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

Reply
Old 29th September 2019, 06:55 AM   #321
Robin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 10,884
Originally Posted by David Mo View Post
This is a new evasive.
After evading the problem several times it seems to me that it is clear that you have got yourself into an absurd dead end from which you don't know how to get out.

And now you pretend going out from the impasse by entering into a new dead-end.

It is impossible for the atheist not to take in mind the theist's belief in God. I don't know how you define an atheist, whether the one who doesn't believe that God exists or the one who believes that God doesn't exist. Or the one who claims that God does not exist. I don't care. In all of them the belief of the atheist is defined as the opposite of the believer. The atheist denies the theist's belief because it seems absurd, false, metaphysical or whatever you want. Therefore, he has to take into account what the believer says. I don't know how else atheism could be defined.

That's why what theists believe "has relevance" for atheists. If you are thinking of another kind of relevance, that is not what I have said.
That doesn't make much sense to me.

I don't collect stamps. But I don't get up each morning and say to myself "How shall I not collect stamps today?". No more do I say "How shall I not worship God today?"

Indeed ordering your life according to that which you do not believe or things which are not the case seems to me to be a primary mistake in reasoning about your life.

When I reason about the kind of world we live in I don't ask "what kind of world do the theists think it is?" first.
__________________
The non-theoretical character of metaphysics would not be in itself a defect; all arts have this non-theoretical character without thereby losing their high value for personal as well as for social life. The danger lies in the deceptive character of metaphysics; it gives the illusion of knowledge without actually giving any knowledge. This is the reason why we reject it. - Rudolf Carnap "Philosophy and Logical Syntax"

Last edited by Robin; 29th September 2019 at 06:58 AM.
Robin 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 29th September 2019, 07:12 AM   #322
JesseCuster
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 1,014
Originally Posted by David Mo View Post
It is impossible for the atheist not to take in mind the theist's belief in God. I don't know how you define an atheist, whether the one who doesn't believe that God exists or the one who believes that God doesn't exist. Or the one who claims that God does not exist. I don't care. In all of them the belief of the atheist is defined as the opposite of the believer. The atheist denies the theist's belief because it seems absurd, false, metaphysical or whatever you want. Therefore, he has to take into account what the believer says. I don't know how else atheism could be defined.
Atheism is defined as being in opposition to theism, yes. But it simply does not follow logically that atheists have to take into account theistic beliefs when doing anything.

The only time I take into account theistic beliefs is when I'm discussing the subject of theistic beliefs, like in this thread or in conversation with people about religion, or maybe on rare occasions where I think someone's religious beliefs will impact how I interact with them.

It simply doesn't factor into the day to day functioning of my life.

I no more have to take into account theistic beliefs when doing anything because I'm an atheist, than I have to take into account what people believe about how reincarnation works when doing anything because I don't believe in reincarnation.

None of what you're saying makes any sense to me.
JesseCuster 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 29th September 2019, 07:12 AM   #323
Parsman
Muse
 
Parsman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Bonnie Scotland
Posts: 697
Originally Posted by David Mo View Post
You're unfortunately deflecting the subject. The issue that has been raised is the difference between God and comic heroes in people's beliefs. The atheist will be discussed later if you are willing to answer the question I have raised:

The most important difference between God and Spiderman is its effect on people's beliefs: the difference between believing that a fiction entity is a fiction entity and believing that a fiction entity is real.
The reader of Spiderman knows that his hero does not exist. The Christian believes that his God exists.
From here the differences between both beliefs are abysmal. I don't know how you can deny this.

It is totally accessory whether you like or dislike the name I have invented to highlight the protective aspect of God in the belief of his faithful.
I'm sure quite a few children believe Spider-man or Superman exist until they learn better.
__________________
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 29th September 2019, 07:24 AM   #324
Robin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 10,884
Originally Posted by David Mo View Post
TIn all of them the belief of the atheist is defined as the opposite of the believer.
To put it another way, this is kind of like saying that a Cosmologist's belief is defined as the opposite of a flat-earther.
__________________
The non-theoretical character of metaphysics would not be in itself a defect; all arts have this non-theoretical character without thereby losing their high value for personal as well as for social life. The danger lies in the deceptive character of metaphysics; it gives the illusion of knowledge without actually giving any knowledge. This is the reason why we reject it. - Rudolf Carnap "Philosophy and Logical Syntax"
Robin 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 29th September 2019, 10:21 AM   #325
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 22,847
Originally Posted by David Mo View Post
This is a new evasive.
After evading the problem several times it seems to me that it is clear that you have got yourself into an absurd dead end from which you don't know how to get out.

