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

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


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 27th December 2017, 10:43 AM   #81
StackOverflow
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 179
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
While one does enjoy a surfeit of exclamation points, I notice that this claim appears to be made up of whole cloth.

You don't really think that Newton secretly did not believe in God but could only transmit that knowledge to us in this day and age by wishful thinking?
'k

StackOverflow 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 27th December 2017, 10:47 AM   #82
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 26,117
Originally Posted by StackOverflow View Post
'k

That is the exact same thing you have said in your last Eight posts.

Fantastic
__________________
A proud member of a dissident religious group.
The Big Dog 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 27th December 2017, 10:49 AM   #83
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 18,516
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
There is no requirement that love, hope, beauty, empathy, good taste, hell political beliefs have evidence or verification.

Say, I love my kids.... so let’s get out the test tubes and run that through the old verification process.

How ridiculous.
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
No, your post is ridiculous. Love, hope, beauty, empathy, good taste etc are descriptive words for feelings or ideas. They aren't really an existential claim. Comparing that to a God claim is comparing apples to oranges.

In contrast, you claim that the Bible is the word of God and that we should follow it. For me, the mere assertion that there is a God and the bible is God's word is not enough. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and yet none has ever been provided.
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
anyone else get whiplash from that change of subject??

My post expertly showed that many things most of us directly experience every day are not subject to "scientific" "verification," despite being so claimed in this thread.

Rather than getting an attempt at a response, we get cherry picking.
You'll have to explain how this is a change of subject.

Your making a false analogy. You are comparing a feeling or a thought to an existential claim. That really is the change of subject. We can prove that your kids exist. You can show us pictures or videos of them. We can also monitor your physiological responses and identify electrical and chemical patterns that are associated with what people refer to as love.

I'd also say that you could have similar feelings about the idea that you call God. But your physiological responses do not prove anything other than a thought in your mind. I concede that you have thoughts. They are most certainly real. But thoughts and feelings prove absolutely nothing about whether there is an underlying true fact.
__________________
“ A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. ”
― David Hume
acbytesla 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 27th December 2017, 10:50 AM   #84
MikeG
Now. Do it now.
 
MikeG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 23,768
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
........ much as I have done so with the false dichotomy in the opening post by demonstrating that religious faith and science are not incompatable........
They are not, so long as you squint a bit and overlook the unscientific guff in most of the holy texts around the world.

If you accept that "religious faith" is dependent upon those texts, then faith and science are incompatible*. If you insist on clinging on to faith, then you have to accept that the religious texts are junk. I'd have a bit more patience with the religious if more of them were prepared to say "the (insert your favourite religious text name here) is full of absolute nonsense, but I have separate reasons for accepting the existence of a deity".

As for my own atheism........it's because even at the age of 6 or 7 I had a functioning bull-**** detector. A series of religious types tried to over-ride this detector, but failed. By the age of 10 or 11 I was the one kid in the school who would sit with eyes open during school prayers whilst everyone else knelt and mumbled out the responses supposed to keep them from burning in hell for eternity. I thought it hilarious.



*In strict terms, faith and science are mutually exclusive concepts. Science is a way of working out how stuff happens without having to rely on unevidenced assertions. Faith is acceptance of unevidenced assertions.
__________________
"The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place." The Don That's what we've sunk to here.

Last edited by MikeG; 27th December 2017 at 10:52 AM.
MikeG 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 27th December 2017, 11:03 AM   #85
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 26,117
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post

Your making a false analogy. You are comparing a feeling or a thought to an existential claim. That really is the change of subject. We can prove that your kids exist. You can show us pictures or videos of them. We can also monitor your physiological responses and identify electrical and chemical patterns that are associated with what people refer to as love.
.
No, I was replying to a claim that beliefs require evidence and verification. Do people really not bother reading the posts to which i was replying for the ESSENTIAL context.

Your contention about "monitoring" is obviously specious because that is not love (further you are ignoring cause and effect). Indeed there was a study mentioned hereabouts not too long ago that noted that atheists have a negative effect when they take the name of our Lord God in vain.
__________________
A proud member of a dissident religious group.
The Big Dog 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 27th December 2017, 11:14 AM   #86
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 69,174
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
The first thing that is necessary when creating a valid scientific hypothesis is that the hypothesis is necessarily falsifiable. And I have never heard hypothesis for testing that a God exists that is. Usually they fail when they try to define God. Feel free Ginger to come up with one that doesn't start out with false premises or fallacies. I bet you can't. Every time I have ever heard anyone try, it's always filled with unproven assertions and special pleading.

