Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community
Old 09-11-2014, 10:14 AM   #861
Shnabdabber
Account Disabled at User's Request
 
Shnabdabber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Exp:
Default

The guy I was talking about is Nassim Haramein, and the google machine is telling me that although many in the field find his work interesting, others find it meaningless. So there you go.
Shnabdabber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2014, 10:19 AM   #862
old-fart
Franchise Player
 
old-fart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by terminator View Post
Thats the challenge, I don't expect you to change. However, I do love your line about rejecting the different gods all the while claiming them to be identical. Its very important for an athiest to study what he rejects, especially since you base your beleif, wait system of law, on science. This alone proves that you have studied all you reject.

- Source, I'm a scientist.
I'm not so sure that MarchHare did claim that all the God claims are identical. He said he rejects all supernatural claims for the same reason - to wit a lack of evidence.

By the way, that was the point I was attempting to make in one of my long winded posts. My default position on all claims, supernatural or otherwise, is skepticism until sufficient evidence is provided. If you claim you have a dog, I may believe you based on you seeming like a nice guy. If you say you have a 300lb Pug I will probably need a bit more evidence, like a picture or to meet this monstrosity. If you say you have a 300lb invisible magic pug... well, I'll need just a bit more evidence than you claiming he is standing at your feet.

Similarly, if you claim that the universe is an expansion of some god-like creators will, spreading its soul (and/or souls) throughout the universe, I'll need a bit more proof that you saying so.
old-fart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2014, 10:21 AM   #863
troutman
Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer
 
troutman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Crowsnest Pass
Exp:
Default

If god is unknowable "or a metaphor for all that transcends intellectual thought", a person of faith is in no better position to understand God than anyone else.
troutman is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to troutman For This Useful Post:
Old 09-11-2014, 10:48 AM   #864
TorqueDog
Franchise Player
 
TorqueDog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Calgary - Centre West
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shnabdabber View Post
The guy I was talking about is Nassim Haramein, and the google machine is telling me that although many in the field find his work interesting, others find it meaningless. So there you go.
Ugh. Nassim Haramein is an idiot.
__________________
-James
GO
FLAMES GO.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure
Typical dumb take.
TorqueDog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2014, 10:53 AM   #865
DuffMan
Franchise Player
 
DuffMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: 127.0.0.1
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by troutman View Post
If god is unknowable "or a metaphor for all that transcends intellectual thought", a person of faith is in no better position to understand God than anyone else.
What? the Bible was written thousands of years ago, and has been translated thousands of times. I'm sure they understand exactly what God had on his mind and what his plans in the future are.
__________________
Pass the bacon.
DuffMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2014, 11:20 AM   #866
old-fart
Franchise Player
 
old-fart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chill Cosby View Post
To touch on just what's been mentioned in the last page or so, they mostly argue God-as-written based on particular religion, vs. God the concept.
I think, at the very least, MarchHare and I have been pretty consistent in NOT arguing that at all. I can, if you would prefer. I'm not sure how many times I need to say this: I reject all supernatural claims until such time as I am presented with sufficient evidence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chill Cosby View Post
For instance, the "strong" argument atheists have against the belief of god based on the the rejection of Norse Mythology: It's no argument at all. It may be an argument against Christianity, but not god. The version of what God is, it's attributes or whatever, vary from text to text. These attributes go towards creating an understanding and give rule and structure to whatever community abides by that text. Concerning the concept of God: the Christian God, Thor/Odin/Zeus, Buddha, Vishnu/Brahma, Mother Nature, it's all human understandings of the exact same thing. So to say "Well you're an atheist because you don't believe in Odin" shows a lack of understanding that there is no difference between Odin and the Christian God. Regardless of religion, belief in any God is belief in "God".
You are correct. I reject Odin as there is no evidence. I reject the God of the bible as their is no evidence. I reject Vishnu as there is no evidence. I reject there exists a "Mother Nature" that controls the weather as there is no evidence. Claiming Zeus didn't exist therefore the God of the Bible doesn't exist is not what most atheists (or any atheists) that I know do. They claim that Zeus didn't exist, and they also claim that the God of the Bible doesn't exist... for the same reason: lack of evidence.