And now you pretend going out from the impasse by entering into a new dead-end.

It is impossible for the atheist not to take in mind the theist's belief in God. I don't know how you define an atheist, whether the one who doesn't believe that God exists or the one who believes that God doesn't exist. Or the one who claims that God does not exist. I don't care. In all of them the belief of the atheist is defined as the opposite of the believer. The atheist denies the theist's belief because it seems absurd, false, metaphysical or whatever you want. Therefore, he has to take into account what the believer says. I don't know how else atheism could be defined.

That's why what theists believe "has relevance" for atheists. If you are thinking of another kind of relevance, that is not what I have said.
Total unadulterated nonsense.

An atheist absolutely can ignore everything a theist believes. It is irrelevant to the atheist that the theist believes their super hero is faster than a speeding bullet or is more powerful than a locomotive. The atheist doesn't believe any of it is real.
__________________
Try
Science, not superstition.
Reason, not revelation.
Education, not epiphanies
Intellect, not ignorance.
.
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 29th September 2019, 10:45 PM   #326
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 4,694
Originally Posted by JesseCuster View Post
Atheism is defined as being in opposition to theism, yes. But it simply does not follow logically that atheists have to take into account theistic beliefs when doing anything.

The only time I take into account theistic beliefs is when I'm discussing the subject of theistic beliefs, like in this thread or in conversation with people about religion, or maybe on rare occasions where I think someone's religious beliefs will impact how I interact with them.

It simply doesn't factor into the day to day functioning of my life.

I no more have to take into account theistic beliefs when doing anything because I'm an atheist, than I have to take into account what people believe about how reincarnation works when doing anything because I don't believe in reincarnation.

None of what you're saying makes any sense to me.
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
Total unadulterated nonsense.

An atheist absolutely can ignore everything a theist believes. It is irrelevant to the atheist that the theist believes their super hero is faster than a speeding bullet or is more powerful than a locomotive. The atheist doesn't believe any of it is real.
The atheist does not believe in the god of the theist but does not want to know anything about the god of the theist. In other words, he doesn't believe in something he doesn't know what it is.
Amazing!
David Mo 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 29th September 2019, 10:53 PM   #327
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 4,694
Originally Posted by Robin View Post
I don't collect stamps. But I don't get up each morning and say to myself "How shall I not collect stamps today?". No more do I say "How shall I not worship God today?"
I don't expect you to spend all day thinking about why you don't believe in God. All you have to do is do it once and as many times as someone brings up the subject --if you like. But I do expect you to draw the right consequences for not believing in God. That is, a coherently atheistic project.
David Mo 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 29th September 2019, 10:55 PM   #328
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 4,694
Originally Posted by Parsman View Post
I'm sure quite a few children believe Spider-man or Superman exist until they learn better.
I am not speaking with children. Is it not? And I am speaking of adult's beliefs.
David Mo 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 29th September 2019, 11:08 PM   #329
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 4,694
Originally Posted by Robin View Post
To put it another way, this is kind of like saying that a Cosmologist's belief is defined as the opposite of a flat-earther.
Sure, but the atheist is defined as someone that doesn't believe in God. In other words, "god" enters into the very definition of the concept. What god? The god of the believer, obviously.
It is not the same thing as the cosmologist.

In general it would be the position of anyone who says "I don't believe what you say, but I don't want to know what you say".