So back to what I'm saying. It is impossible to apply the scientific method to the question AND prove or disprove it.

Unfalsifiable
It takes a paradigm shift and not everyone has made that shift... yet. You may or may not but it's not about arguing my falsifiable hypothesis, it's about letting go of the wrong question or scientific problem.

Hypothesis: Human god beliefs are fictional creations. Human gods are mythical creatures. It's not only easily tested, we can even go the next step in Koch's Postulate and put the hypothesis to the test. This was done albeit not purposefully when the Cargo Cults developed.

What gets in the way of this paradigm shift is the argument one cannot prove that is the case for all god beliefs. It's a rather stupid argument, IMO, because we don't do any such thing with say for example evolution theory. Does anyone say one cannot conclude all mammal lifeforms on Earth are DNA based because one has not yet tested every lifeform? That's not how we word scientific conclusions.

Is it falsifiable because you can test every lifeform even if the task is immense? What about extinct animals? At some point we say we have tested enough mammal lifeforms that we develop a theory.

And evolution is a theory because there is always potential for new evidence.

But we don't say we can't 'prove' that fact therefore evolution theory is not falsifiable. We say one can generate falsifiable hypotheses within evolution theory.

The whole idea we can't let go of fictional god beliefs because we can't prove no gods exist is a ludicrous argument. Fiction is fiction, it's not evidence. It's not something one has to constantly remind ourselves or others of that there is no proof every god is a fictional creature.

We could test every god belief but it is an immense task. So like genomes, at some point we conclude there is a pattern.

What other 'no evidence for X' do you do that with?

Life on other planets? No, that is not something we have no evidence for, we have evidence life exists in the Universe, it is all around us. So that 'X' is a where and how much, not a 'no evidence for'.

String theory? That's above my pay grade but it's my understanding that is a theory to explain evidence that doesn't fit into current particle physics.


Back to testing the 'gods are fictional' hypothesis? How do you test that? Now you have the problem of hard science vs what is so-called soft science. Contrary to what people not involved in sciences such as anthropology might believe, the scientific method applies and there are ways to test multi-variable human behavior problems.
Skeptic Ginger 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 27th December 2017, 11:46 AM   #87
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 18,516
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
No, I was replying to a claim that beliefs require evidence and verification. Do people really not bother reading the posts to which i was replying for the ESSENTIAL context.
Of course they do. I'd argue that you require some evidence of virtually every belief you have except God. Feelings and thoughts are not beliefs. They are simply human reactions. You love your children because you touch them and interact with them. They have audible voices and an image pattern that you recognize. Whereas God is simply an idea in your head.

Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
Your contention about "monitoring" is obviously specious because that is not love (further you are ignoring cause and effect). Indeed there was a study mentioned hereabouts not too long ago that noted that atheists have a negative effect when they take the name of our Lord God in vain.
Really? Then what is love? Are you saying it is more than an idea or physical reaction? As for the so called study? So what? I don't deny that humans have physical reactions to ideas in their heads. Whether it be negative or positive, their emotions are real. My mother passed away when I was 15 and I still have physical reactions when I think about her. But my mother is not real. She ceased to exist 30 years ago.

With God, I'm assuming that you have never actually seen God or had an audible conversation with it. Have you? I bet you have no pictures or videos of God playing in your backyard. Or do you? All you know of it are shared ideas from other believers and what you have read in an old book. Now again, I concede that you may have emotions about those ideas. But that is not, nor should it be enough. I don't ask you to prove your thoughts and emotions, but if you tell me that you or your ancestors conversed regularly with leprechauns, fairies or gods and that I should embrace and obey these rules put down in 2000 year old writings, I'm going to REQUIRE CREDIBLE evidence.
__________________
“ A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. ”
― David Hume
acbytesla 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 27th December 2017, 11:55 AM   #88
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 18,516
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
It takes a paradigm shift and not everyone has made that shift... yet. You may or may not but it's not about arguing my falsifiable hypothesis, it's about letting go of the wrong question or scientific problem.

