ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy
 

Notices


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags atheism , theism

Reply
Old 4th March 2018, 09:50 PM   #321
Thor 2
Illuminator
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 3,687
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
I am concerned that this is the message given in some churches and mosques. And I am also concerned that you demonise all churches and mosques because of the attitudes of some.

Seriously, Thor. I'm kind of tired of trying to tell you that there are good, socially progressive and responsible churches that do not promote these messages - and that there are a lot more of them than you have ever acknowledged. You see only the worst of the worst, and assume that they're all like that. You have always done it, ever since you started posting on these topics, and though I have called you out on it every time, you refuse to even consider an alternative point of view. To you, all religion and expression of religion is by definition evil and irredeemable. Apart from anything else, that's just factually incorrect, and to continue to cling to it despite all available evidence is poor thinking.
Oh my you do go on!

You are making some kind of judgment about me and rounding it off to portray me as some kind anti theist demon however. You refuse to acknowledge that I have on a number of occasions, applauded the stance taken by some moderate theists on some matter or other. You refuse to admit that you at times engage in a slanging match with theists, every bit as aggressive as that of others here.

If the theists we are engaged with here were just Jainists I would have nothing to say. That is not so however and the woo they believe in impacts on us all. It may not impact on me directly but does on others I care about.


Quote:
I don't know why, because I've explained my point to you any number of times. Oh wait, I do know why. It's because you just can't understand anything that contradicts your preferred narrative.
Your points are elusive arth and your summation of my position dodgy.

Quote:
Apparently for you, the label of "religious" is an insult. Okay. Aren't you therefore deliberately insulting people every time you refer to someone as religious? How do you reconcile that with your claim that you "love the believer, hate the belief".
You Threw the line "Like arguing with a religious person" at me! Give me strength.

Quote:
By the way, you know what that's very close to, right? Why do we give you a pass when we don't let religious people "love the sinner, hate the sin"?

Now, are you going to accuse me of supporting paedophiles and extremists again? Because if you are, we're done.
Why should you give me a pass when we don't give religious people a pass?
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard.
Thor 2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2018, 12:38 PM   #322
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 57,164
*sigh*

Whatever. I'm tired of having this conversation yet again. Neither of us have anything new to bring up, so let's just move on, yeah?
__________________
"This quote was taken out of context."
- Randall Munroe
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2018, 01:10 PM   #323
Thor 2
Illuminator
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 3,687
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
*sigh*

Whatever. I'm tired of having this conversation yet again. Neither of us have anything new to bring up, so let's just move on, yeah?

So after starting this conversation yet again you are now tired of having it again. ....... *sigh* indeed.
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard.
Thor 2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th March 2018, 12:15 PM   #324
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 57,164
Originally Posted by Thor 2 View Post
So after starting this conversation yet again you are now tired of having it again. ....... *sigh* indeed.
Yeah, tell me about it. Next time I try, please remind me that it's completely useless because you will never acknowledge my point. Start from there and maybe I can avoid this feeling of frustration in future.
__________________
"This quote was taken out of context."
- Randall Munroe

Last edited by arthwollipot; 6th March 2018 at 12:17 PM.
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th March 2018, 02:54 PM   #325
ynot
Philosopher
 
ynot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,683
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
Yeah, tell me about it. Next time I try, please remind me that it's completely useless because you will never acknowledge my point. Start from there and maybe I can avoid this feeling of frustration in future.
If by "acknowledge" you mean "agree with", then you may avoid feeling future frustration by not having the unreasonable expectation that others will agree with your "point" by default. (Hint - I don't agree with your "point", and I'm sure Thor 2 doesn't either).
__________________
Paranormal beliefs are knowledge placebos.
Rumours of a godís existence have been greatly exaggerated.

Last edited by ynot; 6th March 2018 at 03:10 PM.
ynot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th March 2018, 10:28 PM   #326
Thor 2
Illuminator
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 3,687
Originally Posted by ynot View Post
If by "acknowledge" you mean "agree with", then you may avoid feeling future frustration by not having the unreasonable expectation that others will agree with your "point" by default. (Hint - I don't agree with your "point", and I'm sure Thor 2 doesn't either).

Your'e doing better than me ynot. I don't even know what "the point" is.
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard.
Thor 2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th March 2018, 12:42 PM   #327
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 57,164
Originally Posted by Thor 2 View Post
Your'e doing better than me ynot. I don't even know what "the point" is.
AGAIN!!!