If you are referring to the somewhat famous saying by, I believe, Richard Dawkins that goes something like "most of us are atheists with respect to Odin and Zeus, some of us just go one god further" I think you are either taking it out of context or not understanding the intent behind the message. Again, Richard Dawkins rejects the god claim of Zeus, he also rejects the god claim of the bible (and every other god claim). He is also suggesting that, for example, most Christians will reject Vishnu, Xenu, etc. while accepting Jesus/Yahweh. Most Hindu's will reject Jesus and Xenu while accepting Vishnu/Brahma. Most Scientologist will sit in the corner and drool while giving all their money to a scam artist... and then accept Xenu while rejecting Vishnu, etc. You get the idea. Richard Dawkins was attempting to say that the reasons you reject Vishnu/Jesus/Xenu are the same exact reasons he uses to reject all of them. For some reason, religious people seem to suspend their critical thinking/logical thought process that they apply to all other gods when it comes to their own god.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chill Cosby View Post
Plus you have a couple guys making specific reference to Christianity and treating that like "God", while inferring that the Christian God or Islamic God are different, when in fact those two understandings are quite literally the exact same.
You can blame Fox News for part of that. I'm not sure most Fox News hosts could find their ass in the dark with both hands on a flashlight. Again though, most if not all atheists I know will reject the god of the bible due to lack of evidence, and will also reject the god of Islam for lack of evidence. I know they are the same god, each with the same amount of actual evidence.
old-fart is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to old-fart For This Useful Post:
Old 09-11-2014, 12:52 PM   #867
Thor
God of Hating Twitter
 
Thor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chill Cosby View Post
To touch on just what's been mentioned in the last page or so, they mostly argue God-as-written based on particular religion, vs. God the concept.
Oh this is absolutely common among apologists for "God" biblical or this less defined term of God which plays on the idea that religions have defined what really can't be defined, that is beyond our understanding..

At its core, what we argue is there is no evidence for either, we are not trying to disprove these things, we are arguing there is no evidence for it, that believing in them is only in the realm of faith and science shows us natural explanations which is what I base my life on, evidence and reasoning whether a God concept or religious based dogma version exist.

I think a non-intervening, mysterious force, outside our realm of understanding God (deism) has more validity than a human based religious personal God which I think is rather easy to dismiss. This is NOT to say for that this is at all convincing, but rather another attempt by those who have a hard time imaging a universe without some outside intelligence seek out when they see the failings of organized personal Religions.

Quote:
For instance, the "strong" argument atheists have against the belief of god based on the the rejection of Norse Mythology: It's no argument at all. It may be an argument against Christianity, but not god. The version of what God is, it's attributes or whatever, vary from text to text.
Well the vast majority of religion and believers follow an intervening God, so that is where most of the debate exists. Again because you define some ethereal outside of our understanding God as God, does not mean it has any more legitimacy to people who base their worldview on evidence and naturalism.

Quote:
These attributes go towards creating an understanding and give rule and structure to whatever community abides by that text. Concerning the concept of God: the Christian God, Thor/Odin/Zeus, Buddha, Vishnu/Brahma, Mother Nature, it's all human understandings of the exact same thing. So to say "Well you're an atheist because you don't believe in Odin" shows a lack of understanding that there is no difference between Odin and the Christian God. Regardless of religion, belief in any God is belief in "God".
They are supernatural claims, which we have the problem with, I would find religion much less of a problem if we threw away dogmatic religious texts, and the baggage that they bring to our world, but the vast majority believe and live their lives by these God's being very much real, intervening beings that judge, give us rules&laws and cause a lot of harm in this world when it comes to following this.

Quote:
Plus you have a couple guys making specific reference to Christianity and treating that like "God", while inferring that the Christian God or Islamic God are different, when in fact those two understandings are quite literally the exact same.
I'm a bit confused by what you mean here, Islam and God are Abrahamic religons and share the same God, even Jesus is a prophet to Islam, they just disagree on key things, as with the Jews who see Jesus as a man. I dismiss the Abrahamic God outright, its an intervening God.
__________________
Allskonar fyrir Aumingja!!
Thor is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Thor For This Useful Post:
Old 09-11-2014, 01:02 PM   #868
MarchHare
Franchise Player
 