Don't you see the absurdity?
You insist on discussing what cannot be discussed. I don't know why.
David Mo 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 29th September 2019, 11:11 PM   #330
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 4,694
Originally Posted by Robin View Post
"their"? You don't include yourself?
I have my own mistakes, not this.
David Mo 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 29th September 2019, 11:15 PM   #331
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 4,694
Originally Posted by Robin View Post
When you said "nausea" I thought you meant it in the Sartre sense as a sense of existential anxiety about the absurdity of life.
He was an example. But nausea can be experienced as an anxiety or a simple concern. Sartre himself declared at the end of his life that, despite the nausea, he could be considered to have been a happy man. You see, the concept is not necessarily defined by "anxiety.
David Mo 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 30th September 2019, 10:22 AM   #332
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 22,847
Originally Posted by David Mo View Post
The atheist does not believe in the god of the theist but does not want to know anything about the god of the theist. In other words, he doesn't believe in something he doesn't know what it is.
Amazing!
Now you're just being silly. How it is defined is important for communication but the moment you tell us some wild ass story that you have no evidence for we can dismiss it as quickly as big foot.
__________________
Try
Science, not superstition.
Reason, not revelation.
Education, not epiphanies
Intellect, not ignorance.
.
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 30th September 2019, 10:25 AM   #333
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 20,822
I'm always bemused that people who want to take me to task for "thinking wrong" and take it upon themselves to shove themselves in the "master/student" role in my life are almost without fail literally and functionally wrong about everything.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue 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 30th September 2019, 11:58 AM   #334
JesseCuster
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 1,014
Originally Posted by David Mo View Post
The atheist does not believe in the god of the theist but does not want to know anything about the god of the theist. In other words, he doesn't believe in something he doesn't know what it is.
Amazing!
That is in no way a response to what I actually posted. I might know anything and everything or nothing about the various gods believed in by various theists, that has nothing to do with what I actually said.

It simply doesn't follow that I must somehow 'take into account' the beliefs of theists, because I'm an atheist. Take into account how? Take into account when doing what?

What is it I'm doing to take into account theists beliefs?

Or what is it I'm not doing that I should be doing?

Last edited by JesseCuster; 30th September 2019 at 11:59 AM.
JesseCuster 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 30th September 2019, 02:00 PM   #335
winter salt
Critical Thinker
 
winter salt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 370
Originally Posted by David Mo View Post
But I do expect you to draw the right consequences for not believing in God. That is, a coherently atheistic project.
So then atheists should concern themselves with the consequences of disbelief,
while consequences don't effect the truth value of any belief ?
If the consequences are too grave then what ?
winter salt 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 30th September 2019, 02:03 PM   #336
Thor 2
Philosopher
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 5,602
Originally Posted by David Mo View Post
The atheist does not believe in the god of the theist but does not want to know anything about the god of the theist. In other words, he doesn't believe in something he doesn't know what it is.
Amazing!

The problem David is the task is impossible.

What "god of the theist" are we talking about, that we should get to know? Not only are there such a multitude of differently defined religious groups, but those also are divided into sub groups, with slightly different perception of god.

It doesn't stop there either, because if you would question any individual within a sub group about the nature of their god, you would find differences. Quite understandable really as any person's god exists in one place only - in their own head.

So to get to know the "god of the theist" one would have to question every god believer on this planet - might take a while.
__________________
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 30th September 2019, 02:53 PM   #337
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 19,156
Originally Posted by David Mo View Post
The atheist does not believe in the god of the theist but does not want to know anything about the god of the theist. In other words, he doesn't believe in something he doesn't know what it is.
Amazing!
OK, go ahead and define god.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon 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 30th September 2019, 03:20 PM   #338
Thor 2
Philosopher
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 5,602
Originally Posted by David Mo View Post
The atheist does not believe in the god of the theist but does not want to know anything about the god of the theist. In other words, he doesn't believe in something he doesn't know what it is.
Amazing!
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
OK, go ahead and define god.

Wouldn't it be interesting if we could get a panel of theists to comment on David's definition.

Pounds to peanuts there would be considerable disagreement.
__________________
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 30th September 2019, 04:16 PM   #339
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 19,156
Originally Posted by Thor 2 View Post
Wouldn't it be interesting if we could get a panel of theists to comment on David's definition.

Pounds to peanuts there would be considerable disagreement.
There is a common scenario whereby someone reads a book that so impresses and convinces them of it's veracity that they become hopelessly devoted to it's claims. I have seen it happen many times.

Is this what happened to our protagonist? I have no idea. But it sure ticks a lot of those particular boxes.

Jury is out on that one.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon 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 30th September 2019, 06:40 PM   #340
Roger Ramjets
Illuminator
 
Roger Ramjets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,202
Originally Posted by David Mo View Post
The atheist does not believe in the god of the theist but does not want to know anything about the god of the theist. In other words, he doesn't believe in something he doesn't know what it is.
Amazing!
In many (most?) cases it's the opposite - the atheist doesn't believe because he does know what it is.