There are more good, progressive churches than you have ever acknowledged, and your contention that all churches are evil negates, marginalises and stigmatises them.

Is that clear enough? Seriously what the hell is so difficult about that?
__________________
"This quote was taken out of context."
- Randall Munroe
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th March 2018, 12:45 PM   #328
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 57,164
Originally Posted by ynot View Post
If by "acknowledge" you mean "agree with"
No I don't mean that at all. By "acknowledge" I mean "show some indication that you have actually read and understood what I have said".

Thor's post above where he claims not to understand what my "point" is even when I have explained it very clearly many many times" is exactly what I'm talking about.

I'm talking to a brick wall here, and that's what makes me say that it's like arguing with a religious person.
__________________
"This quote was taken out of context."
- Randall Munroe
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th March 2018, 01:03 PM   #329
ynot
Philosopher
 
ynot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,683
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
AGAIN!!!

There are more good, progressive churches than you have ever acknowledged, and your contention that all churches are evil negates, marginalises and stigmatises them.

Is that clear enough? Seriously what the hell is so difficult about that?
AGAIN!!!

You conflate theism and theists.

I'm sure Thor 2 will answer for himself . . . but . . .
Originally Posted by Thor 2 View Post
You are making some kind of judgment about me and rounding it off to portray me as some kind anti theist demon however. You refuse to acknowledge that I have on a number of occasions, applauded the stance taken by some moderate theists on some matter or other. You refuse to admit that you at times engage in a slanging match with theists, every bit as aggressive as that of others here.
Bolding mine.
__________________
Paranormal beliefs are knowledge placebos.
Rumours of a godís existence have been greatly exaggerated.

Last edited by ynot; 7th March 2018 at 01:10 PM.
ynot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th March 2018, 01:47 PM   #330
Thor 2
Illuminator
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 3,687
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
AGAIN!!!

There are more good, progressive churches than you have ever acknowledged, and your contention that all churches are evil negates, marginalises and stigmatises them.

Is that clear enough? Seriously what the hell is so difficult about that?

What am I supposed to say to this I wonder, given that I can't recall making a statement vilifying all churches as evil? I have been consistent in my assessment of theism, being at odds with the wellbeing of society and even the theists themselves though. If you can't see the difference here then I am at a loss.

I do admit to cynicism when considering those Christians attending those "happy clappy" type churches you have spoken of. They may leave the services feeling all warm and fuzzy, feeling the experience has had a positive and fulfilling effect, although an un- fulfilling effect on their wallets. I am cynical when considering the spiritual leaders of these churches, who's own faith may not be so fulfilling, but who's wallets certainly are.
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard.

Last edited by Thor 2; 7th March 2018 at 01:48 PM.
Thor 2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th March 2018, 01:57 PM   #331
Thor 2
Illuminator
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 3,687
Originally Posted by ynot View Post
AGAIN!!!

You conflate theism and theists.

I'm sure Thor 2 will answer for himself . . . but . . .

Bolding mine.

Thanks ynot.

Seems to be a failing of comprehension of some in being able to see anti theism as different from anti theist. I can see why some theists will deliberately pretend to not differentiate, because they may want to identify the atheist as an enemy, but why arth does it ...... ?
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard.
Thor 2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2018, 12:24 AM   #332
Tommy Jeppesen
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,442
Originally Posted by Thor 2 View Post
Thanks ynot.

Seems to be a failing of comprehension of some in being able to see anti theism as different from anti theist. I can see why some theists will deliberately pretend to not differentiate, because they may want to identify the atheist as an enemy, but why arth does it ...... ?
So theism is independent of theists, just like gravity is independent of humans. The joke is this: Theism is not independent of the humans, who do that. It is not theism, which is the cause of theists and theists is the effect of theism. Theism is a behavior in theists. Imagine that all humans were no more, we know have a reality in which we still have e.g. gravity. Would there still be theism?