MarchHare's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: YSJ (1979-2002) -> YYC (2002-2022) -> YVR (2022-present)
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thor View Post
I'm a bit confused by what you mean here, Islam and God are Abrahamic religons and share the same God, even Jesus is a prophet to Islam, they just disagree on key things, as with the Jews who see Jesus as a man. I dismiss the Abrahamic God outright, its an intervening God.
I assume that was a reference to this post where DuffMan seemed to be stating that "ISIS's God" is a different entity than the Christian God. This is a claim that one sees trotted out every now and then by people who are ignorant of the fact the religious traditions of Jews, Christians, and Muslims all come from the same supernatural entity, the God of Abraham (as you rightly noted).
MarchHare is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to MarchHare For This Useful Post:
Old 09-11-2014, 02:09 PM   #869
Dion
Not a casual user
 
Dion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: A simple man leading a complicated life....
Exp:
Default

If it turns out there is a God and a Hell, i'll be so damned busy shaking hands with friends to know where I am
__________________
Dion is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Dion For This Useful Post:
Old 09-11-2014, 04:28 PM   #870
Chill Cosby
Lifetime Suspension
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Exp:
Default

I feel like it's old-fart's fault that I'm even in this discussion. Just for the record, I'm not defending religion or god, but one's simple right to a belief system and what might cause one to choose "god" over the much more logical combination of "science + things we've yet to discover".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thor View Post
Oh this is absolutely common among apologists for "God" biblical or this less defined term of God which plays on the idea that religions have defined what really can't be defined, that is beyond our understanding..
Exactly correct. The concept of "God" was created to define what was not understood. Things in nature that humans had not yet understood or for something which there is/was no clear answer for.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Thor View Post
At its core, what we argue is there is no evidence for either, we are not trying to disprove these things, we are arguing there is no evidence for it, that believing in them is only in the realm of faith and science shows us natural explanations which is what I base my life on, evidence and reasoning whether a God concept or religious based dogma version exist.
I'm well aware of the atheist argument, and I take zero issue with it. My point is that atheism is a belief system, one which (if not understood) can be as laughably ridiculous as any religion. There are great atheists (Hitchens was one of my favourite essayists), just as there are great people who consider themselves religious. Those who don't understand the view of the other are an issue, and those who don't understand their own belief? Ridiculous. The whole line I took issue with was "God doesn't exist", because it's ignorant and unknowable.

I don't believe in God, but I'm comfortable enough to accept that there are things I don't fully understand and don't feel the need to solve them with the idea of a superior being. I also understand why people do, so I'm not ignorant enough to say "God doesn't exist" because A. It's as ridiculous as saying "God exists" (both statements completely unknowable), and B. I try not to be a terrible person. Your beliefs are your own, and belong within you. It is just as exhausting to hear someone preach about god as it is to hear someone preach about his lack of existence.

The problem with religion is when people feel the need to force their belief onto others. The same is true of atheism.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Thor View Post
I think a non-intervening, mysterious force, outside our realm of understanding God (deism) has more validity than a human based religious personal God which I think is rather easy to dismiss. This is NOT to say for that this is at all convincing, but rather another attempt by those who have a hard time imaging a universe without some outside intelligence seek out when they see the failings of organized personal Religions.
Agree 100%

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thor View Post
Well the vast majority of religion and believers follow an intervening God, so that is where most of the debate exists. Again because you define some ethereal outside of our understanding God as God, does not mean it has any more legitimacy to people who base their worldview on evidence and naturalism.
I don't define what we don't understand as God, but as I said, I was illustrating why I take issue with bringing up things like Odin or other "Gods", because they are all based on the same central concept of God, which is used to give knowing to the unknown. To reason with a religious person in that particular sense is pointless, so I'm not sure where the strength of that argument comes from.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thor View Post
They are supernatural claims, which we have the problem with, I would find religion much less of a problem if we threw away dogmatic religious texts, and the baggage that they bring to our world, but the vast majority believe and live their lives by these God's being very much real, intervening beings that judge, give us rules&laws and cause a lot of harm in this world when it comes to following this.
Agree.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thor View Post
I'm a bit confused by what you mean here, Islam and God are Abrahamic religons and share the same God, even Jesus is a prophet to Islam, they just disagree on key things, as with the Jews who see Jesus as a man. I dismiss the Abrahamic God outright, its an intervening God.

As pointed out by March, it was in reference to Duffman's post which showed a pretty real lack of basic religious understanding. If you don't know about what it is you don't believe, how can you really believe anything at all?

Here's my thing, whether you're religious or atheist, I firmly believe that you should be sure of your own beliefs, know what it is you don't believe and why you don't believe it, while following the general rule of respecting others.