Hypothesis: Human god beliefs are fictional creations. Human gods are mythical creatures. It's not only easily tested, we can even go the next step in Koch's Postulate and put the hypothesis to the test. This was done albeit not purposefully when the Cargo Cults developed.
You are already starting off on the wrong foot. The hypothesis has to be for proving or disproving whether a God exists, not people's beliefs.

I grant you everything else in your post is true.

It ends up going around in circles. Ever ask a theist to define exactly what a God is? It always ends up being incomprehensible immeasurable being outside of time and space. You are 100 percent right in my assessment but i doubt many thests would agree to your terms.
__________________
“ A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. ”
― David Hume

Last edited by acbytesla; 27th December 2017 at 01:25 PM.
acbytesla 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 27th December 2017, 01:23 PM   #89
I Am The Scum
Illuminator
 
I Am The Scum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,405
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
There is no requirement that love, hope, beauty, empathy, good taste, hell...
These are not beliefs.
I Am The Scum 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 27th December 2017, 01:24 PM   #90
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 69,174
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
You are already starting off on the wrong foot. The hypothesis has to be for proving or disproving whether a God exists, not people's beliefs.
It's not the wrong foot, it's the whole point! Think paradigm shift, put the 'can't prove there is no god' on the shelf it belongs on: that's an unnecessary question regardless of how many people believe in gods.

Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
I grant you everything else in your post is true.

It ends up go around in circles. Ever ask a theist to define exactly what a God is? It always ends up being incomprehensible immeasurable being outside of time and space. You are 100 percent right in my assessment but i doubt many thests would agree to your terms.
Then why do we agree with it when it comes to evolution theory and hypotheses?

Think: you can't prove evolution theory because you can't prove the negative: irreducible complexity might exist, we can't prove it doesn't.

No one talks that way about evolution theory. Lots of people believe in creation myths of various varieties. That doesn't create a whole posse of scientists saying we can't prove irreducible complexity doesn't exist somewhere on the planet. It's ludicrous.

At some point one can say, we have overwhelming evidence gods are mythical beings, human created fiction. Why do we keep going on with this no true atheists/you can't prove there are no gods/what ever way it is worded?

We know what gods are: fiction. It's not a hard concept. Paradigm shift: don't ask if there any gods, ask what the evidence says gods are.

Once you shift to the position that gods are fiction from the position of can't prove it, the god belief problem becomes much clearer.


And yes I understand scientific theory vs mathematical proofs. Don't let that argument sidetrack the analogy.

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 27th December 2017 at 01:26 PM.
Skeptic Ginger 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 27th December 2017, 02:20 PM   #91
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 26,117
Originally Posted by I Am The Scum View Post
These are not beliefs.
I believe we will have to agree to disagree!
__________________
A proud member of a dissident religious group.
The Big Dog 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 27th December 2017, 02:45 PM   #92
Thor 2
Illuminator
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 3,867
Originally Posted by MikeG View Post
They are not, so long as you squint a bit and overlook the unscientific guff in most of the holy texts around the world.

If you accept that "religious faith" is dependent upon those texts, then faith and science are incompatible*. If you insist on clinging on to faith, then you have to accept that the religious texts are junk. I'd have a bit more patience with the religious if more of them were prepared to say "the (insert your favourite religious text name here) is full of absolute nonsense, but I have separate reasons for accepting the existence of a deity".

As for my own atheism........it's because even at the age of 6 or 7 I had a functioning bull-**** detector. A series of religious types tried to over-ride this detector, but failed. By the age of 10 or 11 I was the one kid in the school who would sit with eyes open during school prayers whilst everyone else knelt and mumbled out the responses supposed to keep them from burning in hell for eternity. I thought it hilarious.



*In strict terms, faith and science are mutually exclusive concepts. Science is a way of working out how stuff happens without having to rely on unevidenced assertions. Faith is acceptance of unevidenced assertions.

This is essentially my take on the subject regarding the incompatibility of science and religion. Although science can't prove the non existence of god/gods, it can disprove the validity of many things asserted as true by the religious doctrines we can refer too.

The Abrahamic God is the one most in favour now, and although he has been seasoned differently the flavour is essentially the same, with the original ingredient of the creation, big flood and so on.