Ignoring everything a theist believes is not the same as not knowing what the theist believes. Some of us have researched those beliefs in depth, but it is not necessary to investigate every detail of a theist's belief in order to reject it. We know that theists believe in a supernatural god. Since the supernatural does not exist by definition, that is all we need to know that the theists' beliefs are wrong. If only theists would drop the insistence on their god being supernatural we might listen to their claims. But that is impossible, because...

Definition of Supernatural

1 : of or relating to an order of existence beyond the visible observable universe especially : of or relating to God or a god, demigod, spirit, or devil

If something doesn't exist you don't have to know 'anything about' it apart from that it doesn't exist to know that it doesn't exist. Atheists don't believe in god because they know god doesn't exist (by definition!) and that is all they need to know about god to be atheists. What theists believe is irrelevant.

However, many of us came to be atheists because we knew too much about theists' ridiculous beliefs. So please don't stop cajoling us into investigating them further, because the more we know about theists beliefs the more it will support our unbelief!
__________________
We don't want good, sound arguments. We want arguments that sound good.

Last edited by Roger Ramjets; 30th September 2019 at 06:45 PM.
Roger Ramjets 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 30th September 2019, 07:12 PM   #341
ynot
Philosopher
 
ynot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 8,327
Originally Posted by David Mo View Post
The atheist does not believe in the god of the theist but does not want to know anything about the god of the theist. In other words, he doesn't believe in something he doesn't know what it is.
Amazing!
Utter philoso/theist-babble rubbish! Do you really not know that many (if not most) atheists are ex-theists (including ex-priests/ex-clergy/ex-etc.)?
__________________
Paranormal beliefs are knowledge placebos.
Rumours of a godís existence have been greatly exaggerated.
To make truth from beliefs is to make truth mere make-believe.

Last edited by ynot; 30th September 2019 at 07:31 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 30th September 2019, 09:22 PM   #342
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 4,694
Originally Posted by JesseCuster View Post
I'll be honest. I haven't a scooby what you're talking about.

Sounds like you're overthinking a whole load of nothing.
Sounds to you.
David Mo 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 30th September 2019, 09:24 PM   #343
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 4,694
Originally Posted by Robin View Post
"their"?
Also, perhaps you could have said this in the first place instead of couching it in confusing language about "nausea", "meaning" and "projects".
I said it a long time ago. I'm not responsible if you understand now.
David Mo 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 30th September 2019, 09:36 PM   #344
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 4,694
Originally Posted by JesseCuster View Post
Atheism is defined as being in opposition to theism, yes. But it simply does not follow logically that atheists have to take into account theistic beliefs when doing anything.

The only time I take into account theistic beliefs is when I'm discussing the subject of theistic beliefs
Originally Posted by Robin View Post
(...)
Indeed ordering your life according to that which you do not believe or things which are not the case seems to me to be a primary mistake in reasoning about your life.
I'm not saying that the atheist should order his life around what the believer says. When I say that the atheist has to take into account the beliefs of the believer I mean that he should know and keep in mind those beliefs when defining his atheism or trying to distinguish religion from other types of myths. The latter is what we were talking about.

Originally Posted by JesseCuster View Post
It simply doesn't follow that I must somehow 'take into account' the beliefs of theists, because I'm an atheist. Take into account how? Take into account when doing what?

What is it I'm doing to take into account theists beliefs?

Take into account: Keep in mind in the sense of knowing something/to be aware of and apply this knowledge when necessary.

Last edited by David Mo; 30th September 2019 at 10:23 PM.
David Mo 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 30th September 2019, 09:37 PM   #345
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 4,694
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
Now you're just being silly. How it is defined is important for communication but the moment you tell us some wild ass story that you have no evidence for we can dismiss it as quickly as big foot.
Empty comment. You don't need write if you has nothing to tell.

Last edited by David Mo; 30th September 2019 at 10:17 PM.
David Mo 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 30th September 2019, 09:51 PM   #346
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 4,694
Originally Posted by winter salt View Post
So then atheists should concern themselves with the consequences of disbelief,
while consequences don't effect the truth value of any belief ?
If the consequences are too grave then what ?
The atheist must be concerned that his values are not infected by religious thinking. The atheist should be concerned about creating values for himself and not depending on a supreme authority, be it God, Science or Comrade President Mao Zedong. That is called moral autonomy.

I do not understand what "grave" consequences this can have for anyone. I don't know if truth makes us happier, but freer, of course.