I don't believe in god, and I don't believe there isn't a god. I simply don't live my life according to any higher power. Whether there is one or there isn't one is irrelevant to me. What is relevant to me is that religion is as harmful on a global scale as it is helpful on an individual scale. The amount of bad that comes from it will never outweigh the good. A lot of that comes from the need to be "right", the need to turn an unknown into "fact", for their to be "one truth". If you're going godless, at least have a mind not to be part of the problem.
Chill Cosby is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Chill Cosby For This Useful Post:
Old 09-11-2014, 05:13 PM   #871
Daradon
Has lived the dream!
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Where I lay my head is home...
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by troutman View Post
If god is unknowable "or a metaphor for all that transcends intellectual thought", a person of faith is in no better position to understand God than anyone else.
While I don't disagree with your argument, I'm sure a person of faith would say, that's the exact point OF faith. To be closer to what you can't understand. To, IE take it on faith.

It's right in the word.
Daradon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2014, 05:26 PM   #872
Cheese
Franchise Player
 
Cheese's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daradon View Post
While I don't disagree with your argument, I'm sure a person of faith would say, that's the exact point OF faith. To be closer to what you can't understand. To, IE take it on faith.

It's right in the word.
There are many things I havent understood and/or understand. I always studied and ask many questions of those who do have knowledge about something I dont...never would I take something on "Faith". I dont think faith gets us closer to anything, it simply keeps those that refuse to delve into the subject in the dark...<ages>.
Cheese is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2014, 05:29 PM   #873
Daradon
Has lived the dream!
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Where I lay my head is home...
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheese View Post
There are many things I havent understood and/or understand. I always read about and ask many questions ofo those who do have knowledge about something I dont...never would I take something on "Faith". I dont think faith gets us closer to anything, it simply keeps those that refuse to delve into the subject in the dark...<ages>.
Agree 100% One of my favorite quotes is Galileo's:

'I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with senses, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use and by some other means to give us knowledge which we can attain by them.'

Just saying, people of 'faith' often don't see the truth or morality in that. Preferring instead to stay in the dark, thinking it's some sort of noble action.

Willful ignorance is not noble. It's the biggest sin of all.
Daradon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2014, 05:57 PM   #874
photon
The new goggles also do nothing.
 
photon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

And that's ultimately where it all falls apart.. faith as an epistemology fails. The other tools we use to form beliefs (reason, perception, memory) work because they are related to reality. By belief I mean the mental state of holding a proposition to be true or correct (irrespective of the reason for the belief).

Faith, in the way that someone like Alvin Plantinga defines it, is a way of forming beliefs that is separate from the other ways. It's a gift from God (or whatever other divine or transcendent source), a belief is formed because a divine sense guides us to the belief separate from (or in spite of) what our other tools tell us. Holy scripture or holy leader or meditation/introspection, it's the same.

The problem with that is a belief via faith is purely in the mind of the believer, by definition beyond any evaluation or verification. So there is no way to tell the difference between a divinely inspired belief, and wish fulfilment. Or even between divinely inspired and beliefs and insanity.

A reasonable person will agree that no matter how strongly a belief is held, there's always a chance of being wrong. How does one choose between two contradictory beliefs? Beliefs formed via faith don't have a mechanism to be corrected other than more faith. ANY belief via faith can be justified then, including people who do evil things because their faith led them to it. And rejecting someone else's beliefs derived by faith can only be done by faith.

Those people who would say faith is a valid epistemology don't actually live that way either, because how they interact with reality day by day is based on reason and observation, not faith (my car will be where I parked it, if it's not it's been stolen not turned into a bird, etc).
__________________
Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
photon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2014, 06:47 PM   #875
TorqueDog
Franchise Player
 
TorqueDog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Calgary - Centre West
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chill Cosby View Post
The problem with religion is when people feel the need to force their belief onto others. The same is true of atheism.
Most of the time, it's not that atheists are trying to force their lack of belief on others. They're trying to keep the religious majority from forcing their beliefs on them or others.

As an example, when American Atheists or the Freedom From Religion Foundation start getting in the face of governments over overt, public endorsements of religious faith, that's not atheists forcing atheism on people but standing up for everyone's right to not be discriminated against by the government, by preventing them from endorsing a single religious faith as is prohibited in the constitution.

When do I get vocal about atheism? When people start using religious faith to push public policy, or spread harmful information. Remember this?