The creation is easily falsifiable by science as is the big flood, so the Abrahamic God is rendered somewhat indigestible. Does anyone know of other god entities that do not carry some baggage that is refutable by science?
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard.
Thor 2 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 27th December 2017, 02:47 PM   #93
fuelair
Suspended
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 57,679
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
While one does enjoy a surfeit of exclamation points, I notice that this claim appears to be made up of whole cloth.

You don't really think that Newton secretly did not believe in God but could only transmit that knowledge to us in this day and age by wishful thinking?
This has moved a bit, but I was not thinking of any specific but do know of burned scientists. I was more thinking inquisition and similar. I have no knowledge of what Newton thought except on science. And I know of nothing remotely proving any religion.
fuelair 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 27th December 2017, 02:54 PM   #94
fuelair
Suspended
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 57,679
Originally Posted by fuelair View Post
This has moved a bit, but I was not thinking of any specific but do know of burned scientists. I was more thinking inquisition and similar. I have no knowledge of what Newton thought except on science. And I know of nothing remotely proving any religion.
More precisely, I know of nothing proving any god/god collective, but religions clearly exist - there is simply nothing supporting the beliefs that underly them.
fuelair 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 27th December 2017, 03:53 PM   #95
Skeptical Greg
Agave Wine Connoisseur
 
Skeptical Greg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Just past ' Resume Speed ' .
Posts: 15,165
Originally Posted by MikeG View Post
..... Faith is acceptance of unevidenced assertions.
This reminds me of one of my favorites, which was supposedly said by a young child, when asked what ' faith ' was ..

The child reportedly said: " Faith, is when you believe in something, you know to be untrue. "
__________________
" The main problem I have with the idea of heaven, is the thought of
spending eternity with most of the people who claim to be going there. "
Skeptical Greg 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 27th December 2017, 05:25 PM   #96
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 18,516
Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg View Post
This reminds me of one of my favorites, which was supposedly said by a young child, when asked what ' faith ' was ..

The child reportedly said: " Faith, is when you believe in something, you know to be untrue. "


That sounds about right.
__________________
“ A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. ”
― David Hume
acbytesla 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 27th December 2017, 05:50 PM   #97
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 16,211
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
I believe we will have to agree to disagree!
Silliness.

At best, you are conflating two different meanings of the word "belief". And you are far too intelligent and language proficient not to understand that.

Which comes across to me as deliberately dishonest. We have had that before, haven't we.
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein 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 27th December 2017, 06:08 PM   #98
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 18,516
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Silliness.

At best, you are conflating two different meanings of the word "belief". And you are far too intelligent and language proficient not to understand that.

Which comes across to me as deliberately dishonest. We have had that before, haven't we.
Liars for Jesus.
__________________
“ A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. ”
― David Hume
acbytesla 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 27th December 2017, 06:50 PM   #99
I Am The Scum
Illuminator
 
I Am The Scum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,405
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
I believe we will have to agree to disagree!
If you want to play the role of the pedant, then embrace it. However, you'll need to get your terminology right. Think carefully, and make your move.

Further reading: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/belief/
I Am The Scum 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 27th December 2017, 07:05 PM   #100
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 26,117
I'm allegedly conflating things by not picking a version of a word that our correspondents would find ever so much more convenient, which (absolutely shockingly) makes me a liar.

Cripes fellas, if you have literally nothing with which to counter my arguments other than pedantic nonsense and personal attacks, why bother? Next time just run up the white flag, it'll be easier
__________________
A proud member of a dissident religious group.
The Big Dog 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 27th December 2017, 07:10 PM   #101
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 26,117
Originally Posted by I Am The Scum View Post
If you want to play the role of the pedant, then embrace it. However, you'll need to get your terminology right. Think carefully, and make your move.

Further reading: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/belief/
were ya thinking about actually making a point, or just gonna dump a humongous link on the thread as if it had a point?

Well then, allow me to retort:

wtfl;dfr

It would seem then the ball is in your court.
__________________
A proud member of a dissident religious group.
The Big Dog 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 27th December 2017, 07:11 PM   #102
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 13,920
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
There is no requirement that love, hope, beauty, empathy, good taste, hell political beliefs have evidence or verification.

Say, I love my kids.... so let’s get out the test tubes and run that through the old verification process.