From a different angle because theism is wrong, i.e. it has no positive evidence and is a mistake/error in thinking, it would follow that a human, which is a theist, is wrong. There can be no thinking with a human and thus wrong thinking is done by a human.
Now I don't mean wrong in a moral sense, but wrong in the cognitive sense, but that has a limit.
There are 4 different categories of wrong:
  1. Wrong in doing with a body; i.e. someone can't fly solely by flapping the arms.
  2. Wrong in abstract thinking sense; i.e. 2+2=5.
  3. Wrong in the moral sense; i.e. to cause harm in another human. That requires the evaluation, that causing harm, is wrong; it is subjective and wrong is wrong to somebody; i.e. somebody thinks/evaluates that causing harm, is wrong.
  4. Wrong in the transcendent sense; i.e to claim that somebody can know in detail what has reality independent of the mind, other than there is something, which has reality independent of the mind. I.e. das Ding an sich.

So a gnostic theist is wrong in the following senses:
From reality as it appears, she/he can't point to God.
She/he thinks, the belief in God, is evidence of God. That is magical thinking, because it means that the belief in God is what causes God to exist. God is the effect caused by the belief in God.
She/he thinks, that morality is not possible without God, but doesn't understand morality is the effect all the way back to the replication of the gene; i.e. biology.
She/he does special pleading, because only she/he and her/his kind has a special transcendent knowledge. She/he is different!

But is it a fact that it is something she/he can do. The joke is that any belief is real, if it has real consequence as subsequent other behavior; e.g. i.e. the belief in witches causes the burning of witches at the stake.

All 4 categories of wrong and thus right are cognitive; i.e. takes place in brains and you have no natural science evidence for the fact, that theism is wrong. The only reason theism is wrong is because you and other humans think, it is wrong.
There is a category of words, which have no referent independent of human brains. E.g. useful, that it works, meaningful, that it matters and so on. All of these words requires brains and that it is useful to somebody.
I accept that you subjectively think that theism is wrong. It is a fact that you can do so. But it is not a fact, that I think theism is wrong. Nor do I think it is right. I don't need theism, because I can do without it. But that doesn't make theism neither right nor wrong. I simply have a life without the belief in a God/Gods.

I don't hate nor like theism. I am indifferent to it, because I can do without it. Now if you want to debate whether theism is morally wrong, I am "your man", because I am philosopher and I am good at meta-ethics inside methodological naturalism.

With regards
__________________
I don't believe in God and all the rest outside of methodological naturalism But I am a cognitive and ethical relativist/subjectivist and skeptic.
#JeSuisAhmed
Tommy Jeppesen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2018, 01:23 AM   #333
ynot
Philosopher
 
ynot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,683
Well self-proclaimed "philosopher that’s good at meta-ethics inside methodological naturalism”, you’re apparently hopeless at understanding what Thor 2 and myself are saying. Hint - We aren't saying theism is independent of theists at all. Perhaps you should try critical thinking rather than philosophizing?
__________________
Paranormal beliefs are knowledge placebos.
Rumours of a godís existence have been greatly exaggerated.

Last edited by ynot; 8th March 2018 at 01:25 AM.
ynot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2018, 01:57 AM   #334
Tommy Jeppesen
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,442
Originally Posted by ynot View Post
Well self-proclaimed "philosopher thatís good at meta-ethics inside methodological naturalismĒ, youíre apparently hopeless at understanding what Thor 2 and myself are saying. Hint - We aren't saying theism is independent of theists at all. Perhaps you should try critical thinking rather than philosophizing?
You do understand that theism is not wrong, unless you think is wrong. That also goes for the non-moral versions of the word "wrong". All versions/variants of wrong are cognitive, subjective and relative when it comes to wrong. Theism is not wrong as how reality works in practice, because it is a fact that some humans do theism.
In the "ladder" of reality, it goes like this:
Physical->chemistry->biology->culture/psychology->theism. Theism is as much a fact of how reality works in practice as gravity is a fact. Theism is no more or less wrong than gravity is.
It is the is-ought problem in a sense. From the fact theism is fact, does not follow whether you ought to do it or not. Whether you do or don't do theism is cognitive, subjective and relative.

But theism is not wrong in itself and it is only wrong dependent of human evaluation of in the end human behavior.
You don't have to hate theism or think it is wrong. You just have to say the following to a theist: I accept you as a human, but I won't do as you do. I do it differently. Now do you want to move along, fight or cooperate? If you want to fight, I don't do that any more. I am a pacifist now, so you might as well kill me. So what do you want to do?