Last edited by David Mo; 30th September 2019 at 10:24 PM.
David Mo 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 30th September 2019, 09:53 PM   #347
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 4,694
Originally Posted by Thor 2 View Post
The problem David is the task is impossible.

What "god of the theist" are we talking about, that we should get to know?
The gods you know and, above all, the god you're talking about.
It doesn't make sense to stop talking about dogs because you don't know all the dog breeds.
David Mo 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 30th September 2019, 10:04 PM   #348
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 4,694
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
OK, go ahead and define god.
Originally Posted by Thor 2 View Post
Wouldn't it be interesting if we could get a panel of theists to comment on David's definition.

I define myself as an atheist in terms of the gods I have heard of and, above all, those that are relevant to our culture. If you tell me what god you believe in, we will discuss it. And if it's a very rare god that they worship in one of the Moluccas, we'll have to find out what kind of god is.

In general, whenever I have heard of a god, it is a being endowed with superhuman powers that has some (great) influence on human's life. But the god that interests me, because it is the one that touches me, is the God of all the perfections that try to impose us in the contemporary societies. Let it be called Allah, Yahweh, Jesus Christ, or something similar.

When you convince me of the existence of one of those, I will stop calling myself an atheist.

And I remind you that you are deviating from the topic.

Last edited by David Mo; 30th September 2019 at 10:26 PM.
David Mo 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 30th September 2019, 10:15 PM   #349
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 4,694
Originally Posted by Roger Ramjets View Post
However, many of us came to be atheists because we knew too much about theists' ridiculous beliefs. So please don't stop cajoling us into investigating them further, because the more we know about theists beliefs the more it will support our unbelief!
That wasn't the problem. We were discussing the differences between two types of myths: God and comic book heroes. I said that in order to enter into this debate one had to know what a believer understands by God, what his belief consists of. You don't need to study theology for that. It's that simple.

I'm afraid there are people around here who don't like me and are willing to discuss anything I say by attributing to me what's in their heads, not mine.

Last edited by David Mo; 30th September 2019 at 10:27 PM.
David Mo 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 30th September 2019, 10:16 PM   #350
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 4,694
Originally Posted by ynot View Post
Utter philoso/theist-babble rubbish! Do you really not know that many (if not most) atheists are ex-theists (including ex-priests/ex-clergy/ex-etc.)?
And what does this have to do with the definition of atheism?
David Mo 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 1st October 2019, 02:40 AM   #351
David Mo
Illuminator
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 4,694
Summarizing the topic of the latest comments:
Topic: Differences between superheroes and God.

My opinion: there is a similarity and some differences.
Similarity: Both are myths. Neither God nor superheroes exist.
Differences: Traits of "God" that are absent in superheroes.
-Believers think that God really exists.
-Believers think that God is a protective Superfather (Almighty, etc.) "Big Father", if you want.
-Therefore, belief in God gives believers a meaning in their existence. Subjective meaning, if you want.

Objection of some participants in this thread:
Atheists don't need to take into account what the believers think their God is.

My answer:
A-theist means "without God". "God" is included in the definition. Given that God doesn't exist, it only means here "the idea of God in whom believers believe". Therefore the atheist needs to know/take into account what the theist thinks that God is.

And this is my point. And no more!!

I suggest that the problem with this strange debate is basically that some people here give the words “take into account” many meanings that I don't give. Please stick to my words.

Last edited by David Mo; 1st October 2019 at 02:44 AM.
David Mo 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 1st October 2019, 03:20 AM   #352
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 19,156
Originally Posted by David Mo View Post
A-theist means "without God". "God" is included in the definition.
Semantic garbage.

Any and all gods are included in atheism, not your imaginary "God". No god is specifically implied in atheism, any and all so-called "God"s are. Since there are many thousands of such so-called "God"s none of which are consistent with each other, let alone any reality, your insistence that atheists must define exactly which "God" they do not believe in is an astonishingly idiotic idea from it's inception.

For an atheist, "God"s belong in the same category as leprechauns or pixies. Imaginary the lot of them.

Now you might claim that I have made an affirmative claim and thus bear some burden of proof for that claim.

Fine, then. I claim that I do not believe in any god or gods of any sort. As evidence for this claim is the simple fact that I do not believe in any god or gods of any sort.

