An experiment in Atheism

Discussion in 'Religion Archives' started by S.A.M., Jun 23, 2007.

  1. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,968
    Sarkus,

    Those resoponses are a reflection of your mind at that particular time, your mind, although not you in its
    entirety, is non distinct from you.

    The painting of Mona Lisa is a "creation" of Da Vinci, no one, or nothing else. When we think of Mona Lisa, we think of Da Vinci. Da Vinci is thus non distinct from his creation.

    Proof is not necessary, everyTHING that I percieve through my senses is material.

    Analogy stands.

    What would you consider evidence?

    I suggest you re-read my responses.

    I'll let you figure that one out.

    As there is a glimmer of possibility, can you say what would constitute proof?

    I will reserve judgement untill you respond to the above respone.

    Prisons are essentially created by prisoners, ie, if everyone was law abiding there would be no need of prisons. The "lack" comes from the prisoners, not the government.

    Read above.

    If you can concieve of such a world, then you can explain what evidence you would need to believe in God.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    You mean if something cannot be shown to be possible, then it is impossible?

    "Impossible" is an absolute statement I would have thought.
    Unless you can show that God is impossible, his existence is always possible.

    Until you're
    happy, you are sad, that sort of thing?

    Then it stands to reason that there are
    shades of grey.

    The baby develops trust in its loving parent, because the parent is loving toward it. The baby has no idea who or what 'parents' are, in the first week. It does garner experience, whether you wish to call it "evidence" or not, but to say it has formulated a simple theory, is, on your part, wishfull thinking, as the
    baby would undoubtebly
    cry whether or not the parent was loving. It would not, upon not being satisfied, go to plan B, or formulate a new theory or strategy. It relies purely upon faith and hope, because as of yet it knows nothing else,
    it cannot
    think for itself, which is why they have parents.
    If the baby was neglected for most of its upbringing, the chances of that baby becoming a well-rounded adult individual, would be very slim.

    I doubt it. As they grow their awareness (consciousness) becomes more developed, and it is the responsibility of the parent to guide each developmental stage, otherwise the the person will become spoilt, hence the terminology.

    The terms asociated with atheism explains my statement; deny, without, lack.
    These are negative terms which have to be constantly maintained.

    What is he an authority in, exactly?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Jan.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,968
    It is if you defend it.

    Jan.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. SnakeLord snakeystew.com Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,758
    Without gods. How does that have to be constantly maintained? It's the default position of every living being in existence. gods are created and are then maintained by the believer. We all start off as atheists and some, like myself, remain in their default position for the entirety of their lives.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. GhostofMaxwell. Banned Banned

    Messages:
    480
    I defend my country from deranged suicide bombers, does that mean I dont believe in islamic terrorism or I believe in the god of anti-terrorism?
     
  8. GhostofMaxwell. Banned Banned

    Messages:
    480
    Actually you probably do think I believe in the god of terrorism and his immaculately concieved son the swat guy on a donkey, because you obviously have no capacity what-so-ever to imagine anyone can be outside of a blind belief system.
     
  9. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,968
    SnakeLord,

    So, lack of experience, knowledge, and understanding = atheism?

    Jan.
     
  10. GhostofMaxwell. Banned Banned

    Messages:
    480
    No, lack of ignorance to real explanations, wishful thinking and brainwashing = atheism!
     
  11. SnakeLord snakeystew.com Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,758
    For a newly born child or animal, yes. One can then go on to learn about these things that they were without before knowing them and then either retain their default position but with knowledge and understanding along with it, or become a theist.

    So no, ultimately "atheism" does not mean lack of experience, knowledge, and understanding, but is the default position of a new born or animal.

    I didn't think you'd get confused so easily. I hope this helps.
     
  12. srikar Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    66
    Atheism is nothing but lack of self confidance.
     
  13. SnakeLord snakeystew.com Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,758
    Uhhh... lol? Explain yourself.

    If anything it's the opposite. Atheists don't need gods to solve their problems, make their wishes come true blah blah. We kinda just get up and do it ourself.
     
  14. Enmos Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    43,184
    Well said!

    And Srikar.. that was one of the most stupid statements ive heard in a while.
     
  15. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,353
    Regardless of what we think when we see the picture - the two ARE distinct from each other.
    Otherwise you need to define your usage of the term "distinct" - as it obviously has different meanings for us.

    Thus analogy falls - as you were claiming everything being equal to the computer.
    Now you are merely saying "everything that I perceive...".
    You are changing your position.

    I'll let you answer when you have the decency to provide one.

    Nope. That doesn't mean I'm saying it doesn't exist or is impossible.