There is no right/wrong or good/bad out there independent of your brain. That takes places in your brain. That is the same for all other humans capable of right/wrong or good/bad. It takes place in their brains individually and can be shared inter-subjectively, but it is not independent of human brains.
Theism is only wrong if you think so and if you hate it, it is something you do. The hate is not in theism as such, it is in you. And if other humans hate you, it doesn't follow with logic/evidence that you ought to hate their behavior and/or them.
So if you hate theism, you can't use science to give evidence for that the hate is right/true/correct, because the scientific methodology is objective and what you do is subjective.

With regards
__________________
I don't believe in God and all the rest outside of methodological naturalism But I am a cognitive and ethical relativist/subjectivist and skeptic.
#JeSuisAhmed
Tommy Jeppesen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2018, 02:09 AM   #335
ynot
Philosopher
 
ynot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,683
I see you continue to choose philosophizing over critical thinking (I tried). No surprise I guess given you're a self-proclaimed philosophy expert.
__________________
Paranormal beliefs are knowledge placebos.
Rumours of a godís existence have been greatly exaggerated.

Last edited by ynot; 8th March 2018 at 02:12 AM.
ynot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2018, 02:35 AM   #336
Tommy Jeppesen
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,442
Originally Posted by ynot View Post
I see you continue to choose philosophizing over critical thinking (I tried). No surprise I guess given you're a self-proclaimed philosophy expert.
Yes, you can hate theism without hate theists. Can you hate theism only using critical thinking?
Since you claim critical thinking, you can also answer if you can hate theism only using critical thinking, right?

In context you are claiming critical thinking and the concept of "hating theism", so it follows natural to combine both: Can you hate theism only using critical thinking?

You can't get around this. You using critical thinking concerning reality includes hate. So using critical thinking and knowing how reality works, you can answer.
Of course, you don't have to answer, but the problem is that you claim that you can, because you use critical thinking and you know how reality works.
In short I hold you responsible, because you claim that you are. You claim you can answer, therefore you ought to answer. You speak with critical thinking, therefore you ought to do so.

With regards
__________________
I don't believe in God and all the rest outside of methodological naturalism But I am a cognitive and ethical relativist/subjectivist and skeptic.
#JeSuisAhmed
Tommy Jeppesen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2018, 03:06 AM   #337
Tommy Jeppesen
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,442
RE: Is your atheism predominately a science success or a theism fail?

This could be a false dichotomy, because science doesn't cover hate, so if theism failed because if you hate it, it is not about science or theism as such, but emotions.

So ynot, here we are again - critical thinking versus emotions. So besides predominately, is there something else predominately going on. Well, hate apparently.

Edit:
Another take:
All atheists only have in common that they are atheists, so hate shouldn't be relevant, because critical thinking apparently involves objectivity as without biases including emotions, right, ynot???
__________________
I don't believe in God and all the rest outside of methodological naturalism But I am a cognitive and ethical relativist/subjectivist and skeptic.
#JeSuisAhmed

Last edited by Tommy Jeppesen; 8th March 2018 at 03:24 AM.
Tommy Jeppesen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2018, 12:34 PM   #338
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 57,164
Originally Posted by ynot View Post
You conflate theism and theists.
Theism is not independent of theists. You literally can't have theism without theists.
__________________
"This quote was taken out of context."
- Randall Munroe
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2018, 01:27 PM   #339
Thor 2
Illuminator
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 3,687
Lots of squabbling going on here in my absence.

My take on this is quite simple, as I go along with the analogy that religion is like a virus, a virus that effects the thinking capacity of the afflicted. Sure it cannot exist without the mind it invades, but it is a something in its own right just as polio is.

I suppose I could elaborate on this, and stack heaps of words around the notion as Tommy has done in his thesis ^, but it is a simple idea so forgive the brevity.
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard.
Thor 2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2018, 02:04 PM   #340
Ron_Tomkins
Satan's Helper
 
Ron_Tomkins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 42,502
I'm an atheist on the basis that I am not "sold" by anyone's particular "God" and/or Religion. It's not really a "fail" for them, because apparently it seems to work for them, and they're happy believing that. It's also not a "fail" for me, because I'm not asking anyone to justify their beliefs to me. I don't care why you believe what you believe. For all that matters, you could have no reason to justify why you believe in your God.
__________________
"I am a collection of water, calcium and organic molecules called Carl Sagan"

