It's not actually about winning and losing.
It's not?
It's not actually about winning and losing.
The debate has ended and the debate thread has been closed.
As per the rules of the debate (specifically rule #3 and the absence of an agreement to continue), scifes forfeits and GeoffP wins.
Just as well, it was already a slam dunk for GP.![]()
but how can you be interested in something that you won't witness by definition?So your stance basically is: what's in in for me?
And if the answer is "nothing particularly, but think of your family and everyone else and generations from now" then you aren't interested?
Sheesh.
I'm glad I'm a self-absorbed self-serving atheist.![]()
humanity does, humans don't. big difference.Humanity lives on, doesn't it?
i've had timely problems in my previous formal debate, ones i didn't count for.How stupid to challenge somebody else to a debate and then to forfeit after only two posts.
if you had the personality to reject other mods of lower status overriding your decisions, it wouldn't have become so.I don't think there are many debates in this forum that are of lower quality than this one. (No offence to GeoffP, who made the most of what he was handed.)
...all members here are either staggeringly stupid not to realize <incoherent rambling deleted>...
...then when rockerfeller started abusing his powers carelessly and requesting things already provided,
....you didn't want to clash with him so you agreed to his condition of a time limit, ... if you had the personality to reject other mods of lower status overriding your decisions, it wouldn't have become so.
i thought g would be forgiving like spider, but it seems he's not as confident.
If we aren't conditioned to think our worth is based on being eternal, then people won't find it that hard to accept. You see, you are conditioned to accept the values that only religion can fulfill, it's a vicious circle.scifes said:all members here are either staggeringly stupid not to realize that while the objective world will go on after their deaths, their subjective world, of which the objective world is a subset, will cease to exist.
or they're playing dumb because it's a truth too hard to accept.
I understand, but since there is no god or hell, this is a nonsensical argument.scifes said:however, while this is barely acceptable from an atheist, it is absolutely unacceptable from a theist who believes that those who strictly follow the scientific method are going to hell.
definitely an interesting viewpoint.If we aren't conditioned to think our worth is based on being eternal, then people won't find it that hard to accept. You see, you are conditioned to accept the values that only religion can fulfill, it's a vicious circle.
PRECISELY THE POINT I WAS GOING AFTER WHEN I CHOSE GEOFFP.I understand, but since there is no god or hell, this is a nonsensical argument.
well actually no, i'm sure there are many who agree with what i said but didn't have much to add so they just left.Yeah, that must be it. We’re all stupid but you. :rolleyes
English was enough for you to read a thread before demanding stuff already mentioned in the thread.Yes it was insensitive of me not to learn whatever language you were using. Unfortunately I only know English. :rolleyes
not over-ride him.Uh huh, James doesn’t want to tread on my toes and lets me over-ride him. That’s very believable. :rolleyes
all you and him can do is be sarcastic and make fun of my writing composition, while my intellectual challenge for him still stands. it is very apparent he was eager to get out of the debate, we have barely gone beyond two posts and i was only one day late, yet he fled the scene not looking back. spidergoat on the other hand stood his ground and allowed me much more than one day repeatedly. if i was confident i'm gonna win in a debate, i'd like to SHOW the other side he lost, not grab a lame excuse to seal up the debate with a shallow official win.Oh, that’s right, Geoff lacked sooooo much confidence in countering your arguments. He was positively scared. <I can't use any more rolling eyes smilies which is a shame because there can't be too much rolling of eyes for your silly teenage angst.>
that, is the only thing you have to say about the presented issues?I love how the bitter personal attacks from scifes have started up.
If you have an eternity to spend as a conscious being, then our time on Earth is mathematically approaching 0% of your life. I think this proves that belief in the afterlife makes this life practically worthless. In fact this is what we tend to see with believers in that they do not think such things as environmentalism, or controlling nuclear arms are valuable, since it's all going away soon enough anyway.definitely an interesting viewpoint.
that for atheists, usefulness is an instantaneous value?
Not logical. If you act selflessly because it makes you feel good, you aren't acting selflessly but with the expectation of feeling good.scifes said:even when acting selflessly, it is only because it makes you feel good.
it is very apparent he was eager to get out of the debate, we have barely gone beyond two posts and i was only one day late
that, is the only thing you have to say about the presented issues?![]()
Not logical. If you act selflessly because it makes you feel good, you aren't acting selflessly but with the expectation of feeling good.even when acting selflessly, it is only because it makes you feel good.
Therefore this statement is false . . .
You're going to have to explain that, or substantiate it.I could understand what scifes meant he meant there is no selfless act which is indeed true.
Really? Every single time?Even when one isn't looking for one particular reward for a good deed one still makes sure he/she has been compensated for the good deed by another reward when one knowingly does a good deed.
Really? Every single time?
What's the "reward" for drowning while rescuing a stranger's child in the water?
How much use is that "reward" to the guy who's now dead?
If the child's mother withholds that "reward" how does the dead guy "make sure he's compensated for the good deed"?
So you're claiming he got his reward before he did the deed?Assuming you mean one who knowingly sacrifices his/her life to do a good deed one possible reward can be considered to be that this person has had a good life and feels compensated enough to sacrifice his/her own life.