How ridiculous.
For those reasons, I don't argue that I do have evidence for their existence. And I don't assume they do.
BobTheCoward 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 27th December 2017, 07:48 PM   #103
smartcooky
Philosopher
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 8,937
My atheism comes from a theism failure.

My incredulity forces me to reject any invisible sky deity that professes to love its creations and yet allows wars, famines, terrorism, murder etc to take place. A just God would not inflict suffering and pain on the creations it loves.

Besides, if this sky deity really exists, where is it? Point to it and show me what it looks like.
__________________
As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.
- Henry Louis Mencken - Baltimore Evening Sun, July 26, 1920
smartcooky 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 27th December 2017, 08:41 PM   #104
I Am The Scum
Illuminator
 
I Am The Scum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,405
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
were ya thinking about actually making a point, or just gonna dump a humongous link on the thread as if it had a point?

Well then, allow me to retort:

wtfl;dfr

It would seem then the ball is in your court.
My point is that you were asked for an example of a type of belief. You responded by listing many things that are not beliefs at all. I pointed this out to you on the assumption that accuracy is something you value. This assumption appears to have been an error on my part.

By all means, carry on posting in ways that do not address the issue at hand. Those of us that care about the truth will continue without you.
I Am The Scum 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 27th December 2017, 09:08 PM   #105
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 26,117
Originally Posted by I Am The Scum View Post
My point is that you were asked for an example of a type of belief. You responded by listing many things that are not beliefs at all. I pointed this out to you on the assumption that accuracy is something you value. This assumption appears to have been an error on my part.

By all means, carry on posting in ways that do not address the issue at hand. Those of us that care about the truth will continue without you.
No actually you did not rather you dumped a link on us with zero attempt to explain what it is we were supposed to be looking for.

But now we hear that political beliefs? Not a belief for some damn reason?

Beauty? Not a belief, but I dunno something that people don't want to characterize for some odd reason.

It is fine, the original claim was that beliefs were subject of evidence and verification, which has been nuked from orbit.

Now if you wish to discuss the truth of what I have explained, please do not be seduced by the belief that link dumping is doing so, those of us that care about the truth will continue without bare assertion fallacies and link dumping.

I assume that I have made myself sufficiently clear?
__________________
A proud member of a dissident religious group.
The Big Dog 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 28th December 2017, 03:50 AM   #106
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 16,211
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
I'm allegedly conflating things by not picking a version of a word that our correspondents would find ever so much more convenient, which (absolutely shockingly) makes me a liar.
Yes, exactly, your deliberate dishonesty lies precisely in choosing to pick the obviously wrong meaning, the one obviously not implied in the posts you responded to. You have been informed of the "error" too many times to feign innocence.
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein 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 28th December 2017, 03:58 AM   #107
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 16,211
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
...

But now we hear that political beliefs? Not a belief for some damn reason?

Beauty? Not a belief, but I dunno something that people don't want to characterize for some odd reason.

It is fine, the original claim was that beliefs were subject of evidence and verification, which has been nuked from orbit.

...

I assume that I have made myself sufficiently clear?
Yes, you are again deliberately conflating different meanings of the word "belief".

Stop the dishonesty. Looks bad on you.
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein 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 28th December 2017, 04:20 AM   #108
Parsman
Muse
 
Parsman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Bonnie Scotland
Posts: 550
It isn't a science success with me, since I am not very scientifically experienced (dropped all sciences at school at age 16). Not sure it is really a god failure either though. I like to think it is a logic thing (I always liked Mr Spock ). There seems to be no good logical argument for god or gods that can't be destroyed by a better logical argument for the non-existence of god or gods.
__________________
I was not; I have been; I am not; I am content - Epicurus

When you're dead you don't know that you're dead, all the pain is felt by others....................the same thing happens when you're stupid.
Parsman 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 28th December 2017, 07:18 AM   #109
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 26,117
Originally Posted by ynot View Post
Thanks for that!

ETA - A friendly reminder . . .

This thread is addressed to atheists and asks them whether their atheism is predominately preserved by either science or the failure of theism to convert them into theists.
A friendly reminder. . .

The creator of a new thread does not get to declare who is welcome to comment in threads.