Carl Sagan

Last edited by Ron_Tomkins; 8th March 2018 at 02:08 PM.
Ron_Tomkins is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2018, 03:25 PM   #341
ynot
Philosopher
 
ynot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,683
Originally Posted by Ron_Tomkins View Post
I'm an atheist on the basis that I am not "sold" by anyone's particular "God" and/or Religion. It's not really a "fail" for them, because apparently it seems to work for them, and they're happy believing that. It's also not a "fail" for me, because I'm not asking anyone to justify their beliefs to me. I don't care why you believe what you believe. For all that matters, you could have no reason to justify why you believe in your God.
Typically theists "sell" their theistic beliefs. Very few are happy to keep their theism to themselves. That you have never been "sold" I would say is their failure to "sell" you their theism.
__________________
Paranormal beliefs are knowledge placebos.
Rumours of a godís existence have been greatly exaggerated.
ynot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2018, 05:24 PM   #342
ynot
Philosopher
 
ynot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,683
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
Theism is not independent of theists. You literally can't have theism without theists.
So What? You can’t have smoking without smokers either. So What?

Smokes are a product that smokers choose to smoke, theism is a belief that theists choose to believe. Smokers are not smokes and theists aren’t theism (unless you want to define theists as being beliefs). Theism is a god belief, theists are people that have that belief. That some people have measles doesn’t make those people measles.

ETA – It is possible to have a particular theism belief concept without having any theists that believe it. I’m sure nobody really believes in the Flying Spaghetti Monster god, or some redundant ancient gods that were once believed to be real.
__________________
Paranormal beliefs are knowledge placebos.
Rumours of a godís existence have been greatly exaggerated.

Last edited by ynot; 8th March 2018 at 05:56 PM.
ynot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2018, 08:38 PM   #343
Ron_Tomkins
Satan's Helper
 
Ron_Tomkins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 42,502
Originally Posted by ynot View Post
Typically theists "sell" their theistic beliefs. Very few are happy to keep their theism to themselves. That you have never been "sold" I would say is their failure to "sell" you their theism.
Maybe. But to their credit, it's probably not even a matter of whether they are bad at selling their belief. It's just that I'm immune to that, because it's just not my thing and I don't care at all for it. Like with most things people try to sell me. For example, I have 100% ZERO interest in obtaining cable. I have received thousands of phone calls inviting me to switch to this new Cable Plan that is a really great deal blablabla. But I just don't care. Not even the best Cable Salesman on the planet can sell it to me, because it's not about how good of a salesman you are. You're just not gonna convince me about buying something I have zero interest in having.
__________________
"I am a collection of water, calcium and organic molecules called Carl Sagan"

Carl Sagan
Ron_Tomkins is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2018, 10:05 PM   #344
Thor 2
Illuminator
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 3,687
Originally Posted by Ron_Tomkins View Post
Maybe. But to their credit, it's probably not even a matter of whether they are bad at selling their belief. It's just that I'm immune to that, because it's just not my thing and I don't care at all for it. Like with most things people try to sell me. For example, I have 100% ZERO interest in obtaining cable. I have received thousands of phone calls inviting me to switch to this new Cable Plan that is a really great deal blablabla. But I just don't care. Not even the best Cable Salesman on the planet can sell it to me, because it's not about how good of a salesman you are. You're just not gonna convince me about buying something I have zero interest in having.

OK, so maybe you fall outside the group of guys ynot is asking the question of here. The question is directed at those who have dropped theism and asking them why. Pretty clear I think.
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard.
Thor 2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th March 2018, 02:01 AM   #345
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 19,842
Originally Posted by ynot View Post
Typically theists "sell" their theistic beliefs. Very few are happy to keep their theism to themselves.
Are you from the US, by any chance? What you're describing is certainly not my experience of living in the UK, and I would expect not that of the majority of Europeans.
__________________
I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.
Squeegee Beckenheim is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th March 2018, 02:04 AM   #346
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 19,842
Originally Posted by Thor 2 View Post
The question is directed at those who have dropped theism and asking them why. Pretty clear I think.
The OP explicitly says that ynot has never had a religious belief, talks about the role (or lack thereof) of science and others' religion in that, and then asks everybody else to share their experiences. Why would you take from that that he is uninterested in hearing from those of us who have never had theistic beliefs?
__________________
I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.
Squeegee Beckenheim is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th March 2018, 02:27 AM   #347
Cheetah
Muse
 
Cheetah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 867
Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim View Post
The OP explicitly says that ynot has never had a religious belief, talks about the role (or lack thereof) of science and others' religion in that, and then asks everybody else to share their experiences. Why would you take from that that he is uninterested in hearing from those of us who have never had theistic beliefs?
What?



