Relgion forum always has the most views.

Discussion in 'Religion Archives' started by Possumking, Jul 7, 2006.

  1. Possumking I think, I am? Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    385
    I find it curious that the religion forum always has the most viewers on Sci-forums. While the polls always seem to reveal a incredible majority of "non-believers", could sciforums actually be populated by god-fearing atheists? I highly doubt that the majority of viewers are just super interested in expressing their non-religious beliefs -- To me, it seems more likely that self-proclaimed atheists are looking for ways to bury their doubt about their "atheism".

    Then again, isn't it natural for humans to be superstitious?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. wsionynw Master Queef Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,309
    I don't think that's true. Atheists don't spend their time worrying about if there might be a God or not, it simply isn't worth considering for an atheist. They do however take issue when religious types babble on about what God will do to them and why atheists are so wrong, and evolution science is false, etc. You have made one point (though perhaps unintentionally), religion and a belief in God is a kind of superstition, which is why ahteists won't be swayed by God fearing Bible bashers.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. mustafhakofi I sa'id so Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    599
    possibly because this is a science forum with religion as one of it's sub forums.
    because it's a science forum foremost.
    now dont be silly, you cant fear that which is'nt there that irrational.
    again dont be silly if you come on to a science forum and pose questions without evidence then you will be bombarded with the rational.
    science forums are for debating science, religion was only put there, because all people tend to have an interest, religion afterall is just a pseudoscience.
     
  8. scorpius a realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,332
    well ...40 million americans believe in astrology,what does that tell you?

    only reason Im against religion is that it takes young impresionable childrens minds and turns them into totaly braindead morrons unable to think on their own and always expecting someone else usualy the big G to do pretty much everything for them.
    faith sucks and should be eradicated
    www.thewaronfaith.com
     
  9. KennyJC Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,936
    So because a lot of atheists have issue with religion and post about it, means they are God-fearing?

    What kind of idiotic conclusion is that?

    If the planet was filled with an equally strong belief in a polar bear on the moon, and there was a sub-forum for it here, then it would be dominated by non-believers of the lunar polar bear.

    If I had doubt about my atheism, I would simply be agnostic. By some definitions I am agnostic. I am atheist by using the principle of Occam's razor.
     
  10. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    KennyJC:

    FYI:
    You might want to consider some other standard than Occam's razor

    Considering that the razor is often wielded against theism, it is somewhat ironic that Ockham himself believed in God. He apparently considered Christianity to be outside the scope of his rule, once writing, "No plurality should be assumed unless it can be proved (a) by reason, or (b) by experience, or (c) by some infallible authority." The last clause "refers to the Bible, the Saints and certain pronouncements of the Church" (Hoffmann 1997).


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor#Religion
     
  11. KennyJC Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,936
    From your source:

    While Occam's razor cannot prove God's nonexistence, it does imply that, in the absence of compelling reasons to believe in God, unbelief should be preferred.

    It is as simple as that samcdkey. Nobody on this planet can show anything to substantiate their fantastic claims of a living intelligent creator, an afterlife, a soul and whatever other popular superstitious notions are normally tagged with this being of yours.

    So fantastic claims with zero evidence = Unbelief. You apply this logic to most things samcdkey, so you must therefor understand why I share this with your belief.
     
  12. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    Oh I have no problem with it myself; just thought it ironic thats all

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    :m:
     
  13. Godless Objectivist Mind Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,197
    A little more on Ockham that may not be known:

    *William of Ockham (“Occam” is the Latin spelling) was an English theologian of the fourteenth century who has become relatively obscure today. Others, like Thomas Aquinas and Duns Scotus, are much better remembered and are practically superstars in comparison. Yet, it was actually William whose ideas and writings prefigured modernity.

    Ockham was probably born sometime between 1290 and 1300 and he died on April 10th, probably in 1349 due to the fact that the plague was especially strong that year (although some think that he may have died one year later).