Faith can be a dangerous thing insofar as it informs your actions. If you believe that God loves you, fantastic. But if you believe that prayer can cure diseases without medical intervention and use this to inform your action to keep your children from getting medical care, then it's a problem.
__________________
-James
GO
FLAMES GO.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure
Typical dumb take.
TorqueDog is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to TorqueDog For This Useful Post:
Old 09-12-2014, 10:13 AM   #876
Thor
God of Hating Twitter
 
Thor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chill Cosby View Post
My point is that atheism is a belief system, one which (if not understood) can be as laughably ridiculous as any religion.
I agree with most of what you said, but this one I have to disagree with. I start from a zero sum position, that in order for me to accept something I have to have convincing evidence for it. I hate to roll out this example but its apt here, its not a belief system to deny the existence of Unicorns. Atheism is simply a statement of non belief, nothing more. I assume you are referring to the movement of Atheists, the outspoken movement more than you refer to the meaning of what it is.

Its especially noticeable when you meet others in the movement are involved in it like I am, there is no one dogma, there is lots of differing political opinions, and lots of nonsense within this large umbrella of skeptics, atheists, agnostics, humanists, etc.. This is why I dislike suggesting we are like a belief system because it has no basis in what the reality of this movement is.

I simply don't see the evidence nor see the need in my understanding of the universe from a naturalistic and scientific viewpoint for a supreme being, God, outside intelligent force. To say that puts me into a belief system is either an attempt to change the meaning of the word faith or as is often the case done by Christians to play the "well yeah you atheists are just as bad as Christians, you are like any other faith." Which is wrong.

Quote:
I also understand why people do, so I'm not ignorant enough to say "God doesn't exist" because A. It's as ridiculous as saying "God exists" (both statements completely unknowable), and B. I try not to be a terrible person. Your beliefs are your own, and belong within you. It is just as exhausting to hear someone preach about god as it is to hear someone preach about his lack of existence.
I also don't take absolutist stances on this, with enough evidence atheists would change their viewpoint based on that. I only have issues with religion when it intrudes into politics and matters that affect people that are not religious.

You may find it exhausting, I quite enjoy the discussions, and its similar to how I feel about politics, there are times you just don't want to see another liberals vs conservatives discussion because its so repetitive. BUT, the power of debate and discussion is very much a powerful force in changing minds, and that's why I put the effort in to have worthwhile discussions with people who see this universe in a fundamentally different light.

Quote:
The problem with religion is when people feel the need to force their belief onto others. The same is true of atheism.
Well to be fair, the modern atheist, humanist, skeptic movements are born as a reaction to the Religious right, to politicians who make legislation based on their beliefs, the anti gay rights movement, the anti abortion movement, the teach creationism in schools movement, the subjugation of women movement, the Catholic church being itself movement, etc..

The movement really started in force after 9/11 and the Bush years where the Christian right really started to push hard back against secularism and where skeptics are concerned 9/11 was a rallying cry with the insane amount of conspiracy theories that came out because of it and just how common the anti science movement online has become.

This is why I'm in my secular humanist organization, I see this as an answer to a better society where religion and personal beliefs are respected, while we seek to build governance for all people in a secular system, as the founding fathers were very smart to figure out long ago.

Quote:
I don't define what we don't understand as God, but as I said, I was illustrating why I take issue with bringing up things like Odin or other "Gods", because they are all based on the same central concept of God, which is used to give knowing to the unknown. To reason with a religious person in that particular sense is pointless, so I'm not sure where the strength of that argument comes from.
Well its the argument against organized religion, pointing out how we have a vast graveyard of Gods, which most Christians laugh at and dismiss, while holding on to beliefs that share the history and evolution and extinction of these old relgious systems. Because a common and very serious question we get is "how can you not believe in a God??" and the easiest response is the same reason you don't believe in Zeus, Odin...

Quote:
As pointed out by March, it was in reference to Duffman's post which showed a pretty real lack of basic religious understanding. If you don't know about what it is you don't believe, how can you really believe anything at all?
This is a problem on both sides, people in many parts of the world have no clue what atheism is, nor do they have any clue as to why or how anyone could take that stance. The misunderstanding will exist on both sides, I will say however that I find often the non religious know a lot more about organized religion, since so many left their faiths and have had to defend their position to family, friends.

