THIS group. I acknowledge that science and religion don't have to be mutually exclusive. I've been saying that sense I was 15 or 16. I never understood why...if it rains, some will preach on the science of precipitation, while others will just say god made it rain... why can't both be somewhat true?
You don't think followers of science partake in the same behavior?
You don't think man will ever advance science far enough to test some metaphysical things? I hoped we could eventually get there....but given that both sides can't stop fighting long enough to develop any common ideas, you may be right.
Science gets involved with public policy because its method of understanding is evidence-based and has a high predictive power -- exactly what public policy decisions need. Would you feel better if foreign policy was decided by prayer?
The very definitions of metaphysical and supernatural mean that they lie outside the physical and natural, and thus can not be tested. Their existence, properties, etc. are all based on "because I said so."
I greatly doubt that this describes most atheists. (You say "most people who practice it today": but how does one "practice" atheism?) I suspect that you are thinking of, or at least reacting to, the writings and speeches of Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, and Christopher Hitchens, all of whom have made political claims of the sort that you mention. However, I don't think that those claims are why they are atheists, or that they ever argue from those claims to atheistic conclusions. I think that their main argument for atheism is just that theism does not pass rational examination. (Some of them, notably Dawkins and also Victor Stenger, go further and try to offer positive arguments for the non-existence of God. These arguments always rely on a rather simple-minded conception of God, but one which they claim, with justice, to be held by most theistic believers.) The argument that theism has a bad influence on human beings is, I think, independent.
Last edited:
AquaEyes11010
Expert Member
"If atheism is a religious belief then not collecting stamps is a hobby." --Source unknown :tongue:
I'd like to expand on the above questions.
Those of you that identify as Christian, were you raised as such, or are your beliefs a result of examining various religions and determining Christianity to be the one true religion? If it's the latter, what was the evidence that convinced you that Christianity, and/or the Bible is the true word of God?
9InchJezmo
Sexy Member
Noo we dont think there is no god because we dont like god as we keep saying as far as anyone who asks himself 'how can any of the bible stories or any religious text,be literally true?' the answer is clearly they cannot be literally true, they are fictions made up by primitive and superstitious people to explain the world around them, and at best they can be viewed as morality tales.
If they were treated as morality tales and people lived by them then that would be fine, but they dont, they use them to prop up their stupid hatereds and wars and general bullshit
the other thing is atheists dont hate god because they find it hard to hate something that doesnt exist, they do hate religion because it keeps people stupid.Its great for people who are taught from an early age to never question anything.
as far as religious people quoting the bible all days goes I especialy like the bit where it says 'beware those who stand all day in the synagog proclaiming their love of God, for they have had their reward in this world' which means if you like what you read here then live your life according to its rules but for fucks sake dont keep bleating on about it.
Last edited:
I've noticed this is the second time you have mentioned your "habit", or is it a "prescription" Nevertheless, thank you for shedding light on the perplexing short term memory lapses and mood swings..
In regard to your question about my use of ir·ref·u·ta·ble ..I use it as an adjective meaning, impossible to deny or disprove,
As in, when a child is taught in an Elementary Geography course in Christian school about "God-made landforms" and "God-made rivers", a child in a Public Elementary geography class will be taught HOW landforms gradually change through time and how rivers affect the topography around them and visa-versa. Teachers in Public Schools use interactive models and hands on experiments to teach kids the principles and concepts of geology through 'Emprical" knowledge. a source of knowledge acquired by means of observation or experimentation;
...such as your evidently, self-medicating experiences nightly and side effects the morning after..
In Latin it's called " a posteriori" (from the later) as opposed to "a priori" (from the earlier)..where believers and Theist tend to start from..
Mood swings and memory loss? Lol....gtfoh... But on to your post....
I think, if memory serves me right :biggrin1:, one of my posts mentioned my idea of God...not being some white haired old guy sitting on a cloud granting wishes and nodding his head like genie to make things happen. (I'm too lazy to comb through and find the exact post number but feel free to go look for it)... I went on to say I think God is a manipulator and wielder of nature and science. Therefore even when I take the "real" natural way Earth's land forms were "created" or came to be...I still say god did it. Not with a head nod, or the snap of his fingers, but through the same method you described....that's just me though
9InchJezmo
Sexy Member
Interesting, as far as I am aware nobody in any form of school in England is taught about 'God made' anything. If any teacher tried to teach my kids creationist theory they would find themselves in a world of trouble.
Until I lift up a stone and it says underneath 'lovingly made by God' then its going to stay that way.
Until I lift up a stone and it says underneath 'lovingly made by God' then its going to stay that way.
You all need to lighten the fuck up. I seriously thought atheist would be a more laid back crowd than some of the Christian circles I've caused a ruckus in. What you all have taught me (a long with all the wiki posts and what not) is that people are the same. No matter the race, denomination, age, or geographical affiliation. People are the fucking same every where.... Some of you are so hell bent on your cause you can't even read straight. Some of you are posers who just need something to stand in offense to...and some of you are generally smart people with opposing beliefs to my own..... Either way, understand, this is a hobby of mine...ask as many questions as I can...and get as many answers as I can.... You can't stand the discussion, get the fuck out... or grow a set of balls, put on your best poker face and DEBATE... leave all the girly "I'm telling on you" shit at the door...
Last edited:
9InchJezmo
Sexy Member
I am sorry, an all knowing, all powerful, omnipotent being using a substandard marking that gets worn away, are you sure?
Mood swings and memory loss? Lol....gtfoh... But on to your post....
I think, if memory serves me right :biggrin1:, one of my posts mentioned my idea of God...not being some white haired old guy sitting on a cloud granting wishes and nodding his head like genie to make things happen. (I'm too lazy to comb through and find the exact post number but feel free to go look for it)... I went on to say I think God is a manipulator and wielder of nature and science. Therefore even when I take the "real" natural way Earth's land forms were "created" or came to be...I still say god did it. Not with a head nod, or the snap of his fingers, but through the same method you described....that's just me though
Ahh yeah; Yet another "shade' and "patina" of Christian rationale..from those believer/deniers who literally believe God made everything as it is, to those who believe God started the process..
Agreeing with someone earlier, labeling this "childish" and with another person who commented that ..in so many words, teaching children about obedience and authority by repeating and memorizing unquestionable passages of scripture ,".. because it keeps people stupid.Its great for people who are taught from an early age to never question anything."
This kind of stuff fosters all sorts if maladies in later life..
Last edited:
- Status