Thanks a bunch for making note of it.
__________________
A proud member of a dissident religious group.
The Big Dog 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 28th December 2017, 07:25 AM   #110
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 26,117
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Yes, exactly, your deliberate dishonesty lies precisely in choosing to pick the obviously wrong meaning, the one obviously not implied in the posts you responded to. You have been informed of the "error" too many times to feign innocence.
Oh dear....

By the way, anyone else note that our correspondents are not actually weighing in on the topic at hand: that beliefs require evidence and verification
__________________
A proud member of a dissident religious group.
The Big Dog 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 28th December 2017, 08:03 AM   #111
Peregrinus
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 1,213
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
... that beliefs require evidence and verification
Why is it, then, that the world is overflowing in beliefs which have neither evidence nor verification?
Peregrinus 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 28th December 2017, 08:07 AM   #112
fuelair
Suspended
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 57,679
Originally Posted by Peregrinus View Post
Why is it, then, that the world is overflowing in beliefs which have neither evidence nor verification?
Because the majority of people are not high level thinkers but are great followers!!! This is, of course, not a Good Thing!!!!!
fuelair 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 28th December 2017, 08:13 AM   #113
fuelair
Suspended
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 57,679
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
were ya thinking about actually making a point, or just gonna dump a humongous link on the thread as if it had a point?

Well then, allow me to retort:

wtfl;dfr

It would seem then the ball is in your court.
I assume the adjusted by me above is a new (to me anyway) version of tl;dr .
fuelair 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 28th December 2017, 08:38 AM   #114
I Am The Scum
Illuminator
 
I Am The Scum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,405
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
But now we hear that political beliefs? Not a belief for some damn reason?
I never said that political beliefs are not beliefs. Please do not strawman.
I Am The Scum 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 28th December 2017, 08:51 AM   #115
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 26,117
Originally Posted by I Am The Scum View Post
I never said that political beliefs are not beliefs. Please do not strawman.
I respectfully submit that it is impossible to strawman someone who has never taken a position
__________________
A proud member of a dissident religious group.
The Big Dog 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 28th December 2017, 08:56 AM   #116
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 26,117
Originally Posted by Peregrinus View Post
Why is it, then, that the world is overflowing in beliefs which have neither evidence nor verification?
Exactly, because beliefs are both personal and subjective, and do not need "verification" to be strongly and deeply held.

Very nice
__________________
A proud member of a dissident religious group.
The Big Dog 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 28th December 2017, 09:29 AM   #117
I Am The Scum
Illuminator
 
I Am The Scum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,405
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
I respectfully submit that it is impossible to strawman someone who has never taken a position
I stated my position very clearly in post #89. You distorted it. Please don't do that.
I Am The Scum 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 28th December 2017, 09:42 AM   #118
StackOverflow
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 179
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
That is the exact same thing you have said in your last Eight posts.

Fantastic
'k

StackOverflow 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 28th December 2017, 09:45 AM   #119
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 26,117
Originally Posted by I Am The Scum View Post
I stated my position very clearly in post #89. You distorted it. Please don't do that.
wait a minute, you delieberately deleted part of a sentence to make some kind of position statement. That is amazing.

Here was the whole sentence "There is no requirement that love, hope, beauty, empathy, good taste, hell political beliefs have evidence or verification."

You deleted part of it, THEN you slapped down a link to a tome without ever trying to explain what it meant, and now you are complaining that I have misrepresented your point which was based on you having deliberately deleted part of my sentence? Wow.

Seems like someone is getting hoisted by one's own petard.....
__________________
A proud member of a dissident religious group.
The Big Dog 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 28th December 2017, 11:15 AM   #120
smartcooky
Philosopher
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 8,937
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
Exactly, because beliefs are both personal and subjective, and do not need "verification" to be strongly and deeply held.
But when you foist your faith and beliefs on others, or try to persuade others that there is a god, then you had better have evidence to back up your position if you don't want to be laughed off the stage.

I wonder why you and Fudbucker are even posting in this thread at all. The subject of the thread is

"Is your atheism predominately a science success or a theism fail?"

You are both obviously rampant god-botherers, so the question ynot has posed isn't even directed at you, and is one you cannot possibly answer.
__________________
As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.
- Henry Louis Mencken - Baltimore Evening Sun, July 26, 1920
smartcooky 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
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 01:29 AM.
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.