You never believed in Santa?

__________________
"... when you dig my grave, could you make it shallow so that I can feel the rain" - DMB
Cheetah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th March 2018, 03:29 AM   #348
Aridas
Crazy Little Green Dragon
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,032
Originally Posted by Tommy Jeppesen View Post
So theism is independent of theists, just like gravity is independent of humans. The joke is this: Theism is not independent of the humans, who do that. It is not theism, which is the cause of theists and theists is the effect of theism. Theism is a behavior in theists. Imagine that all humans were no more, we know have a reality in which we still have e.g. gravity. Would there still be theism?

For what it's worth, without going back and reading the preceding discussion, this sounds a bit like you're conflating things pointlessly.

Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
Theism is not independent of theists. You literally can't have theism without theists.
To address this sentiment expressed by both of you more directly, believing something is generally considered to be more a state of being rather than a behavior. Theism is the state of being when some person believes in one or more gods. If there are no theists, the concept of theism would still exist as the state of being where a person believes in one or more gods, it would just be completely meaningless for practical uses, much like the state of being where a person believes in orcs, dwarves, and elves warring in secret is meaningless for practical uses.

Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim View Post
Are you from the US, by any chance? What you're describing is certainly not my experience of living in the UK, and I would expect not that of the majority of Europeans.
It's also not even remotely universally applicable in the US, for that matter, even if running into examples of people who are trying to push their faith onto others is nigh unavoidable. People are generally fairly open to discussing what they believe, of course, if approached on the topic. It may be worth adding the caveat that some areas of the US are far more pushy than others, overall.
__________________
So sayeth the crazy little dragon.
Aridas is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th March 2018, 03:32 AM   #349
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 19,842
Originally Posted by Cheetah View Post
What?



You never believed in Santa?

I don't remember ever believing, I have to say. I do remember setting up a trap for my parents when I was about 6 to prove that he didn't, and then angrily confronting them for lying to me. How much of that was down to my powers of deduction, and how much of that was down to having lived in more than one country when I was young, and therefore seeing different Santa traditions, I can't say.

I'm not sure how much any of that counts, but it is a fair point - even if it was only made in jest.
__________________
I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.
Squeegee Beckenheim is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th March 2018, 07:40 AM   #350
Ron_Tomkins
Satan's Helper
 
Ron_Tomkins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 42,502
Originally Posted by Thor 2 View Post
OK, so maybe you fall outside the group of guys ynot is asking the question of here. The question is directed at those who have dropped theism and asking them why. Pretty clear I think.
But I did drop theism, because I used to believe in God when I was much younger.
__________________
"I am a collection of water, calcium and organic molecules called Carl Sagan"

Carl Sagan
Ron_Tomkins is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th March 2018, 08:26 AM   #351
Cheetah
Muse
 
Cheetah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 867
Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim View Post
I don't remember ever believing, I have to say. I do remember setting up a trap for my parents when I was about 6 to prove that he didn't, and then angrily confronting them for lying to me. How much of that was down to my powers of deduction, and how much of that was down to having lived in more than one country when I was young, and therefore seeing different Santa traditions, I can't say.
I just had a flashback, I must have been around the same age.
We always had these big family gatherings on Christmas and Santa brought us all presents. I suddenly noticed that Santa was not Santa, but one of my uncles, in a costume, with a fake beard!
I confronted my parents and they confessed, Santa was never real, he had been my uncle all along. I was the oldest of all the kids and the first to notice this.
At first I did not believe them, not the bit about Santa not being real, but that he had always been my uncle. I could not believe that I did not recognized him the previous Christmases.
__________________
"... when you dig my grave, could you make it shallow so that I can feel the rain" - DMB
Cheetah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th March 2018, 01:16 PM   #352
Thor 2
Illuminator
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 3,687
Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim View Post
The OP explicitly says that ynot has never had a religious belief, talks about the role (or lack thereof) of science and others' religion in that, and then asks everybody else to share their experiences. Why would you take from that that he is uninterested in hearing from those of us who have never had theistic beliefs?

I suspect that those who never had any kind of theistic belief of any kind would be very thin on the ground.