    There is one thing for which Ockham is well known and remembered — his so-called “razor.” What is his razor? It is a logical tool he used to cut absurdities out of arguments and philosophical systems. According to Ockham, the simpler an explanation is, the more preferable it ultimately is. In other words, if it is not necessary to introduce certain complexities or hypotheticals into a situation or explanation, then don’t do it. Just say No. Not only would the result be less elegant and convincing, but it would also likely be less correct.

    Nowhere does Ockham assert that the simpler explanation is always more correct or that the more complex explanation is always less correct. Had he done so, he would have been mistaken and remembered quite differently. The point is to start from the simplest possible explanation and only make it more complex when absolutely necessary.

    An example of this which is relevant to atheism is the following two hypotheses:

    There is a universe.
    There is a universe and a God which created the universe.
    The first hypothesis is obviously simpler than the second. Thus, without sufficient reason, the first is preferable to the second. That doesn’t mean that the second hypothesis is wrong — it does, however, mean that we should not simply assume the second. Interestingly enough, this theologian himself recognized that his logical tool essentially eliminated the hypothetical of the existence of God in pretty much all arguments and explanations. You might think that this would be a problem for Ockham, but that judgment would be a bit hasty. click ref.

    So really it's not relevant wether Ockham believed in god or not what is relevant however is that he realized theres's no logical way to explain god existence or not, unless he introduced all the extra complexities which are unnecessary and which he deliberately sought to eliminate.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Godless
     
  14. Possumking I think, I am? Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    385

    Before you go embarassing yourself, my point was not that the viewers were atheists --it was that the sub-forum of religion has the most viewers at any given moment. Why would a science forum, dominated by atheists, be more interested in the religion forum rather than the science forums?
     
  15. KennyJC Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,936
    Your point was clear:

    It should be obvious that is false. But then again, if that is not your point then we don't need to discuss it now, do we?

    One word: Controversy.

    Going by your logic you'd expect an atheism sub-forum to be filled with atheists simply because they are atheists, right? Wrong. There would be no controversy, therefor it would practically be empty.

    Most atheists could not give a shit about religion, and as a result are passive non-believers. I was a passive non-believer up until I started reading up on scientific subjects. The facts were there for all to read and understand, yet I continually saw theists saying things which contradicted these facts with nothing to support their stupid claims. Therefor I completely understand why atheists with interest in scientific subjects, post in a religion sub-forum.
     
  16. LiveInFaith Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    217
    This forum is the most challenging one, for religion subforum requires people to search rational expanation towards things beyond ratio. Can science explain them?
     
  17. PsychoticEpisode It is very dry in here today Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,452
    I'll give some credit for the theists who wade in here like a someone swimming across a shark infested lagoon with a bleeding nose. You're either unaware, brave or completely reckless. Atheists recognize the futility and before devouring the free lunch they stop and ponder the logic and reason for such an act of sacrifice. They are simply curious.
     
    Last edited: Jul 9, 2006
  18. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    I'm brave AND reckless
     
  19. Adstar Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,782

    Most people deep down know that God exists.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    The more they scream no, no, no the more they reveal their inner turmoil.


    All Praise The Ancient Of Days
     
  20. Adstar Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,782
    I have been swimming in this pool of anti-christs for a few years now.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    The old saying is true:

    Sticks and stones will break my bones but words will never hurt me.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!






    All Praise The Ancient Of Days and rejoice in His eternal victory
     
  21. SnakeLord snakeystew.com Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,758
    Uhh.. No.

    Personally I find some of the discussions interesting. I am also hoping that the longer I stay here chatting about these things, I can find out why such a large portion of humanity has such clear problems. floaty invisible sky beings, eternal fire pits, talking snakes.. c'mon, it's fucking pathetic.

    Still, I do not begrudge people their right to believe in whatever messed up shit they want to - it is when it starts affecting those around them when it becomes an issue, (namely young children).

    Twit.
     
  22. Adstar Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,782
    LOL words, words, words, pathetic.


    All Praise The Ancient Of Days
     
  23. SnakeLord snakeystew.com Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,758
    Words? Really? What else would they be?

    Still, I understand that you couldn't actually come back with anything of any value.
     

Share This Page