Quote:
Here's my thing, whether you're religious or atheist, I firmly believe that you should be sure of your own beliefs, know what it is you don't believe and why you don't believe it, while following the general rule of respecting others.
Most people have never been exposed to our side, that are entrenched in their religion, and I don't think we should push them into our beliefs. I will always be respectful of the person, unless of course that person believes in heinous things.

Quote:
What is relevant to me is that religion is as harmful on a global scale as it is helpful on an individual scale. The amount of bad that comes from it will never outweigh the good. A lot of that comes from the need to be "right", the need to turn an unknown into "fact", for their to be "one truth". If you're going godless, at least have a mind not to be part of the problem.
Agree, mostly, my activism is a response, and in my opinion is a sorely needed one to counteract the problems globally we are facing.
__________________
Allskonar fyrir Aumingja!!
Thor is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Thor For This Useful Post:
Old 09-12-2014, 10:51 AM   #877
DuffMan
Franchise Player
 
DuffMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: 127.0.0.1
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chill Cosby View Post
As pointed out by March, it was in reference to Duffman's post which showed a pretty real lack of basic religious understanding. If you don't know about what it is you don't believe, how can you really believe anything at all?
So, are you saying, because I am saying that there is more than one God I disbelieve in, or peoples interpretation of God(s), or the concept of polytheism, that I am a bad Atheist?
__________________
Pass the bacon.
DuffMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2014, 11:01 AM   #878
Chill Cosby
Lifetime Suspension
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Exp:
Default Godless Apostate

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thor View Post
I agree with most of what you said, but this one I have to disagree with. I start from a zero sum position, that in order for me to accept something I have to have convincing evidence for it. I hate to roll out this example but its apt here, its not a belief system to deny the existence of Unicorns. Atheism is simply a statement of non belief, nothing more. I assume you are referring to the movement of Atheists, the outspoken movement more than you refer to the meaning of what it is.
It's still a belief system. It is absolutely a belief system to deny the existence of Unicorns.

Atheism is a belief system, it is a set of things that a community believes to be true. It doesn't matter if that truth is concerning the positive or negative existence of something, simply that you believe it to be true.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thor View Post
Its especially noticeable when you meet others in the movement are involved in it like I am, there is no one dogma, there is lots of differing political opinions, and lots of nonsense within this large umbrella of skeptics, atheists, agnostics, humanists, etc.. This is why I dislike suggesting we are like a belief system because it has no basis in what the reality of this movement is.
How is this any different from any religion aside from the existence of a Dogma? And how is the dogma strictly negative? In Christianity there are lots of differing political opinions and lots of nonsense. So how is that different? You all collectively believe in particular truths, but there is a lot of disagreement and varying of opinions, which is entirely true of Christianity. None of what you said disproves Atheism as a belief system, if anything, it confirms it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thor View Post
I simply don't see the evidence nor see the need in my understanding of the universe from a naturalistic and scientific viewpoint for a supreme being, God, outside intelligent force. To say that puts me into a belief system is either an attempt to change the meaning of the word faith or as is often the case done by Christians to play the "well yeah you atheists are just as bad as Christians, you are like any other faith." Which is wrong.
First, if you can PLEASE stop the "Well this is just another thing typically done by _____ in order to _____" junk? You're talking to me man, not Christians, not apologists, not whatever, it's just me, so don't condescend.

A belief system is not dependent on faith to qualify it's existence. Perhaps that is where you're getting hung up. Atheism is a belief system as any other, there is a common truth (deities don't exist) that every Atheist adheres to, or they aren't Atheists.

And hey, as someone who doesn't identify with Atheists or with any organised religion, yeah, you guys are just as bad.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thor View Post
Well to be fair, the modern atheist, humanist, skeptic movements are born as a reaction to the Religious right, to politicians who make legislation based on their beliefs, the anti gay rights movement, the anti abortion movement, the teach creationism in schools movement, the subjugation of women movement, the Catholic church being itself movement, etc..
To be fair, the modern Christian or Catholic would never support the anti-gay rights movement, the anti-abortion movement, the teaching of creationism in public schools, the subjugation of women, or legislation based on the Catholic Church.