Non the less the question of theism fail or science success is valid, because one or the other may have been responsible for you not picking up the bug.
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard.
Thor 2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th March 2018, 01:20 PM   #353
Thor 2
Illuminator
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 3,687
Originally Posted by Ron_Tomkins View Post
But I did drop theism, because I used to believe in God when I was much younger.

That is not the impression I got from your previous post where you claimed some immunity.

So what caused you to drop theism then?
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard.
Thor 2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th March 2018, 05:24 PM   #354
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 19,842
Originally Posted by Thor 2 View Post
I suspect that those who never had any kind of theistic belief of any kind would be very thin on the ground.
Perhaps in the US. In Europe, some parts of East Asia, and perhaps former Soviet countries, I'd have thought it'd be pretty common.

Quote:
Non the less the question of theism fail or science success is valid, because one or the other may have been responsible for you not picking up the bug.
Yes, this is why I answered the question.

However, you made the statement that you thought it was "pretty clear" that "The question is directed at those who have dropped theism and asking them why". The question is why did you think that was pretty clear, given that the OP explicitly identified himself as someone who had never had a religious belief? Is it purely because meeting people who have never had religious beliefs is outside your personal experience?
__________________
I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.
Squeegee Beckenheim is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th March 2018, 05:58 PM   #355
ynot
Philosopher
 
ynot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,683
Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim View Post
Perhaps in the US. In Europe, some parts of East Asia, and perhaps former Soviet countries, I'd have thought it'd be pretty common.

Yes, this is why I answered the question.

However, you made the statement that you thought it was "pretty clear" that "The question is directed at those who have dropped theism and asking them why". The question is why did you think that was pretty clear, given that the OP explicitly identified himself as someone who had never had a religious belief? Is it purely because meeting people who have never had religious beliefs is outside your personal experience?
My main question (the title) is directed to all atheists (never theists and ex-theists).

My sub question (an afterthought) is more directed to ex-theists . . .
Originally Posted by ynot View Post
As I’ve never had a god belief (or any paranormal belief) I’m wondering if others are atheists predominately because of the success of science or the failure of theism.
Instead of “others” I should’ve said “ex-theists” (sorry about that).

ETA . . .
I’ve never been a theist nor smoker simply because both are stupid. Seems smoking is easier to never start than give up, and I assume it’s the same with theism. I was wondering therefore if “it’s stupid” is sufficient to give up theism, or whether the knowledge of science is also required. Some ex-theist posts suggest “it’s stupid” is enough. The point is theists attacking science doesn’t help their cause (IMO).
__________________
Paranormal beliefs are knowledge placebos.
Rumours of a godís existence have been greatly exaggerated.

Last edited by ynot; 9th March 2018 at 06:14 PM.
ynot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th March 2018, 09:56 PM   #356
Aridas
Crazy Little Green Dragon
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,032
Originally Posted by ynot View Post
I was wondering therefore if ďitís stupidĒ is sufficient to give up theism, or whether the knowledge of science is also required.
"It's stupid" is generally effective in preventing theism. It's far less effective in ending theism, but people become and stop being theists for all kinds of reasons, rational and irrational. As for knowledge of science, it's only conditionally relevant, generally speaking. Science will not make a theist into an atheist, as a general rule. It can, however, counter falsehoods being promoted by certain forms of theism and that can lead to a more generalized disenchantment with the idea. Rather than science itself, it's the underlying philosophy and concepts like parsimony that end up being somewhat hostile to theism generally.

Originally Posted by ynot View Post
Some ex-theist posts suggest ďitís stupidĒ is enough.
It can be, even if you are directly talking about someone saying "It's stupid." Generally, that involves someone impressionable idolizing another a bit, though.

Originally Posted by ynot View Post
The point is theists attacking science doesnít help their cause (IMO).
Ehh... it certainly can. As I touched on earlier in the post, as the value of the underlying philosophy that leads to science shows itself, it erodes the support that theism relies upon. Attacking science is a means to denigrate the value of the underlying philosophy, as well as the inconvenient results that show various religious claims to be bogus.
__________________
So sayeth the crazy little dragon.
Aridas is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th March 2018, 10:35 PM   #357
ynot
Philosopher
 
ynot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,683
Originally Posted by Aridas View Post
Ehh... it certainly can. As I touched on earlier in the post, as the value of the underlying philosophy that leads to science shows itself, it erodes the support that theism relies upon. Attacking science is a means to denigrate the value of the underlying philosophy, as well as the inconvenient results that show various religious claims to be bogus.
Perhaps I meant to put IMC(ase)
__________________
Paranormal beliefs are knowledge placebos.
Rumours of a godís existence have been greatly exaggerated.

