Atheists - why?

Page 11 of 22 [ 344 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 ... 22 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

leejosepho
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,011
Location: 200 miles south of Little Rock

08 May 2011, 7:06 pm

aspi-rant wrote:

i don't need to invent a magical invisible deity to explain how the universe ticks... i can wait to get some scientific and verifiable answers. there is no hurry. there will be plenty of new science and discoveries that will explain a lot interesting questions... enough for an entire lifetime!

Sure ... but where might that have left me while I was dying of chronic alcoholism back in '81?

_________________
I began looking for someone like me when I was five ...
My search ended at 59 ... right here on WrongPlanet.
==================================

AceOfSpades
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,754
Location: Sean Penn, Cambodia

08 May 2011, 7:09 pm

leejosepho wrote:

aspi-rant wrote:

Sure ... but where might that have left me while I was dying of chronic alcoholism back in '81?

...

Placebo effect? Faulty attribution?

leejosepho
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,011
Location: 200 miles south of Little Rock

08 May 2011, 7:11 pm

AceOfSpades wrote:

leejosepho wrote:

aspi-rant wrote:

Sure ... but where might that have left me while I was dying of chronic alcoholism back in '81?

...

Placebo effect? Faulty attribution?

Nope, and nothing magical either.

_________________
I began looking for someone like me when I was five ...
My search ended at 59 ... right here on WrongPlanet.
==================================

aspi-rant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Sep 2008
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,448
Location: denmark

09 May 2011, 12:23 am

AngelRho wrote:

First this:

aspi-rant wrote:

when does it occur to theists that what they call atheist have no beliefs... nor anything they need to claim to be true...

And then:

aspi-rant wrote:

there will be plenty of new science and discoveries that will explain a lot interesting questions... enough for an entire lifetime!

and if they can't find the answers i eagerly await in my lifetime... the next generations will have the luxury to enjoy science in the same wonderful way...

Are these not statements of beliefs?

aspi-rant wrote:

theists have been standing still for millennia.... because they believe the answers are all in the books. yawn.

And people who rely on science don't believe the "answers are all in the books"? Your most significant explorations and discoveries end up in peer-reviewed journals. Future research depends on these works. Look, academics and scientific researchers rely just as much on the books as religious people do. They just happen to use a different bible.

AngelRho wrote:

Philologos wrote:

AngelRho, thou hast saved me a drain on my energy stores. For this cup of water much thanks.

Glad I could help! I'm having a good day for a change. :lol:

øh ... and then the theists wonder why people ridicule theists and their religious beliefs....

do i really need to reply on this??? seriously???

Bethie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Jul 2010
Age: 38
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,817
Location: My World, Highview, Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Earth, The Milky Way, Local Group, Local Supercluster

09 May 2011, 12:50 am

AngelRho wrote:

First this:

aspi-rant wrote:

when does it occur to theists that what they call atheist have no beliefs... nor anything they need to claim to be true...

And then:

aspi-rant wrote:

Are these not statements of beliefs?

They are not statements of religious belief, that being the TOPIC, nor are they faith-based at all- they are evidenced by thousands of years of empirical and analytical thought being shown in EVERY instance to be the most effective means of separating reality from fantasy. More importantly, they are beliefs neither INHERENT to atheism nor EXCLUSIVE to it, and hence are not "atheist beliefs" in any sense.

AngelRho wrote:

aspi-rant wrote:

theists have been standing still for millennia.... because they believe the answers are all in the books. yawn.

The books "relied on" by the scientific-minded ARE UPDATED WHEN OUR EMPIRICAL KNOWLEDGE ABOUT REALITY CHANGES- that is to say, CONSTANTLY.

The books "relied on" by theists have made the same claims (virgin births, talking snakes, pi being 3, the Earth being flat, and an earth-centered solar system being among them) for MILLENIA.

That was aspi's point, I believe.

Unless you'd be comfortable having a brain tumor operated on by a seventh-century village "doctor", I'm sure you can understand that point.

_________________
For there is another kind of violence, slower but just as deadly, destructive as the shot or the bomb in the night. This is the violence of institutions; indifference and inaction and slow decay.

AceOfSpades
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,754
Location: Sean Penn, Cambodia

09 May 2011, 1:00 am

leejosepho wrote:

AceOfSpades wrote:

leejosepho wrote:

aspi-rant wrote:

Sure ... but where might that have left me while I was dying of chronic alcoholism back in '81?

...

Placebo effect? Faulty attribution?

Nope, and nothing magical either.

Ok so all that means to me is that you couldn't find an explanation atm so God happened to be the most convenient one. That is faulty attribution since it relies solely on the availability of an explanation.

Philologos
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Age: 83
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,987

09 May 2011, 1:06 am

If a phenomenon is observed.

And an explanation is found that fits neatly the observed data.

And if several observers unaware of one another have come up with the same explanation.

And no other explanation fits the data as well or better -

Why, pray tell, would that necessarily involve faulty attribution?

Bethie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Jul 2010
Age: 38
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,817
Location: My World, Highview, Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Earth, The Milky Way, Local Group, Local Supercluster

09 May 2011, 1:36 am

Philologos wrote:

Because the explanation is not "found", in this case-
it is MADE UP.