You appear to claim that a sort of god (which you carefully decline to define) exists. What is your evidence for this entity?
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon 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 1st October 2019, 03:23 AM   #353
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 20,822
David Mo I'm gonna blow your mind here.... careful what I'm about to tell you is so world shattering in it's paradoxical, nay mind twisting in it's contradictory nature that few can gaze into the abyss that this very fact creates without going made, such is the power of the Lovecraftian concept.

Apple Jacks... don't even taste like apples.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue 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 1st October 2019, 05:15 AM   #354
Robin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 10,884
Originally Posted by David Mo View Post
The atheist does not believe in the god of the theist but does not want to know anything about the god of the theist. In other words, he doesn't believe in something he doesn't know what it is.
Amazing!
So you know all about the things you don't believe? You know all the details of all the world religions? You know how to cast an I Ching, make an astrology chart?
__________________
The non-theoretical character of metaphysics would not be in itself a defect; all arts have this non-theoretical character without thereby losing their high value for personal as well as for social life. The danger lies in the deceptive character of metaphysics; it gives the illusion of knowledge without actually giving any knowledge. This is the reason why we reject it. - Rudolf Carnap "Philosophy and Logical Syntax"
Robin 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 1st October 2019, 05:36 AM   #355
Robin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 10,884
Originally Posted by David Mo View Post
I said it a long time ago. I'm not responsible if you understand now.
You don't care if you waste people's time couching a commonplace opinion in such misleading terms?
__________________
The non-theoretical character of metaphysics would not be in itself a defect; all arts have this non-theoretical character without thereby losing their high value for personal as well as for social life. The danger lies in the deceptive character of metaphysics; it gives the illusion of knowledge without actually giving any knowledge. This is the reason why we reject it. - Rudolf Carnap "Philosophy and Logical Syntax"
Robin 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 1st October 2019, 07:05 AM   #356
The Common Potato
Thinker
 
The Common Potato's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: The Scunthorpe Problem
Posts: 126
Originally Posted by David Mo View Post
It is impossible for the atheist not to take in mind the theist's belief in God.
David, I can't speak for other atheists here but I rarely think of God unless I come across believers try to rationalise or justify their beliefs.
The Common Potato 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 1st October 2019, 07:11 AM   #357
The Common Potato
Thinker
 
The Common Potato's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: The Scunthorpe Problem
Posts: 126
Originally Posted by Roger Ramjets View Post
In many (most?) cases it's the opposite - the atheist doesn't believe because he does know what it is.

Ignoring everything a theist believes is not the same as not knowing what the theist believes.

SNIP...
This sounds not too dissimilar to the idea that everyone would be a Truther / Apollo denier / Bigfooter etc., of only they were aware of the 'evidence' .
The Common Potato 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 1st October 2019, 07:14 AM   #358
The Common Potato
Thinker
 
The Common Potato's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: The Scunthorpe Problem
Posts: 126
I fully accept that my morals and the way I look at the world are influenced by the fact I'm British and a lapsed Catholic and middle aged etc. Not being influenced by one's own upbringing would be strange.
The Common Potato 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 1st October 2019, 07:48 AM   #359
Robin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 10,884
This is why I don't like the term "atheist". People draw such bizarre conclusions from it.

Not believing in God doesn't define me. It isn't my creed, my ideology or my identity.

It is just one of the many things I don't believe. Like astrology, flat-earth cosmology and politicians promises
__________________
The non-theoretical character of metaphysics would not be in itself a defect; all arts have this non-theoretical character without thereby losing their high value for personal as well as for social life. The danger lies in the deceptive character of metaphysics; it gives the illusion of knowledge without actually giving any knowledge. This is the reason why we reject it. - Rudolf Carnap "Philosophy and Logical Syntax"
Robin 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 1st October 2019, 08:19 AM   #360
I Am The Scum
Illuminator
 
I Am The Scum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,100
Originally Posted by David Mo View Post
The atheist does not believe in the god of the theist but does not want to know anything about the god of the theist. In other words, he doesn't believe in something he doesn't know what it is.
Amazing!
To describe doubting God's existence as "not knowing what it is" is, to say the least, sloppy wording. It would be more appropriate to say that one is or is not familiar with religious stories. And, as it turns out, atheists are actually quite familiar with religious stories, even more than the ones who supposedly "know what it is."
I Am The Scum 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 07:52 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, 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.