If you want to point out the worst of one and only talk about that, isn't it just as fair to talk about Atheists like they're a bunch of know-nothing teenagers in highschool that just discovered the Ramones and Bad Religion?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thor View Post
Well its the argument against organized religion, pointing out how we have a vast graveyard of Gods, which most Christians laugh at and dismiss, while holding on to beliefs that share the history and evolution and extinction of these old relgious systems. Because a common and very serious question we get is "how can you not believe in a God??" and the easiest response is the same reason you don't believe in Zeus, Odin...
But that's where the disconnect is, because it's NOT the same reason as why they don't believe in Odin. They don't believe in Odin because in their religion, he isn't a factor, there is God. You don't believe in Odin because you don't believe in deities. There is nothing that replaces the story of Odin, there is nothing.

It is not close to the same reasoning. It's the opposite, and that's why it's a silly argument to make. You reject Odin because: Nothing, they reject Odin because: God.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thor View Post
This is a problem on both sides, people in many parts of the world have no clue what atheism is, nor do they have any clue as to why or how anyone could take that stance. The misunderstanding will exist on both sides, I will say however that I find often the non religious know a lot more about organized religion, since so many left their faiths and have had to defend their position to family, friends.
I disagree entirely. Most Atheists are no more or less intelligent or versed in organised religion than members of organised religion. You keep generalising Atheists in a positive light, and members of religion in a negative light. I know more intelligent, thoughtful, and worldly people of religion than I do Atheists, but I'm not going to make a claim that "most people of religion" know this or that, because there's still bad on both sides. I know a good amount of both sides that make me outright cringe at the lack of scope.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thor View Post
Most people have never been exposed to our side, that are entrenched in their religion, and I don't think we should push them into our beliefs. I will always be respectful of the person, unless of course that person believes in heinous things.

Agree, mostly, my activism is a response, and in my opinion is a sorely needed one to counteract the problems globally we are facing.

Sounds an awful lot like the basis of Christian Missionary work doesn't it? "My belief is important, I need to spread the word of Atheism to those who do not know. I need to save them."

I'm sorry. Your opinion isn't a sorely needed one, just like the opinion of the far-right extreme Christian isn't a needed one. The best course of action is simply to reject the extremities of whichever pops up first, instead of having the two opinions sit at opposite sides and bitch across the water at each other.

Honestly, with minor changes I could take every line of every one of your sentences and make it sound like it came from a devout Christian. Deny whatever labels you want, but the common Atheist is no better than the common Christian, and the modern Christian is no worse than the modern Atheist.

Last edited by Chill Cosby; 09-12-2014 at 11:06 AM.
Chill Cosby is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Chill Cosby For This Useful Post:
Old 09-12-2014, 11:11 AM   #879
Chill Cosby
Lifetime Suspension
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DuffMan View Post
So, are you saying, because I am saying that there is more than one God I disbelieve in, or peoples interpretation of God(s), or the concept of polytheism, that I am a bad Atheist?

Actually I was saying that you named one God, and one interpretation of that God, and mistakenly spoke of that God like it was two completely separate Gods.

You reject two books which are nothing more than stories and a set of rules, but it's the exact same God, so you when you're talking about the Christian God, you're also talking about the Islamic God.

Might as well know what you disbelieve in right?
Chill Cosby is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Chill Cosby For This Useful Post:
Old 09-12-2014, 11:21 AM   #880
troutman
Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer
 
troutman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Crowsnest Pass
Exp:
Default

http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showthr...elief+rational

http://www.skepdic.com/faith.html

The error or deception here is to imply that anything that is not a scientific statement, i.e., one supported by evidence marshaled forth the way scientists do in support of their scientific claims, is a matter of faith. To use 'faith' in such a broad way is to strip it of any theological significance the term might otherwise have.

Such a conception of faith treats belief in all non-empirical statements as acts of faith. Thus, belief in the external world, belief in the law of causality, or belief in the fundamental principles of logic, such as the principle of contradiction or the law of the excluded middle, would be acts of faith on this view. There seems to be something profoundly deceptive and misleading about lumping together as acts of faith such things as belief in the Virgin birth and belief in the existence of an external world or in the principle of contradiction. Such a view trivializes religious faith by putting all non-empirical claims in the same category as religious faith. In fact, it would be more appropriate to put religious faith in the same category as belief in superstitions, fairy tales, and delusions.

There are reasons for trusting science and there are reasons for religious convictions, but the reasons for our trust in science are called evidence and the reasons for our religious convictions all reduce to hope.

Last edited by troutman; 09-12-2014 at 11:25 AM.
troutman is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to troutman For This Useful Post:
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:15 PM.

Calgary Flames
2024-25




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2021 | See Our Privacy Policy