Of course it "fits neatly the observed data":
it is purposely tailor-made (up) to explain that which the individual does not understand-
you yourself just admitted elsewhere that you came to be a theist to fill in the gaps for questions which you had no natural answers for.

Philologos
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Age: 83
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,987

09 May 2011, 1:49 am

Wrong.

I was there. I did not make up anything. Not my style.

I do not recognize your near quote - if you point me to the site I will try to reword whatever

When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.

That is an ennea-5 quoted and popularized by an ennea-7. I do not know if I could go that far as a RULE, but that is what happened in this case.

Since you have not examined the data, or followed my analytical path, how can you dogmatically assert what they were or were not?

Sand
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

09 May 2011, 2:07 am

Philologos wrote:

All "truths" are human constructions to fit the data. When dealing with abstract disciplines such as mathematics these truths can be absolute. When dealing with reality wherein human perceptions are always imperfect because the human sense apparatus and the human mind evolved to deal with only a rather limited set of demands. The virtue of science is that it is continually adding to its perceptive abilities and has no difficulty in discarding conclusions which do not take into account the new data. Archaic philosophies and theologies are solidly petrified and their response to conflicting data is uniformly to deny either its relevance or existence or both which leads to frightful misunderstandings of the natural universe.

Bethie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Jul 2010
Age: 38
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,817
Location: My World, Highview, Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Earth, The Milky Way, Local Group, Local Supercluster

09 May 2011, 2:36 am

Philologos wrote:

I was there. I did not make up anything. Not my style.

So what evidence is there of a deity? I'll call the papers! You'll be famous!

Philologos wrote:

When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.

No. Whatever remains is....what's not impossible. According to your conception of what is impossible. Based on your knowledge and comprehension of reality.
It's not impossible for there to be a ketchup-filled teapot orbiting the sun opposite Earth.
Does any evidence suggest such a thing exists outside my @ss where I just pulled it from?
Of course not.

Philologos wrote:

That is an ennea-5 quoted and popularized by an ennea-7. I do not know if I could go that far as a RULE, but that is what happened in this case.

Your constantly-referenced personality categorizing, like so much Tarot cards, astrology, reading goat entrails, and this month's Cosmopolitan quizzes, are only relevant to this conversation insofar as they involve fabricating nonsense.

Philologos wrote:

Since you have not examined the data, or followed my analytical path, how can you dogmatically assert what they were or were not?

Since you've yet to actually cite said "data" that indicates the existence of such an entity, or any reason for me to believe you are an immensely-imminent scientist of some kind who alone has access to it, whereas the rest of the poor skeptical fools bumble about in ignorance of your great discovery.

leejosepho
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,011
Location: 200 miles south of Little Rock

09 May 2011, 3:41 am

AceOfSpades wrote:

... so all that means to me is that you couldn't find an explanation atm so God happened to be the most convenient one.

You seem to have misunderstood. I had been told God could (ability) and would (willingness and power) do for me what I could not (lack of power) do for myself even though a had a tremendous desire (including willingness (but still without ability)) to stop drinking forever ...

Following my permanent recovery, how would/could any mention of God be deemed momentarily "convenient" there?!

_________________
I began looking for someone like me when I was five ...
My search ended at 59 ... right here on WrongPlanet.
==================================

Bethie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Jul 2010
Age: 38
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,817
Location: My World, Highview, Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Earth, The Milky Way, Local Group, Local Supercluster

09 May 2011, 5:06 am

leejosepho wrote:

I had been told God could...

As a lifelong atheist, this is the part that's confusing.

Am I misunderstanding, or did you in fact already believe in a god when this person started talking to you about said god's abilities?

DentArthurDent
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Jul 2008
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,884
Location: Victoria, Australia

09 May 2011, 5:32 am

Philologos wrote:

Twice in my life I have experienced a particular type of phenomenon.

On both occasions I found an explanation that at the time fitted neatly with the observed data.

Many many people have observed very similar phenomenon.

In many (most) of these cases no other explanation seems to fit the data as well or better.

So pray tell; why do I now involve faulty attribution to my original explanation?

Quite simple really, I am now relaxed enough to say that I simply do not know what causes the "visitation" normally attributed to ghosts.

There are so many plausible explanations for this phenomenon, so many in fact that the "we survive our own death" version seems childish in comparison.

_________________
"I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance anyday"
Douglas Adams

"Religion is the impotence of the human mind to deal with occurrences it cannot understand" Karl Marx

01001011
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Mar 2010
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 991

09 May 2011, 10:02 am

Philologos wrote:

How god did it fits the observed data? Or as a matter of fact, ANY data?

Take a simpler example: Why the sun rises from the East? God did it. Then why God did not make the sun rise from the West?

Philologos
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Age: 83
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,987

09 May 2011, 10:09 am

Why did you not choose a different binary label?

Page 11 of 22 [ 344 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 ... 22 Next

Jump to:

Atheists - why? Post Reply New Topic

Atheists - why?