    Please have the decency to now answer.

    No - prisons are NOT created by prisoners. The prisoners create the NEED for prisons.
    The NEED for a thing and the actual thing are 2 different matters.

    Why would this follow?
    I can conceive of a world that is so simple that no God is necessary nor it exists.

    If you can't understand the rationale - just say so rather than respond with glib and pointless comments.

    No - you again demonstrate a lcak of understanding.
    A lack of evidence for the possible does not make it impossible. It makes it still either possible or impossible.
    A lack of evidence for the impossible does not make it possible. It makes it still either possible or impossible.

    Possible - of course.
    So what? I have never denied the possibility of gods.
    I just don't have the belief that they exist.

    Why are you chasing your tail on this - just going round and round and round.

    No. This is a false analogy.
    You either have a belief, or you don't. It is a digital state of affairs - not the analogue of emotion.

    No. It doesn't stand to reason at all. I have explained why.

    In my hand I can either have something or I can have nothing.
    There is no middle ground, no shades of grey.

    It develops a subconscious assessment of probability based on the plethora of evidence and experience.

    This "trust" you speak of is also not the same as religious "belief". The latter has no evidence - the former is built up from a plethora of evidence.

    I "trust" that my brother will help me out when I am in debt - for example - is based on all the evidence I have thus far gathered that supports this assessment.

    You are basing this on a lack of comprehension of the complexity of the human brain - or a deliberate obstinacy in taking things too simply.
    Of course there isn't just one theory being subconsciously put in place - but a whole gammet of them, all inter-relational, interdependent, self-referencing etc.

    All of that is taken into account in the person's experience and evidence. It is unavoidable. How the parent reacts etc is key in weighing up risk/reward of scenarios. Scientific method at work. No "belief" at all.

    Drivel. This has been discussed by others below.

    Whatever it is you would use him in an argument for without supporting evidence.
     
  16. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,968
    SnakeLord,

    This sounds like you're making it up as you go along, but it is fascinating.
    So you can learn how to become ignorant again, but this time you arm yourself with knowledge and understanding?
    So a person goes on to be a theist, or goes back to become an atheist?

    Confused?
    I think you're who is confused.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Jan.
     
  17. GhostofMaxwell. Banned Banned

    Messages:
    480
    Hmmm I wonder why Jan is completely ignoring me? Am I hitting rather sensity nerves here?
     
  18. SnakeLord snakeystew.com Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,758
    You are right, I am confused. Confused as to whether you're being purposefully stupid or genuinely so.

    When you were born you knew nothing about zeus. You were "without" that god - ergo: atheist.

    Later on in life you learnt all about zeus but didn't believe the stories of zeus were true - ergo: still atheist, (without gods), but this time knowledgeable of the subject matter.

    How hard can it be? Want me to draw pictures?

    No. Sheesh. One goes on to believe in these things, (theist), or remains as they have always been, (without gods - atheist).
     
  19. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,968
    Sarkus,

    I believe my previous explanation is adequate to answer these questions.

    When I talk of "everything" it can only be from my perspective, right?
    But we both understand that the computer is material, and therefore must contain, at some level, the same components as all other materials.

    Er..no! If you can imagine a world in which God does not exist, then you must have an idea as to what would make God exist, or not, hence, you should be able to relay the type of evidence you would need to be convinced of existence.

    I have stated my understanding of the term God more than once, in this discussion, and see no need to keep repeating myself.

    The NEED precedes the institute. It is purely for that reason prisons are created.

    Then "simplicity" (your understanding) would be the reason.
    But how would you know in your conception, that God wouldn't exist?

    You can't answer this point can you?

    You won't deny the possibility of God, because you would be seen as irrational, but you assume the impossibility of God by asking for the impossible, physical evidence of a spiritual being. :bugeye:

    I'm happy to cut it if you are.

    So there is no such thing as a "lack of belief" then, all believers just suddenly arrive at "i believe" and stay there until they suddenly become atheist?
    Are you taking the piss?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    LOL!!! Stop it, you're cracking me up!

    Jan.
     
  20. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,968
    SnakeLord,

    LOL!!!
    There is absolutely no point in arguing with this nonsense.

    P.S. some pictures would be nice though.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Jan.
     
  21. Repo Man Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,955
    Snakelord's post seems quite clear and to the point to me. Not at all nonsense.
     
  22. GhostofMaxwell. Banned Banned

    Messages:
    480
  23. Medicine*Woman Jesus: Mythstory--Not History! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,346
    *************
    M*W: Just the opposite.
     

Share This Page