Last edited by ynot; 9th March 2018 at 10:36 PM.
ynot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th March 2018, 03:05 PM   #358
Thor 2
Illuminator
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 3,687
Originally Posted by Aridas View Post
"It's stupid" is generally effective in preventing theism. It's far less effective in ending theism, but people become and stop being theists for all kinds of reasons, rational and irrational. As for knowledge of science, it's only conditionally relevant, generally speaking. Science will not make a theist into an atheist, as a general rule. It can, however, counter falsehoods being promoted by certain forms of theism and that can lead to a more generalized disenchantment with the idea. Rather than science itself, it's the underlying philosophy and concepts like parsimony that end up being somewhat hostile to theism generally.
Richard Dawkins claimed it did just that to him. Also the statistics about the very low religiosity of scientists, even in the USA, seems to contradict this claim.

Quote:
Ehh... it certainly can. As I touched on earlier in the post, as the value of the underlying philosophy that leads to science shows itself, it erodes the support that theism relies upon. Attacking science is a means to denigrate the value of the underlying philosophy, as well as the inconvenient results that show various religious claims to be bogus.

It may be that the religious feel attacking science is an effective strategy but I am with ynot in thinking it is not. A very blunt weapon wielded by theologians who often show a very poor knowledge of the science they try to discredit. Look at the efforts of Ray Comfort and the pathetic display of Cardinal Pell when debating Richard Dawkins.
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard.
Thor 2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2018, 01:00 AM   #359
The Norseman
Meandering fecklessly
 
The Norseman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 7,588
Originally Posted by Thor 2 View Post
Richard Dawkins claimed it did just that to him. Also the statistics about the very low religiosity of scientists, even in the USA, seems to contradict this claim.
It looks like you're ascribing some sort of causative relationship there when it simply could be correlative.
The Norseman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2018, 05:24 AM   #360
Aridas
Crazy Little Green Dragon
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,032
Originally Posted by Thor 2 View Post
Richard Dawkins claimed it did just that to him.
I remain skeptical.

Originally Posted by Thor 2 View Post
Also the statistics about the very low religiosity of scientists, even in the USA, seems to contradict this claim.
Pay attention to the rest of the paragraph? No, the statistics about the very low religiosity of scientists don't counter the claim, as actually made. Science, itself, can and does co-exist with religion peacefully and has been doing so for as long as science has existed. Science's relevance to theists becoming atheists is indirect, at best. Again, if a religion makes demonstrably false claims that science shows to be false and a person loses their trust in their faith and, given the feelings of betrayal that they feel, react emotionally, rather than logically, that's really not science making the theist into an atheist. If someone sees that science has produced incredible and useful information and sees that religions, generally speaking, have not produced much trustworthy or useful information to the questions at hand then decides to rely on the philosophy that has shown itself to be overwhelmingly more useful between the two, again, science has effectively provided information relevant to the decision, but the reactions are completely dependent on the person in question and what values they're choosing to prioritize. More could be said, but science's role, as a general rule, is something of a background role of providing information in a fairly reliable fashion.


Originally Posted by Thor 2 View Post
It may be that the religious feel attacking science is an effective strategy but I am with ynot in thinking it is not. A very blunt weapon wielded by theologians who often show a very poor knowledge of the science they try to discredit. Look at the efforts of Ray Comfort and the pathetic display of Cardinal Pell when debating Richard Dawkins.
Not an effective strategy? It's about the only option they have available, though, when science is directly showing that many of the claims that their particular form of religion makes are false and their claimed supports for it are little more than folly, from an outside objective perspective. Even the mere facts than they can say that there's ongoing debate, however truthful or dishonest any side is being, and that there are lots of other people who believe something is enough to leave wiggle room to let those who want to believe do so, either way.

I strongly disapprove of the strategy, myself, of course, given that effectively blind loyalty to the fundamentally untrustworthy is a terrible method to try to make or reach a better future. Also, of course, I value the quality of arguments employed to be far more important than the conclusions made.
__________________
So sayeth the crazy little dragon.

Last edited by Aridas; 11th March 2018 at 05:33 AM.
Aridas is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

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 -7. The time now is 08:28 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.